Did the Flood really happen?

This has what to do with the topic? I would suggest that the flood really did happen. I see no evidence that suggests otherwise.

Your adolescent intellectual abnegation of all science is a major topic in this discussion.Rather than discuss the details of any evidence presented you insist on rejection based on some juvenile "other" nature you insist existed without evidence. You do not discuss. You troll.Case in point: Don't just reject ... read. The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology

quote:

---

Flood Geology began in order to find support for YEC doctrine but ironically it has now produced an impressive body of evidence against it. The defeat of Flood Geology by its own hand is a great example of how the practice of sound geology leads to correct geological conclusions.

---

You don't use that ridiculous backwards methodology in real life, do you?On Sunday morning, you don't assume that your church has moved to some random new location, do you? You don't demand evidence that it's in the same place as last week, do you?I don't think you do. That would be crazy. You assume that its location HASN'T changed unless you have evidence that it HAS changed.So why should science follow your silly instructions when you don't?

I do not question last week. Nor do I question recorded history and aspects of what ancient life was like, such as spirits living with men, long lifespans, etc.What I question is claims that that different record of the past was the same as today. It sure was not. I question the claims of science when they base models on nature and laws having been the same.

You should. A lot of it is self-serving. Unless it can be confirmed, any written record should be taken with a grain of salt. There was no "different record" of the past. Noah's flood, in particular, was not noticed by the Chinese or the Indian civilization. The oldest pyramids (c. 2630—2610 BC) don't bear any marks from Noah's flood (c. 2472 BC).

There was no civilization before the flood that we know about. They were after, the issue is your dates.

Our dating is fine. It is your dating with its conveniently majikal "other nature" that is your problem. It never happened and you cannot show otherwise.Did you read the paper I cited above? The nice long detailed technical scientific paper with real detailed technical scientific evidence and dozens of references you, a classic lone religious nutjob with no standing, no credentials and no evidence, screaming into the internet like a crazy man howling at the moon, will need to refute? Here it is again.Do you have *ANY* argument other than the stupidity of this majikal "other nature" which you cannot show is anything other than your desperate mentally deficient attempt to deny the actual scientific evidence that stands irrefutable?You have nothing. Science wins again.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

There was no (worldwide) flood that we know about. The date for the flood comes right out of the Bible. The dates for the other, older civilizations are verified both historically and scientifically.I thought you said you didn't reject historical records. Or did you mean that you blindly accept the Bible, talking snake and all, but you reject all other historical records?

You wrote "I question the claims of science when they base models on nature and laws having been the same." But it's important in science to have a consistency of scientific laws. There's no point in scientific laws that work on Monday but don't work on Tuesday!

Chinese and other civilizations are post flood.

True and science has used the laws in place since it came to exist. They work. The time that this great flood occurred is not last Tuesday. If you want to extend nature beyond the experience and observations of man, you need evidence.

I do not accept ancient history as gospel. However, while I may be wary of details regarding exploits and battles of kings, when reading basic facts of life of the time, I am less skeptical. For example, if they said it rained, or there was a garden, etc

But it is the people who claim there was a biblical, world-wide flood that are trying to "extend things" beyond any evidence, either geological or observational (the Egyptian 6th Dynasty didn't record that they were wiped out by the alleged flood!)

Not according to their historical documents. I thought you said you accepted historical documents.

Exploits and battles of kings are a lot more plausible than a world-wide flood. A world-wide flood is a lot more likely to be an exaggeration of a smaller flood. Sure it rained, sure there were gardens, but there's no evidence of a worldwide flood.It's pretty clear that your acceptance of the flood is neither scientific nor historical; it's strictly religious.