Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Entertainment

Irony: Noah’s Ark Film Set Shut Down Due to Flooding From Hurricane Sandy

Oct. 31, 2012 10:30pm

Everyone loves irony. In this case, the level of oddity is so profound that it’s almost painful to process: The set of famed director Darren Aronofsky’s film “Noah,” currently filming in New York City, has been shut down due to flooding from Hurricane Sandy.

Yes, that’s right. The Hollywood depiction of the Biblical epic about a God-ordained water surge has been halted due to an influx of rain and storm water.

Noahs Ark Film Set Shut Down Due to Flooding From Hurricane Sandy

(Photo Credit: AP)

The Jewish Chronicle has more about a situation that seems almost too-good-to-be-true:

In what could be termed an ironic case of life imitating art, filming of a biblical epic telling the story of Noah and his ark was put on hold this week due to Superstorm Sandy.

Darren Aronofsky’s film, starring Russell Crowe as Noah, was due to be filmed on Monday at locations in New York.

Cast and crew stayed away following warnings about the path of the storm, and two arks built for the production were docked, one in Brooklyn and the other in Oyster Bay in Long Island, an area hit by the storm.

Noahs Ark Film Set Shut Down Due to Flooding From Hurricane Sandy

“Noah’s Ark” was painted by Edward Hicks in 1846 (Photo Credit: FILE)

While one of the ships was safely protected inside of a Brooklyn sound stage, the other, quite obviously, was on the water and in the path of the storm. The latter ship, though on the water, was not built to actually set sail. The massive vessel measures 450 feet in length, is 75 feet tall and 45 feet wide.

Despite filming now, “Noah” is not due in theaters until early 2014.

–

Related:

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Comments (77)

  • ArielJudah
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 2:25pm

    Here is a good review of this sick movie which is a quite demented, perverse, anti-God, anti-human, radical environmental promo. As the very knowledgeable article author notes, Hollywood had an opportunity to create a film with addressed a very large audience for positive films of faith and family. But this perverse, anti-Biblical film will most likely flop and give occasion to the Hollywood elites to claim their is no market for faith based films.
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/10/29/sucker-punch-squad-noah-script

    Report this comment

    ArielJudah  
    • wvernon1981
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:29pm

      The original script from the Bible was pretty anti-human as well if I remember right.

      Report this comment

      wvernon1981  
    • SagebrushRebel
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 7:14pm

      Have read similar stories about this movie. Won’t be wasting my money. It’s pretty much a salute to Al Gore and the 350.org Earth Firster new age mother earth global warming zero population growth crowd.

      Report this comment

      SagebrushRebel  
    • bonesiii
      Posted on November 2, 2012 at 1:08am

      “The original script from the Bible was pretty anti-human as well if I remember right.”
      The people of the time were murdering left and right, and there were only eight good people left (according to the writer, anyways, so it’s about whether you have been convinced as I have that God inspired it so it’s true). If God let that play out naturally, who knows what they could have done? He started over with a “clean(er) slate”, giving humanity a chance through Noah. :)

      Report this comment

      bonesiii  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 2, 2012 at 9:18am

      You don’t find it odd that a god would have to “start over”? And what happened RIGHT AFTER the supposed flood? Cultures who didn’t know Yahweh at all. And a LOT of them. The biblical stories as SO from the minds of humans.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
  • RamonPreston
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:35am

    Realism at it’s finest.Every animal lined up two-by-two except the hordes of politicians.

    Report this comment

    RamonPreston  
    • Sol Invictus
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:46am

      Which is strange because the Bible says there were 2 of every unclean animal and 7 of every clean one.

      Report this comment

      Sol Invictus  
  • AmericanStrega
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:34am

    Russell Crowe as Noah? Really, REALLY?

    Report this comment

    AmericanStrega  
  • Juniemoon
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:38am

    Another irony is the Torah portion on the Sabbath before Sandy was Noach and God telling him the rain was coming, the flood started 5 days later. According to the Jewish calendar, Yeshua rose from the dead the same day Noah stepped off the ark.

