Who lost the Ice Age?

The story of Noah and the Great Flood and the Ark - most of us have heard that story in various versions since we were very young.  I won’t copy it here for you to read.  If you need a refresher on the story, I’ll refer you to the Book of Genesis, beginning with Chapter 7, verse 1 and ending with chapter 8, verse 19. 

The question at hand, of course, is this: “Is this story true?”

Luke 17:26

(Jesus is speaking here)

“And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:”

Jesus seemed to think it was true.

1 Peter 3:20 (NASB)

“….who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.”

The Apostle Peter seemed to think it was true.  In fact, he put an even stronger stamp on the story when he said..

^{2PE 1:20-21} “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

Neither Jesus nor Peter seemed to think that the story of Noah and the Great Flood was an allegory, or a metaphor, or a myth.  They both spoke as if it were true history.

Most people know what you mean when you mention the words “ice age.”  The materialistic educators, aided by popular media culture using things like the “Ice Age” cartoons, have done a good job of making sure of that.

The “ice age” or “ice ages” refers to the idea put forth in the 1830’s that one or more periods of time existed in the distant past (the materialists say that the last one happened about 10,000 years ago. 

The dictionary defines an "ice age" or, more precisely, "glacial age" is a generic geological period of long-term reduction in the temperature of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, resulting in the presence or expansion of continental ice sheets, polar ice sheets and alpine glaciers.

That means it got cold for a long period of time and that made ice form all over the world.

So, where is the Ice Age or Ice Ages in this story?  Have any of you found anything anywhere in the Bible that might indicate when that there was an Ice Age?  No?

Then where could the idea of an Ice Age have possibly come from?

This idea was put forth in the 1830’s.  I won’t waste time recounting for you this historical information.  It has already been well treated by a man named Peter Bros.  Mr. Bros presents a well thought out and clear presentation of the process by which the myth of the Ice Age was produced.  I cannot match Mr. Bros' eloquence or thoroughness, so I will only offer excerpts here and heartily recommend that you read his entire treatise yourself for a better treatment.

The Case for the Flood: Exposing the Scientific Myth of the Ice Age 

by Peter Bros

“The geological, linguistic and geographical evidence associated with the worldwide megalithic monuments demonstrates the actual existence of a prototype civilization dispersed around the globe.

“…the scientific establishment unknowingly cast its lot against a world-wide prehistoric civilization before real evidence began showing up.  It did so by enforcing the eighteenth century rule of reason which stipulated that God could not be used as an explanation for physical reality, thereby rejecting out of hand the possible validity of all biblical accounts and, in the case of a worldwide prehistoric society, the possibility that a flood of biblical proportions destroyed all but the megalithic evidence for that civilization.

“Making the world of science safe against Bible-thumpers became the overriding goal of nineteenth-century science.  Evidence of a world-wide flood began to accumulate almost immediately.  Western science was, at this time, unaware that accounts of a universal flood appear around the globe, the universal flood being a part of the myths and traditions of more than a thousand (my emphasis – R.M.F.) cultures, separated both by time and distance.

“As explorers started to bring home descriptions of the world from afar, science (materialistic scientists, that is – R. M. F. again) was horrified to see a picture emerging of a planet scarred by massive movements of water, generally from the northwest to the southeast, over its surface.  The northwestern sides of whole mountains were scored as if they had been subjected to fast-moving waters containing gravel and boulders.  Floodwater was unmistakably the source of the scoring because science could see the same effect from fast-moving rivers.  Furthermore, those same sides of the mountains were also home to massive buildups of drift materials (The Russians have found technological bits mixed in.  See the blog entry “Bits and pieces.”  By the way, the easiest way to navigate this blog site is just to do a search for my name and the title or category that you are looking for.), detritus presumably left behind by receding waters.  Again, this was an effect that mimicked observable natural actions in the real world.  These drift deposits even contained the remains of animals, including the woolly mammoth.

More horrifying to the nineteenth-century materialists than the evidence of water damage and silting were the gigantic boulders exposed to public view all over the European countryside in places where they clearly didn’t belong (too large and wide-spread to snatch up and hide away in some museum store room).  These oversized rocks, many weighing thousands of tons, could have been moved only by massive floodwaters carrying them along and then depositing them when the waters receded.  The movement by these rocks by the floodwaters would have been, in part, responsible for the aforementioned mountainside scouring. 

What to do with these discoveries that constituted irrefutable evidence of a worldwide flood?  If science had been true to the evidence and concluded that the evidence had, in fact, resulted from a worldwide flood, religious crazies would have filled the pulpits and the newspapers with cries that the biblical story of the flood, and thus the entire Bible, had been scientifically confirmed: not a desirable result - for them.

