text:
|11 Mar '16
|13 Mar '16
|13 Mar '16
11 Mar '16
|8 Mar '16
|10 Mar '16
|10 Mar '16
8 Mar '16
Volta Mantovana
|2 Mar '16
|8 Mar '16
|8 Mar '16
2 Mar '16
|1 Feb '16
|1 Mar '16
|1 Mar '16
1 Feb '16
West Hollywood
|United States
✨ Recommended destinations
This is an algorithmic recommendation based on @itsgraz's trips history to find places people they haven't been to yet that other people with similar travels as them also went.
Been living in 3 different centrally located airbnb in Berlin (2018), each between 800 and 900€ per month for 40-45 sqm (we're two, so 400-450€ each). Each time a full flat and not a shared airbnb, legal now since some months (though it was always possible to get a full flat before as well). Internet was always between 15 and 50 mbps. I spend 100€ per week on food, including restaurants (pretty cheap here), check for Turkish market on Maybachufer and Turkish stores in Neukölln (I spend less on food here than in Chiang Mai!). Berlin is such an awesome place to live, very multicultural, very tolerant, many different neighborhoods, quite relaxed feeling, many parks, lakes all around. No need to speak German at all. Come over here, probably one one of the best place on earth ;) (written in Sept 2018)🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌥 Feels 36° 97° 32° 90°AQI 300$3,106 / mo23Mbps
Although London isn't an ideal 'digital nomad' city due to the cost, it is very much made for working, networking and having a great time while you do it. Rent is silly expensive, but you can find a room in a shared house for around £500-600 per month. One review on here complains about bad food, unsafe and bad banking - sounds like they had a bad time to be honest. I disagree strongly with all those negatives. Food is awesome, with lots of incredible places to eat and reasonable (ish) prices. Head to Brixton, Brick Lane, Hackney/Dalston, Tooting etc for top quality food. For your banking, you'll find Revolut, Monzo, Starling etc all allow you to get set up in a few days. Oh and safety.... I've lived here for 7 years (on and off) and been drunk in 'dodgy' parts of town and can say London is one of the safest cities anywhere. Can't say the same for Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona etc.🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌧 Feels 36° 97° 32° 89°AQI 490$3,992 / mo14Mbps
Best city in the world! You can certainly live the Nomad life in NYC for a lot less than 5k a month! I've been doing it since December 2018 for around $2500/mo. AirBnB is the way to go!🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌦 Feels 32° 90° 29° 85°AQI 50$5,385 / mo23Mbps
great city - perfect weather , great food, great tech scene🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌥 Feels 37° 99° 31° 88°AQI 320$3,386 / mo24Mbps
Getting a place to stay is a challenge, and renting an apartment might be a challenge unless you can show proof on stable income job. most leases are 6-12mths minium🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌥 Feels 47° 117° 36° 96°AQI 380$5,191 / mo11Mbps
Bangkok has some of the best private hospitals in the world. Which is interesting if you're in Asia a lot and you want medical care better than you can get in your home country. Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok is ranked #7 in the world. I did an executive health checkup there and it was great. Prices range from $250 to $750 depending on how many checks you want. You can get blood count, X Ray, ultrasound, hormone check, etc. They also have most other medical disciplines. I also got vaccinations renewed. The hospital is private so it's so much better than the overloaded public healthcare systems of Europe, Canada and UK where everyone tries to avoid helping you, is overworked and angry. In Bangkok they're super nice and helpful and you can make appointments straight with a specialist. Not blocked by a GP like in your home country.🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌧 Feels 42° 108° 33° 92°😷AQI 610$1,509 / mo16Mbps
A mixture of piss, weed, unwashed nerdy men, overpriced reality estate, passive-aggressiveness, homeless people and freaks🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety 🌥 Feels 24° 75° 21° 69°AQI 130$5,943 / mo31Mbps
Been there twice. I love Prague🎒 Nomad 💵 Cost 📡 Internet 😀 Fun 👮 Safety ☀ Feels 36° 97° 33° 92°😷AQI 760$2,357 / mo15Mbps


text: Pilot/Controller Glossary 3/29/18 V VASI− (See VISUAL APPROACH SLOPE INDICATOR.) VCOA− (See VISUAL CLIMB OVER AIRPORT.) VDP− (See VISUAL DESCENT POINT.) VECTOR− A heading issued to an aircraft to provide navigational guidance by radar. (See ICAO term RADAR VECTORING.) VERIFY− Request confirmation of information; e.g., "verify assigned altitude." VERIFY SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF TAKEOFF (OR TURNS AFTER TAKEOFF)− Used by ATC to ascertain an aircraft's direction of takeoff and/or direction of turn after takeoff. It is normally used for IFR departures from an airport not having a control tower. When direct communication with the pilot is not possible, the request and information may be relayed through an FSS, dispatcher, or by other means. (See IFR TAKEOFF MINIMUMS AND DEPARTURE PROCEDURES.) VERTEX− The last fix adapted on the arrival speed segments. Normally, it will be the outer marker of the runway in use. However, it may be the actual threshold or other suitable common point on the approach path for the particular runway configuration. VERTEX TIME OF ARRIVAL− A calculated time of aircraft arrival over the adapted vertex for the runway configuration in use. The time is calculated via the optimum flight path using adapted speed segments. VERTICAL NAVIGATION (VNAV)– A function of area navigation (RNAV) equipment which calculates, displays, and provides vertical guidance to a profile or path. VERTICAL SEPARATION− Separation between aircraft expressed in units of vertical distance. (See SEPARATION.) VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING AIRCRAFT (VTOL)− Aircraft capable of vertical climbs and/or descents and of using very short runways or small areas for takeoff and landings. These aircraft include, but are not limited to, helicopters. (See SHORT TAKEOFF AND LANDING AIRCRAFT.) VERY HIGH FREQUENCY (VHF)− The frequency band between 30 and 300 MHz. Portions of this band, 108 to 118 MHz, are used for certain NAVAIDs; 118 to 136 MHz are used for civil air/ground voice communications. Other frequencies in this band are used for purposes not related to air traffic control. VERY HIGH FREQUENCY OMNIDIRECTIONAL RANGE STATION− (See VOR.) VERY LOW FREQUENCY (VLF)− The frequency band between 3 and 30 kHz. VFR− (See VISUAL FLIGHT RULES.) VFR AIRCRAFT− An aircraft conducting flight in accordance with visual flight rules. (See VISUAL FLIGHT RULES.) VFR CONDITIONS− Weather conditions equal to or better than the minimum for flight under visual flight rules. The term may be used as an ATC clearance/instruction only when: a. An IFR aircraft requests a climb/descent in VFR conditions. b. The clearance will result in noise abatement benefits where part of the IFR departure route does not conform to an FAA approved noise abatement route or altitude. c. A pilot has requested a practice instrument approach and is not on an IFR flight plan. Note: All pilots receiving this authorization must comply with the VFR visibility and distance from cloud criteria in 14 CFR Part 91. Use of the term does not relieve controllers of their responsibility to separate aircraft in Class B and Class C airspace or TRSAs as required by FAA Order JO 7110.65. When used as an ATC clearance/instruction, the term may be abbreviated "VFR;" e.g., "MAINTAIN VFR," "CLIMB/DESCEND VFR," etc. VFR FLIGHT− (See VFR AIRCRAFT.) PCG V−1 Pilot/Controller Glossary 3/29/18 VFR MILITARY TRAINING ROUTES (VR)− Routes used by the Department of Defense and associated Reserve and Air Guard units for the purpose of conducting low-altitude navigation and tactical training under VFR below 10,000 feet MSL at airspeeds in excess of 250 knots IAS. distance, to see and identify prominent unlighted objects by day and prominent lighted objects by night. Visibility is reported as statute miles, hundreds of feet or meters. VFR NOT RECOMMENDED− An advisory provided by a flight service station to a pilot during a preflight or inflight weather briefing that flight under visual flight rules is not recommended. To be given when the current and/or forecast weather conditions are at or below VFR minimums. It does not abrogate the pilot's authority to make his/her own decision. a. Flight Visibility− The average forward horizontal distance, from the cockpit of an aircraft in flight, at which prominent unlighted objects may be seen and identified by day and prominent lighted objects may be seen and identified by night. VFR-ON-TOP− ATC authorization for an IFR aircraft to operate in VFR conditions at any appropriate VFR altitude (as specified in 14 CFR and as restricted by ATC). A pilot receiving this authorization must comply with the VFR visibility, distance from cloud criteria, and the minimum IFR altitudes specified in 14 CFR Part 91. The use of this term does not relieve controllers of their responsibility to separate aircraft in Class B and Class C airspace or TRSAs as required by FAA Order JO 7110.65. VFR TERMINAL AREA CHARTS− (See AERONAUTICAL CHART.) VFR WAYPOINT− (See WAYPOINT.) VHF− (See VERY HIGH FREQUENCY.) VHF OMNIDIRECTIONAL RANGE/TACTICAL AIR NAVIGATION− (See VORTAC.) VIDEO MAP− An electronically displayed map on the radar display that may depict data such as airports, heliports, runway centerline extensions, hospital emergency landing areas, NAVAIDs and fixes, reporting points, airway/route centerlines, boundaries, handoff points, special use tracks, obstructions, prominent geographic features, map alignment indicators, range accuracy marks, and/or minimum vectoring altitudes. VISIBILITY− The ability, as determined by atmospheric conditions and expressed in units of PCG V−2 (Refer to 14 CFR Part 91.) (Refer to AIM.) b. Ground Visibility− Prevailing horizontal visibility near the earth's surface as reported by the United States National Weather Service or an accredited observer. c. Prevailing Visibility− The greatest horizontal visibility equaled or exceeded throughout at least half the horizon circle which need not necessarily be continuous. d. Runway Visibility Value (RVV)− The visibility determined for a particular runway by a transmissometer. A meter provides a continuous indication of the visibility (reported in miles or fractions of miles) for the runway. RVV is used in lieu of prevailing visibility in determining minimums for a particular runway. e. Runway Visual Range (RVR)− An instrumentally derived value, based on standard calibrations, that represents the horizontal distance a pilot will see down the runway from the approach end. It is based on the sighting of either high intensity runway lights or on the visual contrast of other targets whichever yields the greater visual range. RVR, in contrast to prevailing or runway visibility, is based on what a pilot in a moving aircraft should see looking down the runway. RVR is horizontal visual range, not slant visual range. It is based on the measurement of a transmissometer made near the touchdown point of the instrument runway and is reported in hundreds of feet. RVR is used in lieu of RVV and/or prevailing visibility in determining minimums for a particular runway. 