    Report this comment

    Juniemoon  
  • DeavonReye
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:14am

    To critique the “they found noah’s ark in Turkey”, . . .

    “A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah’s Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah’s Ark because these supposed “Flood” deposits are younger than the “Ark.” Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia.”

    Source: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/lorence_collins/

    Report this comment

    DeavonReye  
  • AuraStream
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 8:34am

    So much iron it’s bad for your health

    Report this comment

    AuraStream  
  • hydtguy
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 5:24am

    Lol the set is not on the water, but it is in an open field in a area that has winding roads and tons of trees. With weather like we just had, only a fool would risk lifes forany film. Hats off to the guys that told everyon to stay safe…..
    PS. I worked Monday n Tues. In NYC.

    Report this comment

    hydtguy  
  • bonesiii
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 4:05am

    I bet God’s reminding us that it couldn’t possibly have been a local flood. He promised never to send such a Flood again, so it had to be global. :) (And of course there’s all the fossil and geological evidence.)

    Report this comment

    bonesiii  
  • DEFCON4
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:54am

    Hey Folks, There’s still time to buy “Sandy’s Sand”.
    with All “tides to NOAA”

    Report this comment

    DEFCON4  
  • Jenasus
    Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:06am

    Proof positive the government caused Hurricane Sandy.
    The film they were making, Noah, in New Sandy York, NY was about religion.
    Religion is one the things the administration is undermining and at war with.
    Hear the Evil, See the Evil, Speak the Evil.

    New Sandy York, NY 09910
    Capitol of Wet Dreams, USA

    Report this comment

    Jenasus  
  • GaltLine
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:15pm

    Interesting. The Oklahoma City tornado outbreak on May 3, 1999 occurred on the opening night of a two episode Hallmark Entertainment Noah’s Ark mini-series widely received by evangelicals as wildly unbiblical. It was aired on NBC May 3rd and 4th, 1999.

    http://www.worldmag.com/1999/05/news_reviews_1

    Report this comment

    GaltLine  
  • freeberty
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:10pm

    On a side note when did Christie switch parties and become the campaign chief of staff for Obama?

    Report this comment

    freeberty  
    • CatB
      Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:59pm

      The RNC convention .. when he made the key note address all about himself. Probably before that .. but it was quite evident then.

      Report this comment

      CatB  
  • freeberty
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:06pm

    I am sure that Christie with his best new pal Obama will make sure with your tax dollars will go to make sure the state of New Jersey will be made better then new. Of course Romney was a little bit late to the pandering party, thankfully he is on board now and realizes that FEMA is a truly great federal program.

    Of course since I’m a blaze poster I would never vote for someone that actually believes in the constitution like Ron Paul, so if I have to pick between a choice of 3 pandering a** clowns I may just chose the best a** clown, Rosanne Barr.

    Report this comment

    freeberty  
    • bonesiii
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:28am

      It’s Obama who’s joining something — being forced to try to be Presidential, instead of just golfing all the time or campaigning. Christie is just doing what he does — being a good leader.

      Ya gotta hope that any human would work together on this one, though, and put politics aside.

      Report this comment

      bonesiii  
  • rpp
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:03pm

    Hilarious. You cannot make this stuff up!

    Report this comment

    rpp  
    • Reality_Bites_You_on_the_Ass
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 7:29am

      Actually, much like the tale of Noah’s Ark itself, you can make this stuff up.

      Report this comment

      Reality_Bites_You_on_the_Ass  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 8:48am

      @REALITY

      Yea, excepts the archaelogical, geological evidence of the flood and not to mention the ancient fossilized boat that was found in the mountains of Ararat Turkey that matches the dimensions given in the Bible for it. The dredge stones and fossilized animal hair from animals not native to Turkey. Finally, the TURKISH GOVERNMET has made it a national park and declares it Noah’s ark.

      But other than that, there’s no evidence of it.