The task that faced science when confronted with the incontrovertible evidence of a worldwide flood was to create a scientific fact that would provide a substitute for the already existing evidence left behind by the actual flood.  In the early 1820’s, a Swiss engineer, Ignaz Venetz, focused on the remains of woolly mammoths found in the drifts, pointing out that as the same animals were being found in the frozen Siberian wastes, the area in which the drifts were found must have at one time been covered with ice.  The glacier theory did not explain why the scoring, labeled “striations” that supported glacier theory, appeared only on one side of the mountains or why the drifts, called moraines to tie them to glacier theory, contained the remains of animals that were found only in equatorial regions, insects that were found only in the southern hemisphere, and birds that were native to Asia. The glacier theory did not explain why the giant boulders, named erratics to accommodate glacier theory, were found in desert regions where no glacier could possibly go.

But these discrepancies were small potatoes compared the scientific reality of glaciers themselves.  Glacier theory simply ignored the basic facts of glacier movement.  Glaciers are flows of ice that, like rivers, respond to gravity.  Glaciers do not climb hills and they do not travel across level land. 

Even though glaciers could not have carried the erratics the thousands of miles required to reach (and cover) the European countryside, the fact that the North Pole was north, which was “up there” on the globe, was more than ample scientific proof that gravity could cause the glaciers to inch “down” over the sides of the globe.

No one proposed that ice fields covered the southern half of the planet because that would require the glaciers to defy gravity and travel “up” the sides of the globe from the South Pole.

The only problem that science encountered was to explain how the earth could undergo vast temperature variations, a task at which it has failed so far. 

In the meantime, subsequent discoveries continued to verify the existence of a worldwide flood and mirrored the hundreds of newly encountered myths and traditions attesting to the flood’s actuality. The very drifts that contained the bones of the woolly mammoths that gave rise to the idea of the ice age contained, along with the remains of exotic animals, insects and birds that had never lived in the same location and vegetation that could never have been local to where the drifts were found.  There was no way to explain this admixture of life by glacial movements.

It was as if all the creatures, all the trees, all the vegetation of the earth had been caught up in flowing whirlpools, mixed together, and then deposited wherever the water settled.  In addition to the drifts at the northwest bases of mountain chains, these jumbles of diverse life-forms were also found in drifts that filled isolated valleys and made up entire islands in the Arctic  whose boneyards contained not only the remains of animals from warmer climes, but also uncountable tree trunks extirpated with their roots intact – trees that could have grown only below the Arctic tree line.

Science did not rush to proclaim the existence of a warm age!

Instead, as soon as the ice age became a scientific fact, the fossil remains of life that had been found in the drifts, including the woolly mammoth that gave rise to the myth of the ice age, disappeared from scientific discourse and the newly named moraines became a simple admixture of sand and rock.  When the same admixture of bones and plant life was found stuffed deep in caves, a process that could have occurred only if it had been carried into the small cracks and crevices by the recession of massive floodwaters, the caves were deemed an anomaly that explained nothing and the evidence was allowed to be mined into nonexistence.”

Randy, why are you showing us all this stuff?  Other than being highly interesting on an intellectual level, what difference does it make in our Christian life?

1 Peter 3:15

“…but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;”

Psalm 11:3 (NASB)

“If the foundations are destroyed,

What can the righteous do?”

If I’m an unbeliever opening the Bible and the first stories that I come upon are presented to me as myths or allegories or metaphors, why would I trust any of the rest of it?

WARNING!!

     The truth is there.  You just have to see it.

     This blog has been written with the sole purpose of using the ample evidence available to verify and support the biblical record, while refuting the copious propaganda that is shoved down our throats daily by materialistic uniformitarians. 

     It is my contention that the Bible describes God's original creation of people with extraordinary capabilities who subsequently created an advanced civilization that exceeds our own.  It was destroyed in the Great Flood and we have spent the last 4,500 years trying to preserve or re-build that civilization.  I contend that science supports all this in multiple disciplines, but this information is ignored, discredited or suppressed by people who have an opposing agenda.

     Nothing that you see on this blog is original.  Any fact that you see here is obtainable on a dozen different websites and books.  I use these facts and photos, without violating their copyrights, under the legal principle of fair use practice.  That is, I use them one time, for educational purposes only.

     The point is, nothing here is made up.  The only thing that I do (or need to do) is assemble this information in its readily discernible pattern. 

      You might want to read through the first entry posted on this blog (Past Remembering: Thoughts toward a coherent view of our ancient past, our present and our future) in order to understand my theoretical and theological underpinnings more clearly.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 (NASB)

That which has been is that which will be,

And that which has been done is that which will be done.

So there is nothing new under the sun.

Is there anything of which one might say,

“See this, it is new”?

Already it has existed for ages

Which were before us.