1. Touchdown RVR− The RVR visibility readout values obtained from RVR equipment serving the runway touchdown zone. 2. Mid-RVR− The RVR readout values obtained from RVR equipment located midfield of the runway. Pilot/Controller Glossary 3/29/18 3. Rollout RVR− The RVR readout values obtained from RVR equipment located nearest the rollout end of the runway. (See (See (See (See ICAO term FLIGHT VISIBILITY.) ICAO term GROUND VISIBILITY.) ICAO term RUNWAY VISUAL RANGE.) ICAO term VISIBILITY.) VISIBILITY [ICAO]− The ability, as determined by atmospheric conditions and expressed in units of distance, to see and identify prominent unlighted objects by day and prominent lighted objects by night. a. Flight Visibility− The visibility forward from the cockpit of an aircraft in flight. b. Ground Visibility− The visibility at an aerodrome as reported by an accredited observer. c. Runway Visual Range [RVR]− The range over which the pilot of an aircraft on the centerline of a runway can see the runway surface markings or the lights delineating the runway or identifying its centerline. VISUAL APPROACH− An approach conducted on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan which authorizes the pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must, at all times, have either the airport or the preceding aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and under the control of the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must be: ceiling at or above 1,000 feet, and visibility of 3 miles or greater. (See ICAO term VISUAL APPROACH.) VISUAL APPROACH [ICAO]− An approach by an IFR flight when either part or all of an instrument approach procedure is not completed and the approach is executed in visual reference to terrain. VISUAL APPROACH SLOPE INDICATOR (VASI)− (See AIRPORT LIGHTING.) VISUAL CLIMB OVER AIRPORT (VCOA)− A departure option for an IFR aircraft, operating in visual meteorological conditions equal to or greater than the specified visibility and ceiling, to visually conduct climbing turns over the airport to the published "climb−to" altitude from which to proceed with the instrument portion of the departure. VCOA procedures are developed to avoid obstacles greater than 3 statute miles from the departure end of the runway as an alternative to complying with climb gradients greater than 200 feet per nautical mile. Pilots are responsible to advise ATC as early as possible of the intent to fly the VCOA option prior to departure. These textual procedures are published in the 'Take−Off Minimums and (Obstacle) Departure Procedures' section of the Terminal Procedures Publications and/or appear as an option on a Graphic ODP. (See AIM.) VISUAL DESCENT POINT− A defined point on the final approach course of a nonprecision straight-in approach procedure from which normal descent from the MDA to the runway touchdown point may be commenced, provided the approach threshold of that runway, or approach lights, or other markings identifiable with the approach end of that runway are clearly visible to the pilot. VISUAL FLIGHT RULES− Rules that govern the procedures for conducting flight under visual conditions. The term "VFR" is also used in the United States to indicate weather conditions that are equal to or greater than minimum VFR requirements. In addition, it is used by pilots and controllers to indicate type of flight plan. (See INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES.) (See INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS.) (See VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS.) (Refer to 14 CFR Part 91.) (Refer to AIM.) VISUAL HOLDING− The holding of aircraft at selected, prominent geographical fixes which can be easily recognized from the air. (See HOLDING FIX.) VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS− Meteorological conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling equal to or better than specified minima. (See INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES.) (See INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS.) (See VISUAL FLIGHT RULES.) VISUAL SEGMENT− (See PUBLISHED INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURE VISUAL SEGMENT.) PCG V−3 Pilot/Controller Glossary VISUAL SEPARATION− A means employed by ATC to separate aircraft in terminal areas and en route airspace in the NAS. There are two ways to effect this separation: a. The tower controller sees the aircraft involved and issues instructions, as necessary, to ensure that the aircraft avoid each other. b. A pilot sees the other aircraft involved and upon instructions from the controller provides his/her own separation by maneuvering his/her aircraft as necessary to avoid it. This may involve following another aircraft or keeping it in sight until it is no longer a factor. (See SEE AND AVOID.) (Refer to 14 CFR Part 91.) VLF− (See VERY LOW FREQUENCY.) VMC− (See VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS.) VOICE SWITCHING AND CONTROL SYSTEM (VSCS)− A computer controlled switching system that provides air traffic controllers with all voice circuits (air to ground and ground to ground) necessary for air traffic control. (Refer to AIM.) VOR− A ground-based electronic navigation aid transmitting very high frequency navigation signals, 360 degrees in azimuth, oriented from magnetic north. Used as the basis for navigation in the National Airspace System. The VOR periodically identifies itself by Morse Code and may have an additional voice identification feature. Voice features may be used by ATC or FSS for transmitting instructions/information to pilots. (See NAVIGATIONAL AID.) (Refer to AIM.) VOR TEST SIGNAL− (See VOT.) PCG V−4 3/29/18 VORTAC− A navigation aid providing VOR azimuth, TACAN azimuth, and TACAN distance measuring equipment (DME) at one site. (See DISTANCE MEASURING EQUIPMENT.) (See NAVIGATIONAL AID.) (See TACAN.) (See VOR.) (Refer to AIM.) VORTICES− Circular patterns of air created by the movement of an airfoil through the air when generating lift. As an airfoil moves through the atmosphere in sustained flight, an area of area of low pressure is created above it. The air flowing from the high pressure area to the low pressure area around and about the tips of the airfoil tends to roll up into two rapidly rotating vortices, cylindrical in shape. These vortices are the most predominant parts of aircraft wake turbulence and their rotational force is dependent upon the wing loading, gross weight, and speed of the generating aircraft. The vortices from medium to super aircraft can be of extremely high velocity and hazardous to smaller aircraft. (See AIRCRAFT CLASSES.) (See WAKE TURBULENCE.) (Refer to AIM.) VOT− A ground facility which emits a test signal to check VOR receiver accuracy. Some VOTs are available to the user while airborne, and others are limited to ground use only. (See CHART SUPPLEMENT U.S.) (Refer to 14 CFR Part 91.) (Refer to AIM.) VR− (See VFR MILITARY TRAINING ROUTES.) VSCS− (See VOICE SWITCHING AND CONTROL SYSTEM.) VTA− (See VERTEX TIME OF ARRIVAL.) VTOL AIRCRAFT− (See VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING AIRCRAFT.)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Chris Young Auctions Off Grandmother's Handmade Quilts to Benefit St. Jude
Chris Young has always been eager jump at any opportunity to help raise money for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Now, with the help of his beloved grandmother, Young is offering fans rare, one-of-a-kind quilts made by Nanny's own little sweet hands!
Every month, Nanny will whip up special quilts with a Chris Young theme, such as the current quilt up for bidding for the month of May (see above), which has various song titles from the singer's three RCA albums patched into the red and yellow fabric.
"I think it's really cool that Nanny has taken up the cause to help raise money for these incredible St. Jude kids who are fighting for their lives," says Young in a statement. "I hope my fans will check out her handmade quilts each month and consider making a bid to help support St. Jude."
Fans can place their bids on the quilts each month by visiting Young's official website by clicking here. All funds raised through the sales of the quilts will be donated each month to the hospital. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital is one of the world's premier centers for the research and treatment of pediatric cancer and other deadly childhood diseases.


text:
Watch monthly live webcast - Like us on Facebook - Subscribe on YouTube
Biblical flood
The Biblical Flood is an event (Date::17 Bul 1656 AM) described in the Biblical book of Genesis, wherein the entire world was covered with water as a deliberate act of God. Only a small number of humans and animals survived through an ark that was built by Noah under instructions from God.
In The Genesis Record, Henry Morris states:
|The word for "flood" (mabbul), used here for the first time, applies only to the Noahic Flood; other floods are denoted by various other words in the original. This was the "mabbul," unique in all history...Similarly, when the Genesis Flood is referred to in the New Testament, the Greek term kataklusmos is uniquely employed (Matthew 24:39 ; Luke 17:27 ; 2 Peter 2:5 ; 2 Peter 3:6 ) instead of the usual Greek word for "flood." This Flood was not to be comparable to other later local floods; it was to be absolutely unique in all history.[1]
The account in Genesis is the best known and the most detailed, but the event recorded in ancient histories in various forms across cultures worldwide. It is described in the Islamic Qur'an, the Book of Jubilees, and the Book of Enoch. Direct references occur in the Critias and Timaeus of Plato, and the ancient Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh.
- 1 Cause
- 2 Purpose
- 3 Biblical Record
- 4 Extrabiblical Sources
- 5 Pre-flood and Post-flood differences
- 6 Questions and Answers
- 6.1 Where did the water come from?
- 6.2 Where did the water go?
- 6.3 Was the flood regional?
- 6.4 Could a just God destroy innocent life?
- 6.5 How could you get 7 billion people from just 8 survivors of the Flood?
- 6.6 Could plants survive the pressure and salinity?
- 6.7 Could the Ark hold all the animals?