      Report this comment

      SquidVetOhio  
  • BurntHills
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:03pm

    this “NOAH” film is not going to see a dime of our hard-earned Christian American money. we read the complete synopsis and analysis of this film, incl ‘spoilers’ on Breitbart Hollywood— and it is anti-Christian, anti-GOD, anti-Humanity, pro-useless-violence, pro-nonsensical-environmentalism. so Fie! on crowe and his movie.

    Report this comment

    BurntHills  
  • Ilikepeople
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:00pm

    It’s interesting that in the east people have built houses they do not dwell in just as well like lightning reflects in the west most people will never own their homes, and they are getting foreclosed on as the system falls apart. Additionally in the east they do not drink of the well of the family, and in the west people have planted vineyards they don’t drink from. In the east the Great river Euphrates is drying up, and in the west it is drying up. In the east the sea has also dried up, and I’m sure you can guess what that means.

    Report this comment

    Ilikepeople  
  • rafa2design
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:54pm

    Why did they even build a set? There’s a dutch man in the Netherlands who has built the biblical ark to the exact measurements in the Bible. Maybe they should change filming location…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcLf6xHcT8c

    Report this comment

    rafa2design  
    • Reality_Bites_You_on_the_Ass
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 7:32am

      Because a movie set has different needs, such as adequate power and overhead space for lighting and sound equipment, that the fake ark won’t have.

      Report this comment

      Reality_Bites_You_on_the_Ass  
  • G.E.R
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:54pm

    At least this flooding is real.

    Report this comment

    G.E.R  
  • Ilikepeople
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:52pm

    That’s ironic. It would also be ironic if there was another bad hurricane named Valerie.

    Report this comment

    Ilikepeople  
  • Wayner
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:48pm

    Perhaps another “Harbinger” of things to come.

    Report this comment

    Wayner  
  • americansfightingforcommonsense
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:45pm

    God said, I mean Biden said “Don’t Mess Around With Me!”

    Report this comment

    americansfightingforcommonsense  
  • john vincent
    Posted on October 31, 2012 at 10:43pm

    I certainly sympathize with all those who felt the devastation of the storm;
    but I also find it humorous that a Movie production about the ‘flood,’ ie, Noah,
    was shut down.

    I see a heavenly wink in there somewhere. Oh, yes, they who scoff, there WAS a global deluge.

    Report this comment

    john vincent  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on October 31, 2012 at 11:48pm

      Sorry but no there wasn’t.

      Report this comment

      ModerationIsBest  
    • bonesiii
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 4:09am

      ModerationIsBest, that’s a possible faith position you have, but you really should look into the reasoning and evidences on sites like creation.com. IMO it’s overwhelmingly convincing that there was. All the fossil and geologic evidence fits best with a global Flood, when analyzed fairly. :)

      And I don’t know from what little you said if you’re a Christian or not, but if so, God said he wouldn’t send another like it, so this reminds us that the Flood could not have been merely local. (If you’re not, I highly recommend looking carefully into it. It pays off, believe me. And it’s the highest possible stakes, so you owe it to yourself. The reasons are many and virtually proven, for example, the prophecies.)

      Report this comment

      bonesiii  
    • guz75
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:54am

      @BONESIII
      ‘……but you really should look into the reasoning and evidences on sites like creation.com’

      This is sarcasm…….right?

      Why don’t you read your sentence again and then take a moment to consider why this (completely refuted) scientific evidence for a global flood, only appears on creationist websites.

      If you’re struggling, the clue is in the name; ‘CREATION.com’.

      Report this comment

      guz75  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 8:14am

      bones-
      guz-
      History, logic, facts, and faith have all proved that our discussion points to the infallible proof that water once covered ALL the mountains of the earth. You have seen the devastation that water causes in a mere few minutes; your issue is not with us, but with GOd who you point your finger at in disgust.

