|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence of the flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
rr writes: LMAO! Climate change made that storm stall didn't it? LMAO It didn't know where to go because CO2. Climate change almost certainly helped create the storm but the flooding was caused by ignorance and greed; on constantly voting down zoning and building regulations.
rr writes: You believe in God you say? He created the universe, and He could have hid the (objective)evidence of a flood from us. Which is what I think happened. God wants us to believe by faith, what good then would evidence serve us? Seeing that you believe in god(small g for you), this is one scenario that could have happened. Saying it didn't happen as absolute is not really faithful, or scientific minded of you. Then you are marketing a vile, evil, dishonest God who is also not really very smart or effective. As I pointed out in Message 46 the God you claim and market is really really stupid. Part of the evidence that shows there was no world-wide flood during the time humans have existed are the cultures that continue uninterrupted by the Biblical Flood. Part of hiding the evidence then was creating populations that replaced everything that was killed so there was not interruption to the civilizations or even their mythos. Your God created flood that no one noticed. Pretty pitiful.
rr writes: And we always are able to see that evidence........said no one ever. Yes, we are able to see the evidence. There has never been a world-wide flood during the time humans existed. Remember, all it takes is one single example of something that must have been effected by the flood but has not been effected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Then perhaps we can avoid such ridiculous misrepresentations in the future.
quote: So, not exactly a crowd of those local species prepared to tolerate human company arriving only when the rain got really bad. Even if we ignore the parallel account (which has distinct differences) you have to have pairs (and only pairs) of all species and the whole thing has to happen in a day. Obviously if there were simply an instinct to find shelter with humans you would just get the species living in the immediate area, and pretty much every single one of them - not just a pair, So, no, that doesn't fit the story (and to the extent it does, it makes a lot more sense for a local Flood - only species living close to the Ark are even possibly going to get in) Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Assertions are not evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Thermodynamics. You may not realize that steam and water were the drivers of the industrial revolution. We know a lot about water in various states. If the water was in the atmosphere the temperature and pressure required to keep it there would make the Earth uninhabitable. If the water came from outside the atmosphere the heat released by loss of potential energy would make the Earth uninhabitable. Except, of course, for a few thermophilic bacteria.
Sensitivity Studies on Vapor Canopy Temperature ProfilesWater and Vapor and Noah's Flood
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
riVeRraT writes: I am not a creationist. Creationist do not conduct real science. The CRS (Creation Research Society) and the Discovery Institute and Steve Austin and Jonathan Wells and Michael Behe and Stephen Meyer and William Dembski and (throwing him in just for fun) Kent Hovind would disagree with you.
For the nth time, I am not saying there was a flood. I said Harvey the Hawk is direct evidence that part of the story of the great flood is true. Can you debate that maybe? I don't debate the absurdly ridiculous. "Oh, look, it's raining, evidence of the flood."
There is evidence of a flood, we just choose to ignore it, because there is more evidence there wasn't a flood. Too many people in here say there is NO evidence. If you pick and choose your evidence then anything can seem true. Seashells on a mountain top are evidence of the flood, as long as you ignore all the other evidence. Incomplete evidence points in the wrong direction all the time - it's why so many innocent people are in jail. Your ability to assemble a grouping of incomplete evidence doesn't make the flood any less impossible than it already is. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
riVeRraT writes:
Then you're a creationist. You just don't believe creationism is science.
I am not a creationist. Creationist do not conduct real science. I believe Creation is possible, more than random evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
jar writes: Climate change almost certainly helped create the storm That goal post moved rather quickly.
but the flooding was caused by ignorance and greed; on constantly voting down zoning and building regulations. Agreed.
Then you are marketing a vile, evil, dishonest God According to the Cult of jar. That's not the way it works jar. You don't take your subjective opinion, about a subjective story, and market said opinion as fact. What you've done is exposed how you think, not how the rest of thinks. Speak for yourself. 2+2=4, but your 2's and my 2's are different.
Part of the evidence that shows there was no world-wide flood during the time humans have existed are the cultures that continue uninterrupted by the Biblical Flood. Part of hiding the evidence then was creating populations that replaced everything that was killed so there was not interruption to the civilizations or even their mythos. Your God created flood that no one noticed. If biblical dates are correct. I am not a bible literalist, so it is unimportant to me. Or God could have choose to save those cultures and not tell Noah, or whatever. Like I said it's God, the creator of the universe. He can make a flood happen anyway He wants for whatever purpose He wants.
Yes, we are able to see the evidence. What evidence? How can you see evidence you don't even know about? Unless you know everything.
Remember, all it takes is one single example of something that must have been effected by the flood but has not been effected. Or a supernatural God who decided it would be best to hide the evidence from jar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
NoNukes writes: 1) That is not a random arrangement.2) It happened before the Flood not during according to the account. As stated before, this wasn't a global flood. All we are examining here is the behavior of the animal. In other observances, animals ran for shelter before the flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
JonF writes: Assertions are not evidence. Or fact. Perhaps you meant that for jar?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
JonF writes: Thermodynamics. You may not realize that steam and water were the drivers of the industrial revolution. We know a lot about water in various states. If the water was in the atmosphere the temperature and pressure required to keep it there would make the Earth uninhabitable. If the water came from outside the atmosphere the heat released by loss of potential energy would make the Earth uninhabitable. Except, of course, for a few thermophilic bacteria. OMG yes! Thank you for saying this. This reminds of years ago, and who knows it may have even been you. Someone calculated the amount of friction would heat the water up as it fell to raise the temperature so high as to cause life to cease to exist. Congratulations bro, you just explained hail. lmao.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
My 2s are honest actual 2s.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
percy writes: The CRS (Creation Research Society) and the Discovery Institute and Steve Austin and Jonathan Wells and Michael Behe and Stephen Meyer and William Dembski and (throwing him in just for fun) Kent Hovind would disagree with you. About what? That I am not a creationist, or that they are not conducting real science? Either way who gives a rats ass what they think.
I don't debate the absurdly ridiculous. "Oh, look, it's raining, evidence of the flood." Ummm, let me check, nope I never said that. So was this statement another one of your unattacks on my character? Me thinks so.
If you pick and choose your evidence then anything can seem true. Who's picking and choosing? Not me, you are.
Seashells on a mountain top are evidence of the flood, as long as you ignore all the other evidence. Until the other evidence changes or new evidence is found. Aren't we always supposed to be on the look out for a better explanation? Who's picking and choosing now? Who has the closed mind now? Words are important.
Your ability to assemble a grouping of incomplete evidence doesn't make the flood any less impossible than it already is. Incomplete evidence can do the same thing, as does lack of knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
ringo writes: Then you're a creationist. You just don't believe creationism is science. What am I if I believe we were created to evolve through natural processes? Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 436 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
jar writes: My 2s are honest actual 2s. Right, your subjective 2s are more legit than my subjective 2s. There's a word for that kind of thinking....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
Riverat writes: What am I if I believe we were created to evolve through natural processes? A very fashionable, very modern creationist. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024