- 6.8 Could Noah repopulate the earth with the altered soil composition and available food?
- 6.9 Would inbreeding threaten extinction for humans and lower animals?
- 6.10 Mass Global Extinction
- 6.11 Speciation vs Specialization
- 7 References
- 8 External Links
- 9 See Also
- Main Article: Flood models
According to the Biblical account, the Flood of Noah initiated when the "fountains of the great deep broken up" (Genesis 7:11). Thus the primary source of water was subterranean. This was accompanied by "the windows of heaven were opened" to deliver a forty day rain. The waters rose and persisted for some time after the rain subsided. Since the hydrologic cycle of this timeframe was not air-to-ground-to-air (clouds and rain), but underground-to-ground-to-underground (a ground-level mist), there is no identifiable earthly source of water for the "windows of heaven" There were no clouds or rain, but a mist that watered the earth (Genesis 2:5-6). In fact, in other places where "windows of heaven" are mentioned (2 Kings 7:19, Isaiah 24:18, Malachi 3:10) this term reflects a provision directly from the heavenly realm.
The Bible is not clear on when the "springs of the deep" were closed and some have interpreted Genesis 7:24 to mean that 150 days were involved - wherein it states: The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days.. The flood, which began in the 600th year of Noah's life on the 17th day of the second month (Genesis 7:11 ) - to the day when the ark came to rest in the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the seventh month (Genesis 8:3-4 ). Noah was unable to leave the Ark for quite some time after this, however, because the tops of the mountains were not seen until three months later (Genesis 8:5 ). Noah was not given permission to leave the ark until the 27th day of the second month of his six-hundred-first year, placing them in the Ark for over one year(Genesis 8:14 ).
In this timeframe, we can derive that a month was thirty days long, with twelve months for a 360-day year. Even today, the value of 360 is used to measure a circle. Like a seven-day week, we may presume that this is a holdover from a pre-Flood measurement standard (one degree being one day) because no other known astronomical or geographical standard would provide such a baseline.
Several theories have been put forth to explain the source and eventual recession of these waters. While early models held to the existence of a vapor canopy as supplying the flood waters, the majority of creation geologists now support the waters from beneath the Earth's crust as responsible. Supporting this long-held view, subterranean water reservoirs have been recently discovered revealing oceanic-level water quantities below the Earth's crust.
[2][3] Others estimate that the total water underground may be five times more than the amount of water in above-ground oceans[4]
The exact depth of this water within the Earth's crust varies with different models. The Hydroplate theory places the water below a 10 mile thick crust, the remnants of which are now the continental crust. The Hydroplate theory is the first flood model to deal with the springs of the great deep. Modeling the springs of the deep is an important aspect of any Flood model and one where hydroplate theory excels. It is an important aspect of flood geology but one that still requires much work.
Flood Models:
Destruction of all Breathing Creatures
- Main Article: Noah
God chose a specific class of creature to annihilate, that is all creatures with the breath of life Genesis 6:17 Genesis 7:22 with a specific complaint that their flesh had been corrupted Genesis 6:11-13, , but more importantly, they had "corrupted their way upon the earth". This is a direct allusion to the "way" of the flesh, which is the behavior borne on its corruption. The Creation had strongly deviated from its original design, both in the genetic makeup of the creatures, and the behavior borne on those genetics.
According to the book of Genesis 6:9 ,"Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations and Noah walked with God".[5] However, Noah lived at a time when men became more and more corrupt, and God determined to rid the Earth of its population.[6] Because of Noah's special place as a (a) righteous man (b) near genetically pristine and (c) walked with God, God entered into a covenant with him, with a promise of deliverance from the impending Deluge.[7] He was accordingly commanded to build an ark[8] to save himself and his family.
God told Noah that he would send animals to the Ark. Noah would not have to gather them[9]. An important aspect of the Flood is that God chose the passengers of the Ark based primarily on their genetic viability (to abate the corruption of the flesh) and in Noah's case, someone who would be obedient to build the Ark and apply extraordinary physical and mental effort to accomplish it. We must consider that God declared the entire world wicked, including Noah, yet set Noah aside for this task. Certainly Noah's heart was no better than any other man, but God recognized his dedication to truth and to God himself, as well as his genetic viability for the post-Flood world.
It is seen as significant by most that the Bible mentions a hybrid race known as the Nephilim immediately prior to God's proclamation to destroy the Earth by flood. Their presence may have been responsible for or contributed to the corruption of humankind. Being the progeny of God's enemies (fallen angels), they may also have contributed to the continuing rise of violence, jeopardizing the future of the human race as a whole.
"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth." - Genesis 6:4-7
However, the primary purpose of the Flood was not to simply destroy or punish the wicked (e.g. a vindictive act as promulgated by atheists), because after the Flood we read in the Bible Genesis 8:21 that the "imagination of man is evil from his youth."
The Flood was a very physical solution to a physical problem that was worldwide in scope. Wickedness, violence and evil were the natural results or symptoms of the physical complications. Sin and wickedness are pervasive in the heart of man to this day, even for believers. In this time frame, however, the physical world had taken on a form of corruption that required a physical rather than spiritual solution. The most dramatic outcome of this solution would be to stop the procreation (cut off the descendants) of every line of land-creature than did not board the Ark.
- Man's physical longevity preserved evil for longer periods of time
- The Nephilim, physical progeny of God's sworn enemies, would be expected to commit genocide against humans to defy God's word and his promises
- corruption of the flesh, another physical problem, was that man and beast had irreversibly deviated from their original purpose and design in a manner that utterly grieved God. It is reasonable to assume this corruption was exhibited behaviorally but was also genetic in nature
- We may also presume that this corruption-of-flesh affected clean animals which, if annihilated, would inhibit man from having fellowship with God through sacrifice.
- Corruption of the flesh explains why animals had to be annihilated along with mankind, because animals do not sin or have moral issues.
Reduction of Life Expectancy
- Main Article: Human longevity
Ancient historical records (including Genesis) state that prior to the flood of Noah, humans lived to approximately 10 times our current life expectancy. Methuselah is known for living longer than any other human in history, dying at the age of 969.[10] This longevity is believed to be so extraordinarily long in part because environmental conditions were optimal before the Earth was destroyed. However, immediately after the flood, the lifespans recorded in the Biblical genealogy dropped quickly. Creationists have proposed a number of explanations for this, and it can not be overlooked as significant that immediately prior to proclaiming the coming of the global flood, God states that "Man's days shall be 120 years;"(Genesis 6:3 ). This statement may well indicate that one of the purposes of the flood was to reduce the lifespan of humans.[11]. In Genetic Entropy, John Sanford notes that anyone could place the decreasing lifespans from Adam to King David and put them on a curve, and they would represent an exponential decay that is off-tolerance by less than 0.94. Either the Biblical patriarchs were simply recording what they saw, or had access to advanced mathematical models in order to display the curve this way. An exponential decay curve is significant in that, if initiated by God Genesis 6:3 is mathematically consistent with the rest of his Creation.
An exponential decay curve (genetic decay resulting in shorter lifespans) has significant implications for the evolutionary model. If for example the human genome is decaying from its originally designed state, this flies in the face of evolutionary claims that the genome is getting better with each generation. In fact, it asserts that the human genome is devolving, not evolving. Invariably when evolutionary thinkers publish papers on recent observations, it is often very easy to reinterpret their conclusions in the light of genetic decay or loss-of-function rather than the other way around. The famous Lenski experiment [12] attempts to show evolution-in-progress. But each observation, taken out of the evolutionary context, is indicative of loss-of-function not gain-of-function.
Foreshadowing Salvation
The word "pitch" used to cover the Ark, Genesis 6:14 is the same word for "atonement" (Strong's H3722) and foreshadows the blood atonement of Christ, which protects the believer from judgment John 3:36 , just as the pitch protected the Ark from the waters of judgment I Peter 3:20 .
God's holiness is "active" in that sin compels him to respond. His loving mercy likewise compels him to provide. While the Flood represents the fact that God possesses the will and capacity to execute judgment on creation, it is also representative of God's provision of salvation of the righteous. Abraham persistently inquired of God as to his tolerance of wickedness for the sake of the righteous remnant Genesis 18:32 where Abraham learned that God would withhold judgment for the sake of 10 righteous (Abraham feared inquiring further). The remaining righteous before the Flood (8 people) did not meet this threshold.
Foreshadowing of the "Rapture"
In the discourse on the Mount of Olives Matthew 24 , Jesus Christ offers insight to a period commonly referred to by believers as the "last days". Interleaved in these explanations are foreshadows of the event that believers call "the Rapture", when Jesus returns in the clouds to receive all believers living and dead. Jesus references Lot and Noah as examples of "evacuation before judgment".
But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour our Lord doth come.
And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
The above are both a picture of "evacuation before judgment", in describing the Rapture event, that all believers will be caught up (1 Thess 4:17) to be with the Lord in the air as a groom receives a bridge into the bridal chamber (Matt 25:1) for the wedding supper of the Lamb Revelation 19:7-9 . Christ's rich wedding imagery and constant anchoring of the believer to a marriage covenant is a promise of the groom's protection and provision for the bride.
Significant in Christ's explanations are the "routine" existence of everyone prior to the Rapture event (likening it to Noah and Sodom in this regard). When we couple this with the extraordinary spiritual and earthly mayhem that start and escalate (Daniel 7,8,9, Revelation), we can see that there is nothing "routine" about two prophets causing worldwide plagues (Revelation 11:3-6), a global emperor causing people to swear fealty before they can do business or buy food (revelation 13:15-17), along with real miracles (angelic hosts preaching to mankind (Rev 14:5,6) and demonic miracles (2 Thess 2:3-9). These lead us to the very objective conclusion that Christ will remove his Bride from the Earth prior to the beginning of this mayhem.