      You have simply joined a long train of people who would mock the rainbow in the heavens, as some sort of ‘accidental’ display of residue from floatring water in the air…it takes more faith in your unbelief than does it take to believe that there is a sovereign God. You are a few more of mockers who laugh at GOd and His word, while he is patient toward your foolishness.

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 8:19am

      sorry bones-
      reply for modern

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 9:39am

      How is it “mocking” . . . when the actual evidence does NOT point to a global flood at ANY time in the earth’s history? And creation.com “evidences” have been proven time and time again to be flawed. I used to believe YEC/Noah flood apologetic pseudo-science until actual science showed how ridiculous some of their [Noah flood] claims were.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • ModerationIsBest
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 9:50am

      @Vincent
      “History, logic, facts, and faith have all proved that our discussion points to the infallible proof that water once covered ALL the mountains of the earth. ”

      Ah I find it interesting how you changed the wording in your argument. Plus, if you have history, logic, and fact, why do you even throw faith in there?

      You can have that all mountains were once covered by water(they wouldn’t be mountains yet), without a flood.

      Creationists are a joke and here’s why.

      One creation “scientists” said, and I quote, “if we do an experiment and the results, on the surface seem to contradict the word of God, then we go with the word of God.”

      They aren’t looking for real truth, they are looking for evidence to fit their already predetermined interpretation of the Bible.

      That’s NOT science, therefore I have no use for it.

      Report this comment

      ModerationIsBest  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:26am

      deav-
      modern-

      Tkx for post. I dont see how I ‘changed’ anything in wording. You act as if faith is a disease that is not consistent with logic and history. You excercise faith every day- and dont even know it: you TRUST that the car coming at you will abide by the rules of the road and not crash into you; you have faith that the dinner in front of you was not poisoned by the waiter; you believe the meteorologist when he says a storm is coming, and you prepare, yet,

      You casually deny the testimony of history as events were recorded, referred to, and proved to be actual, by the words of they who were present, as well as THE one person whose word means more than ours combined, and that is Christ Himself, who spoke of Noah’s global flood as a matter of fact and needing no further proof.

      ‘and ALL the high hills, that were under heaven, were covered with water….’

      This is why I refer to the word ‘scoffing,’ it really does not matter what you or I think as to a flood. He who created water said it occured, and thats fine by me.

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:40am

      The problem is that what YOU see as “testimony of historical events” is a MUCH greater “faith” than whether or not I’m confident enough to drive down the road or eat restaurant food.

      But the problem is when you MUST see “christ’s words as written down in the bible” as “absolutely true”, . . . . . and “because he spoke of noah’s ark, . . . it must therefore be true, . . . end of discussion”. BUT, . . . you cannot make that conclusion JUST because a story book makes that claim. So, I may “scoff” at such stories, but it is with GOOD reason. I do not hold the bible as an infallible idol that “must be true”. I have other sources of information to determine the veracity of the claims. They don’t match with the biblical narrative. Various studies have proven this, from many disciplines.

      So tell me, . . . what do we do with that? If the evidence does NOT point to “a global flood, roughly 4,400 years ago”, . . . then I must accept those findings.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • guz75
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:51am

      @JOHN VINCENT

      Ah, I see. No chance of a sensible discussion here then, full circle back to the same old fall-back.

      Maybe one day you’ll understand the difference between faith and delusion (I won’t be holding my breath though).

      Report this comment

      guz75  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 10:57am

      d-rye

      I’ll ignore the point u make about a ‘story book,’ as that so called legend is the anvil that has worn out all hammers against it.

      You are calling The Lord Jesus Christ a liar, but He has been called worse; he nor I will take offense. But consider the testimony of Ezekiel who spoke of Noah, Daniel, and Job in the same sentence to prove a point much easier than the flood topic. In addition, Peter spoke of the flood thousands of years later.

      If there is a discrepancy between alleged ‘facts of science’ and the record of history, I’ll stay with a record that doesnt change. You have never met Charlemayne or George Washington, yet you are certain they existed, dont be so slow to believe the record of other good men.

