Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mt. Ararat Anomaly
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 53 of 97 (197003)
04-05-2005 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by SonClad
04-05-2005 4:38 PM


Re: Noah's Ark
That's a great image. It really brings into focus how the Ark as described in the Bible is several orders of magnitude too small to actually float members of all the different species, or even all the different "kinds" (whatever those are supposed to be), that would be required to repopulate the Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by SonClad, posted 04-05-2005 4:38 PM SonClad has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Chiroptera, posted 04-05-2005 4:54 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 60 of 97 (197089)
04-05-2005 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by SonClad
04-05-2005 8:38 PM


You're avoiding the question. What would it take to convince you?
Genetic evidence that it occured. Geological evidence that it occured. Biogeographical evidence that it occured. Forensic evidence that it occured. Paleontological evidence that it occured. Archeological evidence that it occured. Cosmological evidence that it occured.
In addition to all that, there would have to be a lack of evidence that it did not occur; in other words, we should not be able to make observations that would be impossible to make if the Flood had actually happened.
That's what it would take. I know it sounds like a lot, but what you're talking about would be the most important event in the history of the world if it were true. That demands a pretty high standard of evidence.
Unfortunately what we have right now is no evidence, from any field, that it did occur; and an enormous amount of observations that would be impossible if the Flood had actually happened. In other words, we have no evidence for and significant disconfirming evidence against.
It's a shame that a reasonable discussion and exchange of ideas cannot be conducted without slamming the door on alternate theories, etc, due to the fact that the only "accepted" theories must be purely naturalistic.
It's not that we'll only accept naturalistic theories, its that we'll only accept theories that are not contradicted by the evidence. The Flood, unfortunately, does not meet that standard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by SonClad, posted 04-05-2005 8:38 PM SonClad has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024