God's Preservation of a Promise to Mankind
Jesus is the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" Revelation 13:8 . All of God's actions will ultimately preserve this truth.
God is holy and keeps his promises Acts 13:23 II Peter 3:9 Revelation 19:11 and this characteristic utterly separates Him from all others. His words (his promises) will never pass away Isaiah 40:8 Matthew 24:35
God had already promised Adam and Eve Genesis 3:15 that Eve's seed would be used to redeem the creation. This is an explicit promise of a human Redeemer, a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ. Adam, Eve and many more died with this promise in their hearts.
Human souls are eternal Genesis 2:7 . Many believers, including Adam and Eve, had already died prior to the corruption of the flesh and the rise of violence that so grieved God. Their souls did not go to heaven, but awaited Christ's redemption elsewhere John 3:13 Luke 16:22 I Peter 3:19 Ephesians 4:8-10 Acts 2:27-31 . Without Christ's redemption, they would remain forever separated from God's fellowship.
This promise required God to preserve mankind's bloodline in-general to bring about a human Redeemer. God later acts through the Abrahamic promise Genesis 18:18 Genesis 22:18 and the Davidic promise II Samuel 7:16 to preserve specific bloodlines leading to the promised Messiah.
As God interacts with mankind using everlasting priorities, The Flood and all of the acts of God, including the acts he required of men, kings and armies, can be viewed from a perspective of eternal purpose rather than temporal utility alone.
The pre-Flood violence, if unabated, risked at worst annihilation of all mankind, at best subject to the cruelty of demon progeny in the Nephilim. However, if annihilated, this would nullify the promises that God had already made to mankind to send a human Redeemer (no humans remained through which the Redeemer could come). For those who would have died prior to this annihilation, including Adam and Eve, the salvation through human Redeemer would likewise be lost. Their souls would remain in hell unredeemed and God's promise broken.
The Ark is a promise-kept to all future believers, a picture of salvation for the future of mankind, but also the preservation of a promise to those believers who had already died.
This viewpoint largely dispels the notion that God was acting capriciously or as a "cosmic kill-joy" to wipe out humans for punishment alone.
God's Preservation of Fellowship with Man
God slew animals and covered Adam and Eve with their skins Genesis 3:21 , presumably showing them how to perform ritual sacrifice in the process, because their progeny (Cain and Abel) executed formal ritual sacrifice Genesis 4 as did Noah after the Flood Genesis 8:20
Preparations for later sacrifice were made in the stocking of the Ark Genesis 7:2 , with seven pairs of clean animals and one pair of unclean animals.
After the Flood, Genesis 8:20 the clean animals were necessary for sacrifice, allowing mankind to maintain temporary fellowship with God and to honor the foreshadowing of the coming Redeemer Hebrews 10:2-4
As Noah did not have to fetch the animals, (they were sent Genesis 6:20 ) but the overstocking of clean animals underscored God's priority of preserving ongoing fellowship with man in the upcoming generations, through blood sacrifice.
Biblical Record
- Main Article: Noah's ark
The Biblical account of the flood contains a remarkable degree of detail. Precise dimensions are given for the ark and each of its decks. It also provides the exact year, month, and day of the flood. In Genesis 7:11 we read that the flood occurred in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month. According to the Biblical genealogy, this was 1656 years after the creation.
The Bible account also states exactly how long the flood lasted:
"The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat." - Genesis 8:3-4
"The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible." - Genesis 8:5
"By the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was completely dry." - Genesis 8:14
This degree of detail — day, month, and year — is common in first-hand historical accounts, but is rare in myths and fiction.
"So the LORD said, 'I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth — men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air — for I am grieved that I have made them.'" - Genesis 6:7
According to the Biblical chronology the global flood occurred approximately 4500 years ago. If this event occurred as described in the Bible, the fossil record left behind could never be correctly interpreted by a naturalist. Although the earth is completely covered in monumental amounts of flood sediment, a naturalist would have to explain the survival of animals using natural processes, such as many local floods, and gradual deposition over millions of years. However, the Bible specifically says God caused the earth to be flooded until the waters exceeded the highest mountain by 15 cubits (22.5 feet, or 7 meters) (Genesis 7:20 ). The waters covered the mountains to the extent that no human was capable of surviving without supernatural intervention. The evidence of this event covers the world, but cannot be correctly interpreted by scientists who hold to an atheistic philosophy and naturalistic presuppositions.
"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month — on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened." - Genesis 7:11
Explicit biblical references to Noah
- Genesis 5:28-32 — Genealogy
- Genesis 6-10 — The full narrative of the Flood itself
- Isaiah 54:9
- Matthew 24:37-39 — Testified to by Jesus
- Luke 17:26-27
- Hebrews 11:7
- 1Peter 3:20
- 2Peter 2:4-11 (vs 5)
Near explicit references to Noah
- 2Peter 3:3-9 (vss 5-6) — (the word translated "flooded" here is the root of our word cataclysm)
Possible implicit references to the flood
Extrabiblical Sources
- Main Article: Flood legends
Native global flood stories are documented as history or legend in almost every region on Earth. In The Antiquities of the Jews, first-century historian Josephus cites myriad ancient histories recording the flood, including those by Berosus the Chaldean, Hieronymus the Egyptian, Mnaseas, and Nicolaus of Damascus. (Antiquities I:3:93-95.) In addition to these written accounts, scores of oral traditions about the flood exist throughout the world even today, including Native American and Aboriginal societies. Old world missionaries reported their amazement at finding remote tribes already possessing legends with tremendous similarities to the Bible's accounts of the worldwide flood. H.S. Bellamy in Moons, Myths and Men estimates that altogether there are over 500 Flood legends worldwide. Ancient civilizations such as (China, Babylonia, Wales, Russia, India, America, Hawaii, Scandinavia, Sumatra, Peru, and Polynesia) all have their own versions of a giant flood.
These flood tales are frequently linked by common elements that parallel the Biblical account including the warning of the coming flood, the construction of a boat in advance, the storage of animals, the inclusion of family, and the release of birds to determine if the water level had subsided. The overwhelming consistency among flood legends found in distant parts of the globe indicates they were derived from the same origin (the Bible's record), but oral transcription has changed the details through time.
The following elements are common to nearly all the accounts:
- A flood was sent by the divine to punish mankind.
- A family of people and a number of animals were spared from the flood in a boat.
- All life on earth outside the boat or not native to the water was destroyed.
- The residents of the boat repopulated the whole earth.
There are two explanations for the widespread flood story. The global flood was a popular and fictional myth created by early man, passed from culture to culture and gradually exaggerated, or global flood was a historical event, of which the events were recorded and retained to varying degrees of accuracy in different cultures over the years.
Those who hold to the second approach challenge those who hold to the former in the following ways:
- If this was a fictional myth, why did all the cultures take it as historical fact?
- If this was a fictional myth, why was it found among Native American people who (according to the evolutionary view) had no contact with people of the Middle East for tens of thousands of years?
- If this was a fictional myth, why is there such a spectacular degree of detail, particularly in the Genesis account, which provides the exact day, month, and year for the events of the flood?
- Why is the geologic record so much more consistent with catastrophism than with uniformitarianism?[13]
- Why does the physical evidence such as the massive fossil graveyards, huge sedimentary deposits, vast coal and oil fields and chalk deposits indicate a massive flood so strongly?
Many of those who most vigorously object to the second approach (historic event) do so for philosophical reasons. Because the most complete account of the Flood is found in Genesis, any admission of a major flood in human times would present a threat to Naturalism philosophy. They object to the idea that a God of judgment would reveal the future to a human and then destroy almost all land-living animals. Even evolutionists who agree with catastrophism often seek other explanations. This philosophical objection results in a great number of apparently scientific arguments against a global flood. However, most of these arguments are unfounded and do not hold up to scientific scrutiny.
Pre-flood and Post-flood differences
Most historical information regarding the pre-flood world and the post-flood world is based largely on speculation. However, one conclusion that is usually agreed upon is that the pre-flood world and post-flood world were dramatically different.
The following table is a summary of the known and assumed facts based on scientific research and biblical history.
|Long lifespan.
|Short lifespan.
|Prophecy before the flood: (Genesis 6:3 )
|Nutrient Availability
|Full nutritional diet available in plants and/or other resources.(Genesis 1:9 )
|Many creatures, including Man, are now allowed to eat meat because there is a loss of nutrient resources.(Assumption based on Genesis 9:2-4 )
|It is clear that before the flood, plant life was ample to sustain man, but after the flood, God also made animals available for man as a food source.
Questions and Answers
Where did the water come from?
- Main Article: Springs of the great deep
Springs of the Great Deep are described in the Bible as a source of the devastating global flood. While some have contended that the main source of the waters was the 40 days of rain (See: canopy theory), today most creation scientists agree that it was principally caused by waters of a subterranean origin. Recent discoveries have revealed that the inner earth may hold more water than the seas. Analysis of the earth's likely composition in 2002 revealed "there may be more H2O deep underground than in all oceans, lakes, and rivers combined."[14] In 2007, scientists discovered for the first time that a vast 'ocean' exists beneath Asia that is at least the volume of the Arctic Ocean.[15] According to National Geographic, the water appears locked in moisture-containing rocks discovered through scanning seismic waves[16], but further discoveries could follow.[17]
Where did the water go?