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:12am

      guz-
      thank you as well

      I’ll leave you with a question and some homework. Do you think geneologies are important? I’m sure you would agree. There is a desire to know family trees.

      Read 1 Chronicles chapter one, and note the lineage of Noah, as well as a host of proof that others lived and died- actually more important than what they did. They left an eternal footprint, just like you; the words on the headstone are proof. Read that, then try to argue. If my point is not made, then you have to burn down every library and book, for promoting history as fraud. A family tree is hard to avoid

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:14am

      It actually IS a story book. A book of stories. Some may have been true, others were definitely not. And sure, the bible has withstood a lot, over the centuries, . . . but modern techniques and tests has shown to damage that “anvil” quite a bit. But I understand that we will disagree on that point.

      I call no one “a liar”. Once again, you MUST see everything written in the bible as “the absolute truth”. A CLAIM has been made . . . and from men ~ 1950 years ago. None of them can be corroborated. You are accepting it “by faith” without any confirmation. Before I [personally] accept something, I expect ample evidence of support, mostly because I care about the things I accept as being true. The claims of men are of no value until they be shown as true. “These were the words of Jesus” cannot be. So, let’s get that cleared up. I call no one “a liar”.

      Again, you call ALL of the bible as a “record of history”. How about the claims found in the Quran? The Bhagavad Gita? The Enuma Elish? The stories about Zeus? Why, or why not? And [once again] I understand that you see the bible as “truth”. If it runs contrary to repeatable scientific discovery [which you obviously don't believe, by putting quotes around "facts of science"], yet still insist on “believing it. . . because it never changes”, . . . you are free to do so. But you must also be ready to accept criticism that proves you uninformed.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:26am

      What you call a lie others call truth.
      You say science backs you, they say it backs them.
      You say your guys got the facts, they say theirs do.
      Believe what you will … “speak to a man twice, after that have nothing to do with him”.

      Noahs boat was ready for the rain … the people mocked … until it rained!

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:27am

      d-rye
      good talk

      He who created the sun and moon has no competitors. The Word of God is self proving, while the others you mentioned serve a purpose, but they are all fallen branches, and wannabe trees…

      I liked your thought about ‘chipping away at the anvil….’ but you know I disagree. God’s book has it all, and sin is the great divide that proves its worth, untouched by all other attempts. It does not flatter man, and for good reason.

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:42am

      4truth2all, who are these “they”, and what evidence do they submit that has peer review? There is no conspiracy. IF something has validity, . . . the evidence will prove to be repeatable/verifyable. Having said that, why is it that mainstream scientific evidence points away from “any global floods”? This has nothing to do with “believing what I will”.

      As for your little saying, that is the perfect way to “stick your head in the sand” and refuse to learn new things.

      John, of course, I disagree with your belief system. Not because I “hate you” or “hate your deity”. It just doesn’t hold up anymore, mostly due to scientific discovery. It was thought [and many YEC apologists still believe] that the Grand Canyon was a product of receding flood waters. Scientific discovery proved this to be absolutely wrong, . . and what WAS found there showed evidence for an incredibly old earth with layers showing changing climates and ecosystems during that ancient past.

      Was there a man [even named Noah] who rode out a regional flood [with a few animals]? Perhaps. But a global deluge? There’s no way. I suspect that the Noah story fell victim to what happened to other stories. A common/natural event was blown out of proportion for a specific reason. With the Noah story, it was to show “a god who destroyed the earth with a flood because people were evil”. But the backstory shows the obvious mind of men.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:51am

      d-rye

      Try to picture 40 days of pounding rain. Then add 40 nights. Picture the water rising, higher, higher, I can see it, can you? I live near water, and let me say, within minutes there is flooding that you cant imagine. You have to be a tad more honest and realistic as to the possibility of a w/w flood.

      Ever heard of the Johnstown flood? One of the greatest disaters in American history because of water. Again, the geneologies are more than stories, they are a factual account of who lived-rock solid evidence-irrufutable proof-

      Just look at the oceans d-rye. Thats alot of water, then there is the rainbow…..
      good day

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 11:52am

      Yo Devonreye:

      You say … “repeatable scientific discovery” … PLEASE PROVE THE BIG BANG with your statement. So you have NO proof, yet you say you do, because EVERYTHING hinges on this “faith”.

      Oh, by the way EVERYBODY ( except you it seems) knows Zeus is mythology.

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:05pm

      John, I used to believe the Noah story, when I was a christian. I even agreed with guest apologists with their [later to be discovered as pseudo] “science” on the geologic column, how mountains were formed during the flood, etc. But actual reality proved these as entirely bogus. Yes, I can absolutely disregard any “possibility of a global flood”. It didn’t happen. Yes, the ocean has a lot of water in it. BUT, the ocean cannot encompass the globe, else, where would the run off . . . run off to?

      2all, I’m not talking about Big Bang cosmology here. I’m talking about why a global flood didn’t happen.

      As for Zeus, . . . it WAS mythology, . . . but explain WHY you know it as mythology?

      Again, guys, . . . nothing I say here means “there is no god/gods/goddesses”. But ask yourself why you MUST believe what just couldn’t be, just because a “holy book” made a claim that it did. Are you REALLY interested in “the truth of your faith”, or are you bound, like a slave, to the ancient writings from men?

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:21pm

      d-rye
      you appear to be thoughtful, and I dont know what kind of ‘christian’ you were, (there are many Jews who believe there was a w/w flood) but you may be forgetting about another component: according to Geness and Peter, EIGHT souls were brought to safety through the water. Kind of changes the whole dynamic of the local thing, since camels can travel a great distance, carrying cargo and people.

      A person telling a tall tale to a child should be very careful: Santa Claus was a real being in the minds of many; it does not prove they are imbeciles, it proves they who told them were liars…..

      I was told by many sources whom I trust, there was a global flood, He whom is the truth himself- again thats fine by me. Eight souls….

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:32pm

      John, I was Assemblies of God for most of my christian time.

      We can leave this discussion here, if you wish. I understand your stance. I held it once. Having been introduced to geologica science in my days, and the discoveries of that field, and others, I must accept the conclusions of their findings. They have no reason to lie about them. . . and would be committing career suicide BY giving out false data [that could be easily refuted by other scientists]. I realize that you must see the pages of your bible as “all true”.

      I know there wasn’t a global flood, circa 2800 bce. So, we will have to do that “agree to disagree” thing, I guess

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 12:55pm

      d-rye
      last word.

      For what its worth, I have a friend who is a scientist, and he believes totally my position. He argues that the evidence is there for the taking, and that his colleagues are not convinced by science, but that they hold the view because they cannot tolerate the alternative.

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 1:04pm

      Yo Devonreye:
      Third time …
      You seem to be ignorant of the bias in the “scientific” community.
      “mainstream” … does not make for truth.

      “My” statement is from scripture and has nothing to do with “sticking my head in the sand”. It has to do with my first two words. It seems you do that.

      When you look at the grand canyon do you really believe a little water over a long time frame made that ? I believe alot of water quickly is much more plausable and I have personally seen the damage a lot of water quickly can do. Are you aware of the canyon app.1/3 the size of the grand canyon being formed in a very short time frame.(recent times)

      Why do I believe what I believe … not enough space to write it ALL down. Jesus say’s He is the truth … I am a slave to truth … I am “4truth”.
      In Genesis the enemy brings that truth into question, ( the Word of God) he continues that lie to this day. …. as I said; what you call truth others call a lie, what God said you say He did not (and I got proof)
      I am a slave to the words of men and so are you! Question is what is the source (spirit) of those words.
      Third time …

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 1:27pm

      John, feel free to post a link to this evidence. Thanks.

      2all, . . . The Grand Canyon was formed over a LONG period of time by the Colorado River. If you SEE what a natural dam breakage causes “down stream”, or flows from volcanic erruption, . . . you will see it travel in a relatively straight line.