- Main Article: Flood model
Some who dismiss the idea of a global flood do so because they say the Flood would have had to rise as high as Mount Everest, because Genesis 7:19 says the waters covered "all the high hills." Mount Everest peaks at 29,035 feet (8850 metres), and they say there is not enough water on earth to cover such a height.[18]
This is actually a straw man argument. Creationists do not claim that the Flood covered mountain ranges such as the Himalayas, Rockies, Andes or even Mount Ararat. Rather these mountain ranges were formed by the rapid plate movement of the continents at the peak of the Flood's activity. Some have claimed that such a notion would create enough joules of energy to boil the seas, but the Flood initiated the Ice Age so there is clearly a missing piece of their claim. The "mountains" mentioned in Genesis are the "high hills" and nothing more. Mountain ranges were formed catastrophically, as the Bible notes:
"You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. But at your rebuke the waters fled, at the sound of your thunder they took to flight; they flowed over the mountains, they went down into the valleys, to the place you assigned for them. You set a boundary they cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth." - Psalm 104:6-9
This passage tells us that mountains rose and valleys sank during the Flood. Mount Everest rose up during the Flood, so the Flood did not need to reach the height that Mount Everest is today.
There is enough water on earth for a global flood. If the earth was smoothed out, the water in the oceans would cover it to a depth of about 8,813 feet (2.6 kilometres). This does not include the water in rivers, lakes, glaciers, and other sources. They would add about another 2–3 thousand feet (600-900 metres). In reality, the Flood would only need to be a little over 7,000 feet (2.1 kilometres) deep.
Anecdotally, if the oceans today were only 300 feet lower, every continent would be connected with land bridges. That much of the floodwater was trapped on land and in glaciers is evidenced in the massive underwater canyons located at the egress point of major rivers on every major continent. The Hudson river has just such a canyon, eclipsing the size of the Grand Canyon and would have required enormous power to carve (more power than what is delivered today by the river's egress to the ocean).
So the real question is whether it is possible for Mount Everest to have risen to its current height fast enough to fit a time-scale consistent with the Flood. The earthquake that caused the Indonesian tsunami of December 26, 2004 caused an uplift of at least 20 feet (six metres) in a few minutes, which is a speed of about 240 feet per hour (84 metres per hour). At that rate Mount Everest could have reached its current height in about five days. Forces observed in earthquakes are sufficient, if extended long enough, to quickly raise the highest mountain to its current height in just a few days. Marine fossils are discovered on the highest peaks[19]. The result is that, based on the amount of water on earth, and observed tectonic forces, there was the potential to quickly raise mountains. So the global Flood of the Bible is theoretically possible. You can see a seafloor study that traces culprits behind Indian Ocean tsunami[20] for further explanation.
Was the flood regional?
- Main Article: Local flood
Although the Genesis account of the flood of Noah has traditionally been interpreted as meaning a global event, some believe it was merely a regional catastrophe. The local flood view is held by old-earth creationists known as Day-age or Progressive creationists. Arguments in favor of this position use the original Hebrew wording, which they claim is ambiguous about whether the flood was universal. This is not true, since a unique and specific Hebrew word "mabbul" is used to for the Genesis flood, and a unique and specific Greek word "kataklusmos" (e.g. cataclysm) is used in the New Testament. Other words for "flood" are used for local floods. Local-flood advocates also cite many ancient historians who have claimed that Noah's Flood was regional. In addition, some Islamic and Greek historians recorded the flood as regional. These however, are so closely descriptive of the original Flood that they are considered derived stories. The Flood is offered in Genesis as an eyewitness account.
Practically speaking, a regional flood makes nonsense of the story. The size of the ark means that its building is likely to have taken several years. That being so, it would always be simpler to migrate away from the region rather than build an ark. In addition, there would be no need to preserve animals through it, since they too could have walked to safety. No conceivable regional flood, in the earth's current configuration, could cover so wide an area as to require an ark rather than feet in order to escape it.
More importantly, God promised (with a rainbow) that he would never flood the Earth with water again. There have been many local floods since that time. Even one local flood means that God broke his promise.
Furthermore, John D. Morris, at the Institute for Creation Research, points out that the Hebrew and Greek words used in the Bible for the Global Flood were substantially different from any words used to describe either a local flood or a metaphor for a military invasion.[21]
Could a just God destroy innocent life?
This objection refers to the many living things that were destroyed in the Flood. Why destroy the innocent animals? This is answered with an examination of the context. Mortal life, including plants and animals, since the Fall of Adam and Eve, is subject to death. Withholding a global flood would not have saved any animal or plant from death. The justice of God provided a way for many species to be saved on the Ark. God waited as long as his justice would allow, before causing a Flood that would shorten the life spans of individual creatures but would not destroy general kinds of creatures: Life would return and the earth would be repopulated.
The question of "innocent animals" also presumes that the purpose of the Flood was solely to judge sin or bad behavior, neither of which were solved by the Flood. The Flood served to universally and completely cut off the physical germlines of the corrupted flesh. That is, the animals that had genetically deviated, or had been deliberately corrupted by angelic interference, would be annihilated. The animals on the Ark, specifically and personally selected by a wise Creator, would reset the animal population of the earth.
In the opening verses of Genesis 6, God openly observes that all humans are wicked. God selects Noah for His own purposes and reasons, but does not claim that Noah is innocent, only that Noah is obedient and is "perfect in his generations" - that is, a highly pristine genetic specimen.
Abraham queried God as to whether God would preserve Sodom if only a few righteous remained, and persistently reduced the number down to ten(10). As far as we know, this is God's threshold for withholding judgment for the sake of a righteous remnant. The Flood, however, preserved only eight(8) which like Sodom, did not meet this threshold. Later in Scripture, Jesus Christ compares his Second Coming to the Flood and to Sodom, linking the two events as analogous to "evacuation before judgment."
How could you get 7 billion people from just 8 survivors of the Flood?People who make this objection often fail to realize how fast the exponential growth of a population can occur. As shown below, if the flood occurred 4300 years ago, then we would only need an annual growth rate of .49% to get from the 6 children and in-laws of Noah to the 7 billion people of today. Here is the proof:
Population growth is modeled by the equation , where is the current population, is the beginning population, is the growth rate (as a decimal), and is the amount of time over which the population has been growing. Now, let us find the growth rate required to get from 6 people 4300 years ago to 7 billion people today by solving for .
Recall that this is the growth rate required if the Flood had occurred 4300 years ago, which is a late date for the Flood. However, if the Flood occurred 4500 years earlier, as believed by many Creation Scientists, then the required growth rate drops down to .47%.
Could plants survive the pressure and salinity?
Doubters of the flood ask how plants could survive the flood when the salinity and pressure, and lack of sunlight, would most likely kill most plants. Their argument assumes that the salinity and pressure would in fact be high. As shown above, the water level wasn't nearly as high as the present altitude of mount Everest and not as high as they'd consider, so the pressure would not be high enough to flatten trees and such as they'd think.
They further assume that the water flooding the earth, had to be salt water. If it wasn't, then it would more than likely "water" the plants underneath rather than poison them. And because the water altitude wasn't nearly as high as they anticipated, sunlight filtration becomes less of a problem. Indeed, thousands of sea creatures and plants today can live in seawater at great depths with minimal sunlight, and they are submerged deeper than those flooded plants would have been. Furthermore, even if the water flooding the earth was highly saline, seeds could have easily survived—as Darwin himself proved.[22]
When the dove returned an olive branch Genesis 8:11 this strongly adds credibility to the account, considering that olive trees are one of the hardiest and resilient trees in the world, and would have rapidly grown to produce branches in a short period of time.
Could the Ark hold all the animals?
- Main Article: Microevolution
One of the most frequent questions asked, as evidenced by the abundance of Creationist responses, is whether the Ark could contain all the varieties of animals we see today.[23]
Practically speaking, God personally gave Noah the dimensions of the Ark and also told Noah that the animals would come to him. In short, God knew which and how many animals he would send, and so designed an Ark suitable for it. The question remains as to the details of this preservation.
Probably the best point to be made is that made by Doctors Morris and Whitcomb in The Genesis Flood (1998), that the core created "kinds" mentioned in Genesis 1:5 are not the same thing as species.[24][25]
|"The word species and the Biblical word 'kind' are often used interchangeably. This is incorrect since they are not synonymous. The Biblical word kind denotes an organism that reproduces others like itself. The species concept is much narrower than this; therefore many species can be included in a single Biblical 'kind.' The word kind is probably closer to the modern taxonomic unit of genus, and in some cases the larger taxonomic unit, family. The Canidae (canine) family includes about 14 genera of dog like animals. These include the coyote, dog, wolf, jackal, etc. The ark did not have to contain the hundreds of species of canines that make up this group. In reality, these were all represented by a few 'kind.' These 'kind' would then produce all the animals that make up the Canidae family. For example all of the hundreds of varieties of domestic pigeons that have all been produced originated from one species, the wild rock pigeon (Columbia livia)."[26]
This is the concept of Microevolution, which is Biblically compatible. According to Genesis 1, God told each core created animal to bring forth after their "kinds", or a scientist might call them, Family.
|And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good... And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:21 , Genesis 1:24-25
The word "kind" is translated from the Hebrew word "miyn", defined by Strong's Hebrew Dictionary as "from an unused root meaning to portion out; a sort, i.e. species:--kind."[27] We can see Natural Selection occur, we can see adaptation occur, but what remains highly speculatory is this belief in Macroevolution, that all species came from a common ancestor. Just because species adapt after their core species (genera) to the environment, changing to become the numerous varieties we see today, does not mean they all had a common ancestor.
There would, in other words, be fewer parent species required on the Ark, which would then adapt through Microevolution into the many varieties that we see today, according to the book of Genesis. What is more, we see that this rate of Microevolution is fast enough to allow such rapid adaptation within thousands of years, as it is being discovered far faster than commonly believed under the theory of Evolution, within decades, rather than over thousands or millions of years.[28]
Could Noah repopulate the earth with the altered soil composition and available food?