      When you see a river flowing along a relatively flat plain, you will have twists, turns, meandering, . . . like the Colorado River did to that landscape. Turning nearly 270 degrees points towards a slow moving river. The depth shows a LOT of time it took to carve it. These are the facts. And when the Colorado River exposed layers layed down in a distant past, . . . some with different ecosystems from the one above it, . . . then the evidence can ONLY be that the area of the Grand Canyon has been there a LONG time. Much greater time frame than YEC beliefs.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 2:38pm

      Yo Devonreye:

      You did not answer my question … are you aware of …?

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 2:51pm

      Yo Devonreye: You say a little water over a long time, others say alot of water over a short time …

      Concerning your statement of the path of the river… you make alot of assumptions as to the lay of the land, but then assumptions become facts when truth is not followed.
      4truth …

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • ArielJudah
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 2:54pm

      DeavonReye and other skeptics and scoffers-blind faith in naturalistic presuppositions is just as blind a faith as blind acceptance of any religion’s claims. From your comments I assume you are an atheist. As GK Chesterton observed, “Atheism is the most daring of dogmas, for it presumes a universal negative.”
      But one question, the small minority of secularists that have “progressively” gained controlled over our culture and likewise forced their agenda on the overwhelming majority of citizens who have faith, have also in their “tolerance” and proclamations of “free speech” have become increasingly forceful in excluding their so-called version of science on the culture while simultaneously excluding all other viewpoints including other views of science. History shows the scientific revolution came about through Christians and the Christian world-view and theory had to be validated by evidence. But the “new science” rejects genuine evidence and substitutes absurd notions such as a “consensus” of scientists (as if truth and facts could be established by a vote rather than evidence). Moreover, this popular scientific community does not use science as a means to validate the “truth” about nature or creation, but to promote their radical social, economic and political agenda. Thus “modern science” – so-called-is more appropriately called “scientism,” ie is basically motivated by a secularist and often Marxist agenda to mold peoples’ mind rather than discover t

      Report this comment

      ArielJudah  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 3:07pm

      Unless I missed it, 2all, the only question you asked, . . . I DID answer.

      Ariel, what I’ve posted above isn’t an “agenda” or “so called science”. It is the geology of that area of the country! This is the actual truth of it. Actual truth doesn’t care about “agendas”. I’m amazed that you even bring this up. . . . . . . . and, of course, through in “marxist agenda”, like that means anything to the scientific method. I mean, come on!! You are seeing conspiracy where there isn’t one! The same scientific method that has brought to you, the airplane, germ theory, current medical procedures, space exporation. . . and the very computer you are looking at this on. Seriously!

      As I said, . . . no global flood does not automatically say “there is no god”. Evidence is solid on there not having been a global flood ~4,400 years ago. It cannot be contested! See it for what it is. A story that ancient people used to tell, . . . and became so influential in that society that it became a legend. That it DIDN’T happen is NOT “therefore your god is fake”.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • ArielJudah
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 3:18pm

      To DeavonReye and others who reject the evidence of the Bible without TRULY having searched the evidence: if your evolutionary theories are so correct and subject to scientific rigor -true science again being based on evidence not on the opinions of a “consensus” -why do such “scientists” and “academics” if they are so correct, so assiduously oppose, attack and discriminate against those who dare to merely mention contrary scientific research which doesn’t fit the “consensus” And I refer to many, many instances when very accomplished scientists and academics who dared to even question the presuppositions of evolution or even discuss-not discuss, not advocate for- evidence and concepts from eg Intelligent Design (which is not in itself theistic), they were routinely booted out and lost their tenure. Again they were not discussing much less advocating any religion, but simply had dared to question the orthodoxy of evolution and discussing contrary evidence. Again, if evolution is so confidently based on facts and evidence, why do they so forcefully attack and seek to destroy those who dare to think differently or dare to question their hegemony over academic and scientific institutions? Is this not a modern, secularist Inquisition? You skeptics, you challenge Christians to provide evidence. But have you truly examined the contrary evidence? Even more can you articulate the solid evidence for your position other than venting anti-Bible rhetoric and animosity?