To be more specific: could the remaining soil support enough agriculture to feed eight people and all the herbivores of the earth? The Flood was a violent event that essentially stripped away the old soil and remade the surface of the earth. But this new surface, and new soil, would be more than sufficiently fertile, for several reasons:
- One persistent complaint by Flood doubters, and therefore a generally acknowledged fact on all sides, is the apparent lack of human fossils. Certainly, most of the victims of the Flood did not fossilize. Therefore their bodies decomposed, and this decomposition would have supplied the new soil with nitrogen and other vital components.
- Irrigation would not be a problem, because the Flood had provided plenty of water, and as discussed above, that water need not have been saline.
Therefore, the surviving seeds would have been able to germinate and thus repopulate the world with all kinds of plants, including grains, fruits, and vegetables. If germination began almost immediately after the Flood, Noah and his family could live on the remaining supplies that they had not consumed aboard the Ark, and within weeks the first "voluntary crops" could have sprouted. Noah and his family would have consumed only a small fraction of these, and the rest would have gone to seed. Other animals would have helped indirectly by contributing to the nitrogen cycle through waste and death. Entire rain forests on other continents would have grown in only a few hundred years. The generations listed after Noah could have provided more than enough people to build the Tower of Babel.
Would inbreeding threaten extinction for humans and lower animals?
Many have asked, would inbreeding among humans after the flood not have caused the offspring of such unions to be retarded or deformed as we see today when brothers cohabitate with sisters or close kin? The answer is no. An understanding of genetics helps to clarify the matter. Briefly, in Adam's gene pool was the potential of creating all traits found in man today. Those who left the ark had a genetic makeup that was purely ideal and full of variabilty, allowing the descendants of the flood survivors to have the many traits we see today-through the process of isolation. After the Flood, Noah's three sons went out into the world in different geographic directions and isolation occurred. As generation, after generation was born, the gene pool was eventually narrowed through the process of natural selection and isolation, which eventually allowed the process of speciation to develop at a much faster speed. Thus after each generation was born, gene pool narrowing coupled with isolation from other peoples, caused the available genes to lesson and this influenced modern man's characteristics. However, because of sin, man's genes were effected and this lead to the possibilities of deformities. These two factors today, namely a smaller gene pool, and the present of bad genes causes children of close relatives to be possibly deformed in some way.
Inbreeding is often regarded as far more deleterious than the actual facts suggest. While inbreeding causes several mutations and losses of genetic material, multiple examples from history show that this need not be lethal. For millennia, royalty married only other royalty. Therefore, of necessity, cousin married cousin and often brother married sister. While genetic diseases like hemophilia did occur more frequently than they do in the general population, even this increased frequency did not destroy those royal families. (The destruction of the Romanov dynasty in Russia is often cited as an example, but that destruction resulted, not from the suffering of Tsarevich Alexei, but rather from the tragic decision by his mother to trust a mystic with questionable political connections. The Royal House of Windsor in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland did not suffer such a tragic fate, though that family also saw an increase in hemophilia and in fact passed this increased incidence to the Romanovs, who were their cousins.)
More to the point, to say that an increased frequency of genetic disease would have wiped out entire populations is absurd. Millions of people today are still born with genetic diseases, because technically everyone's spouse is a cousin to some degree. Yet the human race endures. However, inbreeding could have caused a deterioration of the human species, which might help explain the shortening of the human lifespan.
The same applies to animals: while some deterioration would have occurred, no credible observation, or series of observations, suggests that inbreeding has ever caused the extinction of an entire species.
Mass Global Extinction
According to some, the earth is experiencing the sixth and worst mass extinction event in it's history[29] and that it's all mankind's fault. Species are dying off in record number, plants and animals both[30]
The conditions on the earth today are not radically different from the past. Even the amounts of C02 in the atmosphere have been measurably higher. Latest research shows that temperature and C02 are not directly related. In fact, the temperature associated with C02 is logarithmic, it reaches a certain point and stops even if C02 continues to rise.
What if the world's animals are dying off? Is mankind truly responsible? The amount of waste and mayhem produced by the earth itself is far greater than anything mankind has ever, or could ever produce. But if the mass extinction is real, wouldn't this fall in-line with the Christian worldview, that the Creation is meant to be managed but is still a temporary existence. According to all we know of Scripture, the current Earth and Cosmos are not to last forever (2 Peter 3:10) but will be replaced by a new heaven and earth (Rev 21:1).
Speciation vs Specialization
The scientific community has extraordinary trouble wrapping words and definitions around the concept of "speciation". Within a given group of creatures, they cannot accurately define what is a new species or when "speciation" has formally occurred. Nor is there consensus on what a "hybrid" might be. In the case of many fish. a parent species of two other species could be mistaken for a hybrid of the two. There is no means to determine lineage because the definition of speciation is in flux.
A major concept in Creation genetics is the idea that the current animal populations are spinoffs of the original created kinds. This is why the work "species" does not adequately describe them, either.
As an example, a recent study of the mitochondria of 37 lines of cats, from the housecat to the jaguar to the lion and tiger, revealed that all 37 lines are descended from a common cat-mother in Asia[31]. This is a finding that lines up with the creationist notion that a common cat-kind is the original progenitor of all cats on earth. Each type of cat we see today therefore, is a specialization of the original cat kind.
Let's say the original cat population was as diverse as humans in any city in the world. Various fur colors and patterns, varying height, weight and size, etc. As the population grows, it must find food so a portion of it spins off to a new habitat. This behavior is observable in populations of all creatures. Let's say this diverse group moves into a mountainous region. The smaller cats don't do so well, nor do the larger ones. Over time the population specializes in size and color to what looks a lot like a mountain lion. We could observe the same for cats all over the world, specializing into their various habitats.
This also explains why most sea creatures have little specialization, because their environment is not chaotic like the environment on dry land.
This specialization is possible because of the highly adaptive genes given to the cats by their Creator. Their genes, like s Swiss-Army knife, are able to easily adapt to new climes and locales. A universal rule of adaptation however, is that each time an adaptation must occur, some adaptability is lost. As the given cat specializes into its habitat, it loses adaptability. Eventually it must go extinct when all adaptability is finally lost.
This is primary reason for the aforementioned "mass extinction" of creatures and plants. They have specialized, adapted and re-adapted as necessary over many thousands of years, but the time has come for them to go extinct. They have lost adaptability over time and can no longer survive.
What does this say of the notion that the animals we see today are derived from a common ancestor prior to the cats? The finches that Darwin saw on the Galapagos island had a variety of beaks, and he thought the beaks were the result of new, never-before-seen function. If he had stayed around long enough for one of the island's periodic climate swings, he would have seen a radical shift in beak shapes as the populations adapted to the food supply, and then a re-shift to another set of beak shapes when the climate event was over. This high adaptability is not "new function" but original adaptation placed in the finch's genome to help it survive such climate swings.
Evolutionists look at animals today and see "new function" or for that matter, imagine "new genetic material". What they are missing is that the original progenitor of the creature had much more robust genome and ultimately gave rise to the diversity the evolutionist sees before him.
In short, the creationist view starts from a pristine genome and "devolves" into adaptations through specialization - while the evolutionist starts with a "lower functioning" genome and sees higher function in the creatures around. Which explanation is better suited to describe the natural world?
Featured Article
Recognized for exceptional quality and value. See also other
featured articles.
- ↑ Morris, Henry M., The Genesis Record. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 1976. p.183-184.
- ↑ Rare Diamond Confirms That Earth's Mantle Holds an Ocean's Worth of Water Scientific American, March 12, 2014.
- ↑ Huge Underground "Ocean" Found Beneath Asia National Geographic News, February 27, 2007.
- ↑ Inner Earth May Hold More Water Than the Seas National Geographic News, March 7, 2002.
- ↑ (cf. Book of Ezekiel 14:14,20 )
- ↑ Genesis 6:7
- ↑ Genesis 6:18
- ↑ Genesis 6:14-16
- ↑ Genesis 6:20
- ↑ Genesis 5:31
- ↑ Morris, Henry M., The Genesis Record. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 1976. p.170.
- ↑ http://myxo.css.msu.edu/index.html
- ↑ Catastrophism vs. Uniformitarianism, All About Creation, 2002. Accessed March 9, 2008.
- ↑ Harder, Ben (2002, March 7). "Inner Earth May Hold More Water than the Seas." National Geographic.
- ↑ Than, Ker (2007, February 28). "Huge 'Ocean' Discovered Inside Earth." LiveScience.
- ↑ Lovett, Richard A. (2007, February 7). "Huge Underground 'Ocean' Found Beneath Asia." National Geographic.
- ↑ Harder, Ben (2010, November 8). "Earth Contains a Vast Amount of Water, But Scientists Are Unsure of Its Origins." Washington Post.
Bryner, Jeanna (2007, October 1). "Huge Stores of Oxygen Found Deep Inside Earth." LiveScience.
Krulwich, Robert (2011, June 23). "How Much Water Is There On Earth? Magellan Would Be Shocked." NPR.
- ↑ Haverluck, Michael F. "The Global Flood as You've Never Seen It." CNN, November 30, 2007. Accessed March 9, 2008.
- ↑ http://www.icr.org/article/did-noahs-flood-cover-himalayan-mountains/
- ↑ Harder, Ben, and Petherick, Anna. "Seafloor Study Traces Culprits Behind Indian Ocean Tsunami." National Geographic News online, December 23, 2005. Accessed March 9, 2008.
- ↑ Morris, John D. "'Cataclysmed' with Water." Institute for Creation Research. Accessed March 9, 2008.
- ↑ How did land plants survive the Genesis Flood? by Christian Answers Network
- ↑ Slick, Matthew J. "Could Noah's Ark Hold All the Animals?" Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry.
- ↑ Taylor, Stanley E. & Taylor, Paul S. (2002). "Could Noah's Ark Really Hold All the Animals That Were Supposed to be Preserved From Flood?" Eden Communications.
- ↑ Sarfati, Jonathan D. (1997). "How Did All the Animals Fit On Noah's Ark?" Creation Ministries International. In Creation, 19(2), pp. 16–19.
- ↑ Mendez, Arnold C., Sr. "Was Noah's Ark Big Enough to Hold All the Animals?" BibleStudy.org.
- ↑ BibleTools. "Greek/Hebrew Definitions: Strong's #4327." Church of the Great God.
- ↑ Skelly, David K. "Rapid Evolution." Yale University. School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.
- ↑ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/22/the-earth-is-on-the-brink-of-a-sixth-mass-extinction-scientists-say-and-its-humans-fault/
- ↑ http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/15921/20150802/without-doubt-sixth-mass-extinction-event-occurring.htm
- ↑ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/science/06cats.html
External Links
- Was the Flood global? by Answers in Genesis
- Online video: The Global Flood - Dr. Marc Surtees
- Noah's Flood—what about all that water? by Answers in Genesis
- Problems with a Global Flood? by TrueOrigin
- A comparative study of the flood accounts in the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis by Answers in Genesis
- New Underwater Finds Raise Questions About Flood Myths National Geographic
- The Fossil Record by Amazing Discoveries
- Was the Flood of Noah a Real Event? A-Quest-for-Creation-Answers
See Also
- Asian flood myths
- There are flood myths from all over the world (Talk.Origins)
- Flood and kinetic energy


text:
The requested news item does not exist. Please return to News
Occupiers more willing to embrace outsourced solutions according to Jones Lang LaSalle research
Jones Lang LaSalle has published its first Data Centre Barometer research report, which focuses on the European data centre real estate market and features an independent market survey (undertaken by iXConsulting –the leading independent data centre consultancy). The Data Centre Barometer reflects the views and expectations of key industry stakeholders from both the developer/investor and occupier communities, representing approximately 9.5 million sq ft of data centre accommodation (net internal area).
Commenting on Data Centre Barometer, Mark Larard, Director of Jones Lang LaSalle's Data Centre Advisory Group said: "Data Centre Barometer is the first independent research paper of its kind. It confirms that the data centre market is relatively buoyant in comparison with other markets, especially when you consider everything else which is happening around it. Many data centre occupiers still have data storage issues, which they cannot postpone indefinitely. The survey indicates that by the second half of 2009 they will need to re-enter the market, but will use outsourced data solutions to enhance their occupational strategies, as these will be more acceptable bearing in mind their capital expenditure restrictions".
Survey highlights from Data Centre Barometer include:
Mark Larard concluded: "In the data centre market, supply closely aligns with demand; the development pipeline is not as astronomic as those who wish to criticise the industry claim and cannot all come on line simultaneously. Therefore the market looks likely to continue on its path of healthy growth and sustained demand throughout the year."
Note to Editors
Jones Lang LaSalle's Data Centre Barometer survey encompasses corporate occupiers, investors, developers and third party operators from across Europe. In total, respondents controlled data centre portfolios of circa 9.5 million sq ft of technical space. Their sentiments are collected, aggregated and analysed by independent data centre consultancy, iX Consulting.
Fiona Smith
0207 399 5469
Gemma Shah
0207 399 5875


text:
In this globalisation where company has issue to produce profitability and catering to changing need of customer become challenges. Lean manufacturing gives you the flexibility to manufacture the products according to the needs and demand of the customer. Customer is not willing to pay more prices on the contrary
Lean manufacturing or lean production, is a systematic method of elimination of waste within a manufacturing system. Lean also takes into account which created through overburden and was created true unevenness workload. Lean management is a concept related to manufacturing sector it is applicable to Other industries as well Such as retail, Service Sector.
Advantages of Lean Manufacturing, improve quality increase efficiency by eliminating waste and reducing cost. These all positive impacts improve the performance of the organisation some of the benefits observed during implications of as below
Reduced cost reduced – Cost by reducing cycle time, increase productivity ,reducing machine downtime, increase output from existing facility and eliminating the bottlenecks
Reduce lead time – Lean manufacturing help to reduced lead time, reduced with effect of reduce cycle time and also reduce work in progress inventory.
Waste reduction -all form of waste like , defect, Over productions , waiting for information, non value added activities, Transportation, inventory, motion and unutilised talent, are the waste that can be reduced by reducing Lean Manufacturing.
Improved productivity – improve productivity by improving labour productivity by reducing ideal time and ensuring that labor are not doing unnecessary task or motions
Reducing work in progress – reduction in lean management in hr WI, production state is known as inventory (WIP) at all state of production
Reduce defects – By quality improvement elimination of various errors and unnecessary physical waste including excess use of raw material inputs prevent defects and costs associated with repairing
Reducing waiting Time – time between process stage as well as process preparation time.
Improve flexibility by reducing change over time – Minimum changeover cost Time (SMED) improve the flexibility to produce more range of products
Better utilization of space and equipment – by eliminating bottlenecks and maximizing the rate of production with existing equipment with minimizing machine down time
Benefits of Lean Manufacturing
Benefits of lean Manufacturing are listed below. we have created a remarkable improvement in the company. For More information please visit our you tube channel.
Over Production – Producing Items for which there are no orders, which generates such wastes as overstaffing and storage and transportation costs because of excess inventory.
Waiting – Workers merely serving to watch an automated machine or having to stand around waiting for the next process step,tool,supply,parts,etc., or just having no work because of stock outs,lot processing delays,equipment downtime, and capacity bottlenecks.
Unnecessary transport or conveyance – Carrying work in process long distances,creating inefficient transport,or moving materials,parts,or finished goods into or out of storage or between processes.
Over processing or incorrect processing – Taking unneeded steps to process the parts. Inefficiently processing due to poor tool and product design,causing unnecessary motion and producing defects. Waste is generated when providing higher-quality products than necessary.
Excess inventory – Excess raw material, WIP, or finished goods causing longer lead time,obsolescence,damaged goods,transportation and storage costs and delay. Also, extra inventory hides problems such as production imbalances,late deliveries from suppliers,defects,equipment downtime and long setup time.
Unnecessary moment – Any wasted motion employees have to perform during the course of their work, such as looking for, researching for, or stacking parts,tools etc. Also,walking is waste.
Defects – Production of defective parts or corrections. Repair or rework,scrap,replacement production,and inspection mean wasteful handling time,and efforts.
Unused employee creativity – Losing time,ideas,skills,improvements,and learning opportunities by not engaging or listening to your employees.
In this globalisation where company has issue to produce profitability and catering to changing need of customer become challenges. Lean manufacturing gives you the flexibility to manufacture the products according to the needs and demand of the customer. Customer is not willing to pay more prices on the contrary


text:
We consider sets A Í Rn ×R which are large either in the sense that their complement either does not contains a Borel set of positive measure or does not contains a nonmeager Borel set. We survey theorems and open problems concerning the existence for such a large set A of cross sections of the form fÇA, where f: Rn ® R, which are large relative to f (in a suitable sense) and where f is as nice as possible, for example constant (as in Fubini's theorem) or continuous or smooth or entire.
The title refers to Cauty's example of a metric linear space C which is not an absolute retract. The Cauty's construction can be improved to the effect that the completion E of such a space C can be isomorphically embedded as a linear subspace of an F-space which itself is an absolute retract.
Which countable spaces have a connected compactification? Interest in this topic began with van Douwen's 1981 result that there is a Tychonoff nowhere locally compact space with no connected compactification. Also Emeryk and Kulpa verified van Douwen's conjecture that the Sorgenfrey line was such a space. Gruenhage et al. established that all metrizable nowhere locally compact spaces have a connected compactification while Alas et al. established a slightly stronger result in the separable case (which Gruenhage et al. showed did not hold in the general case). In this work we consider simple one-point extensions of the rationals and the main result is to show that there is one which does not have a connected compactification.
This is joint work with Vladimir Tkachuk.
We show that a closed graph on a Polish space without large cliques has a small weak Borel chromatic number in some forcing extension of the universe. Here the weak Borel chromatic number of a graph is the least size of a partition of the vertex set into Borel sets that contain at most one vertex of every edge of the graph.
This is joint work with Ben Miller and Clinton Conley.
We report on some results around the duality theory of topological abelian groups. In particular, the properties of determined groups and the application of duality methods in the computation of some topological invariant cardinals will be mainly discussed.
This is a joint research with María V. Ferrer. A part of this talk also concerns several research projects accomplished with different authors: C. Chis, S. Macario, J. Trigos-Arrieta, and B. Tsaban.
Let (S,·) be a semigroup and let Pf (S) be the set of finite nonempty subsets of S. Then S satisfies the Følner condition (FC) if and only if
Følner showed that any amenable group satisfies FC and Frey showed that any left amenable semigroups satisfies FC. Argabright and Wilde showed that any semigroup satisfying SFC is left amenable. They also showed that any commutative semigroup satisfies SFC. However their proof of the latter fact relied on the fact that any commutative semigroup is amenable, a fact whose proof is not particularly easy and is a bit hard to find, as well as the fact above that any amenable semigroup satisfies FC. We provide a simple elementarly (and entirely algebraic) proof that any commutative semigroup satisfies SFC.
We discuss some recent progress in Weyl-von Neumann theorems, in particular, applying beyond the usual case of corona C*-algebras.
Computable Analysis studies computability over the real numbers and related spaces. Since computable functions are continuous in a certain sense, topology plays an important role in this theory. The cartesian closed category QCB of quotients of countably based topological spaces turns out to be an appropriate category for modelling the topological aspects of higher type computation.