      Report this comment

      ArielJudah  
    • ArielJudah
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 3:49pm

      DeavonReye- your refer to the scientific method and evidence. That is just my point-contemporary science is not based on scientific method but talks about “a consensus of scientists” vs evidence. I am not judging your motive-I am speaking of the contemporary scientific establishment. And I am not knocking you but as with most secularists, you just scoff and don’t talk facts. But a few examples of pseudo-scientific agenda (call if what you will): besides evolution, the so-called “gay-gene” and global warming, (which in previous generations such Chicken-Little scientists were crying “global cooling”). BAck in the 1930s and 1940s an earlier agenda by other scientists were promoting the inferiority of the races and eugenics-not only in Germany but by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger whose agenda PP still promotes today. As far as Marxism/ evolution, one of the earlier “architects” laying the foundation for evolution was a Russian Communist scientist-it isn’t that difficult to understand that if your ideology is atheism and “scientific socialism” the Christian world view is a cultural foundation that needs to be undermined as Marx and Lenin recognized.
      And with regards to the scientific inventions you cited, again that is the natural and progressive development of the scientific method in Western Civilization which again was Christian in origin, not the secularist worldview which has taken over but could never create the scientific method or its fruit.

      Report this comment

      ArielJudah  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 4:12pm

      I had a post that somehow didn’t take. I don’t have time to repeat it all. To sum up, . . . actual truth is not interested in an agenda. If these creation scientists have provable data points, then they need to submit them for peer review. IF they stand up to criticism, then you will have something to go on. But what I HAVE seen from many of these creation scientists is . . . bending rules, or even a lack of understanding IN ORDER to sway their results towards “Young Earth Creationism” and “Noachian flood”.

      For example, can you site one of their theories on the flood and how it could have happened as well as the effects this global flood would have on the planet?

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
    • john vincent
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:00pm

      eljudah-
      good stuff
      tkx for the contribution

      Report this comment

      john vincent  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:58pm

      Yo Devonreye:

      THE FLOOD = alot of water in a short time … no ark YOU DIE
      “Arieljudah” took the time to explain the very thing I alluded to … yet you refuse to see
      #4 … good bye

      Report this comment

      4truth2all  
    • DeavonReye
      Posted on November 2, 2012 at 9:10am

      Uh. . . . I asked for evidence. Not opinion. If you see that as “refusing to see”, that is YOUR problem. What I SAW was “conspiracy theories” about “the scientific community shutting up creation scientists and not listening to them”. If a theory has testable and repeatable data, that DATA will stand on its own.

      I will ask again. Provide evidence for “a global flood” that took place ~4,400 years ago.

      Report this comment

      DeavonReye  
  • Poggle The Stick
    Posted on November 7, 2012 at 10:59pm

    God’s logic makes perfect sense to me… the rest of the world had fallen into gloom, and a flood was actually a pretty good idea – this piece of the Bible might actually tell of the displacement and restructuring of the continents of the world.

    You know, all of you out there with religious/non-religious affiliations have no maturity, perverted minds, and like to put wet crap on your nose and stick them into our faces and interfere with the course of a mature world. I understand your doubts – I’ve had them before too, but I’ve moved on and decided that for various things, blaming God gets you nowhere. You should consider going to school – and after that, perhaps, consider Sunday-school as well.

    Or, maybe, you are a believer who had Jeremiah Wright as a pastor.

    This is coming from a 14-year old kid here.

    Report this comment

    Poggle The Stick  
  • fine
    Posted on April 23, 2013 at 8:28am

    God’s judgement comes down on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you read the Bible
    you will find out that only Noah and his family were found righteous in God’s eyes. He saved Noah and
    his family, and out of them came the inhabitants of the world. There is no need to say what you said about God.

    Report this comment

    fine  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love