In this talk, we discuss topological properties of the Kleene-Kreisel continuous functionals and their surprising relationship to an open problem in exact real-number computation. We show that the sequential topology on the space N(NN), which is the space of Kleene-Kreisel continuous functionals of type 2, is neither zero-dimensional nor regular. Moreover, we establish non-regularity of further function spaces formed in the cartesian closed category of Hausdorff k-spaces. k-Haus is one of the categories from which QCB-Haus inherits its cartesian closed structure.
Some results and questions concerning subgroups of the full symmetric group of the integers are their natural action will be discussed.
Let f : X ® Y be a function and let m be an infinite cardinal. Then we say that the rank r(f) of f is £ m if
This is a joint work with Pawel Krupski (University of Wroclaw, Poland).
Let Z be a continuum in the plane and let h : Z ×[0,1] ® C be an isotopy starting at the identity. We prove that h extends to an isotopy of the plane. We provide a new characterization of an accessible point in Z and show that accessible points are preserved under the isotopy. We show next that the isotopy can be extended over small hyperbolic crosscuts which are shown to remain small under the isotopy. The proof makes use of the notion of a metric external ray which mimics the notion of a conformal external ray but which is easier to control under the isotopy. It also relies on the existence of a partition of a hyperbolic, simply connected domain U in the sphere into hyperbolically convex sets which have limited distortion under conformal maps to the unit disc.
We study the gap structure of the partial order of projections of the Calkin algebra of a separable infinite dimensional Hilbert space. We prove the existence of an analytic Hausdorff gap in this partial order. As a consequence we obtain that under Todorcevic's Axiom and MA the gap spectrum of P ( C(H) ) is strictly bigger than the gap spectrum of P(w)/Fin.


text:
2. Do not generalize.
3. Do not stereotype.
4. Pay attention to who is saying what and how many times s/he repeats it.
5. Count to one hundred before posting. (I know, I know, I didn't follow this with my bow tie comment on Facebook, and I'm very sorry. I'll make it up to you bow tie people.)
The Problem
The online genealogical community is in an uproar over ever-more heated comments in the debate on citing sources on blogs. I don't want to go into detail about the comments. One person in the genealogical community is proselytizing--telling bloggers how to blog. As far as I can tell, just one associate of the Board for Certification for Genealogists, commonly called Certified Genealogists(SM) or CGs. I am one of those AND a blogger, and I'm writing to defend both.
Snarkiness on the list has been dragged out and repeated endlessly by people who are not certified because they do not agree that those principles define professional genealogy. They can't seem to tell us what does, but I don't care what they think and I'm ignoring them. Can you? They have nothing to do with this discussion.
My Credentials Should Not Be Threatening to You
I pursued certification because I wanted to know how well I measured up against professional standards in the field. I'm just that kind of person. I wanted to know if I was doing it "right." I have never been the most confident of people, but I wanted to be assessed. I thought the standards made good sense, would make me more productive and please my clients. I measured up just fine, thank you very much. That's between me and BCG®. It's an assurance to my clients that at least I had the guts to let someone else look at my work and tell me what they thought of it. It's not assurance that I'm going to write fantastic reports every time, just that I want to do so. I do not want to lord my credentials over anyone. I do not think I am better than anyone else. But I worked really, really hard, learned a lot and am not going to apologize for that. I am well aware that a lot of the best genealogists in the country do not have credentials. Just because you never took an IQ test doesn't mean you're not intelligent. And some people who managed to get credentials create some lousy work.
But when are we supposed to follow the standards, including citing sources? In client reports? Of course. In writing articles (though some publications strip them out anyway)? Of course. In writing up our own research? Sure helps if you ever want to find it again. But how about blog posts?
It's My Blog and I'll Cite If I Want To
How about we leave it up to the individual? Yes, vast, angry, oh-so-sensitive GeneaBlogger community, it's up to you, personally, to make that decision. One guy trying to change the world really shouldn't be such a threat. Everyone engaging in genealogy does not have to follow professional standards. It depends on the post. It depends on what you want people to take away from the post. I've got credentials, colleagues who read my work and will judge me on it, potential clients who will be evaluating my posts, and still, only very rarely do I cite my sources in footnote form. I mention the record groups, and anything out of the ordinary or hard to find I include in the body of my post. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS, EVEN FOR PROFESSIONALS AND THOSE WITH CREDENTIALS. There is room for everyone in the sandbox as long as you don't throw sand.
The nature of blogging is casual, transient and in my opinion only one step away from email or writing in a diary. Formal ESM-style citations are overkill there, especially for the happy casual genie. The spirit of citing your sources is to make it clear where you info comes from, and bloggers just naturally do that.
It's Not Compromise, It's Inclusivity
I think it ought to be clear by now that there are two extremes. But that's the point: they are extreme ends of the spectrum of human nature. Those who need every comma in the precise spot and those who talk/write without knowing much. Neither of these is balanced. By taking what one man says and accusing 2,000 other people of subscribing to his theories you stir up trouble. It doesn't have to do with credentials. It's too easy to paint everybody in two camps. Bloggers vs. Credentialed. Everyman vs. Elitists. Democratic vs. Fascist. I have some very good friends who are persnickety about typos, commas and the like, but I am not. I care about bad information, bad manners and bad feeling in public forums. The point is to get the information out where we can access it ourselves and judge for ourselves whether it needs more research or not. The vast amount of information I've only touched on in the blog posts I've read make it clear what a genuinely valuable resource they are. The bloggers will decide on their own format. If you want a precise citation, ask the blogger.
Some of the absolute best GeneaBloggers have now declared themselves against professional genealogy and started to show disdain for what I worked so hard to achieve. All because one guy is advocating citing sources on blogs? Really? Their voices are pervasive and important to me, and I'm sad that something I was proud of having achieved is now being mocked and equated with bad character.
If you've insulted someone, apologize. If you're feeling persecuted, relax! Can we all please take the weekend off and come back with smiles on our faces, ready to do some real genealogy? It's time!


text:
Oct. 27, 2011
NORTH DARTMOUTH, MA-Visiting Rivier defeated the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth's volleyball team on Senior Night at the Tripp Athletic Center Thursday evening. The Raiders won 25-18, 25-19 and 25-18.
Prior to the match, UMass Dartmouth honored seniors Allie Mastrocola (Swansea, MA/Case HS), Shannon Brodie (Chelmsford, MA/Chelmsford HS), Stacey Miner (Greenfield, MA/Greenfield HS), Amanda Micco (Waltham, MA/Waltham HS), Kaitlin Hogan (Tewksbury, MA/Shawsheen Tech), Cami Ascher (Natick, MA/Natick HS), and Kelsey Craveiro (Freetown, MA/Apponequet HS) as well as manager Tori Davis.
Ascher led the Corsairs with 10 kills, Mastrocola added seven, Brodie had seven digs and junior setter Jess Goncalves (New Bedford, MA/New Bedford HS) added 26 assists.
"We played them tough at the beginning, and after it was tied at 16-16 we actually moved ahead by a couple of points, but they ran off the last nine points," said UMass Dartmouth Head Coach Steve DeRossi. "The same thing happened in the third game. It was a tight game and they ran off several points in a row and we were behind from that point on. Rivier was one of the toughest serving teams we've faced all year. Our seniors were disappointed, but hopefully, we can come back with two good performances Saturday, which is Play for the Cure Day."
The Corsairs dropped to 13-16 with the defeat, while the Raiders improved to 17-13 with the victory. UMass Dartmouth will return to action when they host Western Connecticut State and Framingham State Saturday. Rivier will host Westfield State and Mass Maritime Saturday.


text:
The politics of FEMA's future
With Hurricane Sandy poised to wreak havoc for millions of Americans, it seems like a good time to revisit Mitt Romney's unusual vision for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
In this clip, Romney was asked at a debate for the Republican presidential candidates about emergency-response efforts, and he suggested FEMA should be shuttered, moving responsibility to the states.
"Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that's even better.
"Instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut, we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we're doing at the federal level and say, what are the things we're doing that we don't have to do?"
Asked specifically about the federal government playing a role in disaster relief, Romney added, "We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids."
Again, in context, he wasn't talking about debt reduction in the abstract; Romney was specifically talking about FEMA and the federal role in responding to communities hit by disasters.
What's more, Romney appears willing to put his (lack of) money where his mouth is – Romney's budget plan would mean at least a 34% cut to FEMA's budget.
I should note that there may be some who find this perspective compelling. Maybe Romney's correct, the argument goes, and FEMA's doors should be closed. Maybe Washington should just let states, municipalities, and families fend for themselves when disaster strikes, as Republican policymakers focus solely on debt reduction.
In case anyone's tempted to believe this is wise, I'd note two things.
First, this is an incredibly callous approach, wholly at odds with the American tradition. When making a list of tasks the federal government can and should tackle, one need not be a far-left ideologue to think emergency relief should make the cut.
Second, as Matt Yglesias explained, Romney's anti-FEMA approach would be awful for the economy.
Disaster relief, I would argue, is a great federal program precisely because of the debt issue.
If a storm damages basic physical infrastructure (power lines, bridges) and imperils human life it would be the height of penny-wise, pound-foolish thinking to suppose that the afflicted area should wait months or years to repair the damage. Ultimately, anyplace is going to go back to robust wealth creation faster if basic stuff gets fixed up faster. But that requires financing by an entity capable of rapidly financing expensive projects – i.e., the federal government. Left to its own devices a storm-ravaged Delaware or Louisiana is going to be squeezed between balanced budget rules and falling sales tax receipts and be forced into an increasing state of dilapidation.
Given this, as Sandy takes its toll, it's worth remembering what may happen to FEMA early next year depending on the outcome of next week's election.