Dat Noah Flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-02-2015, 03:17 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(25-02-2015 12:17 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(25-02-2015 10:15 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  And Robby doesn't know why I mention the ice age--when I've repeatedly said I'm asking if we can find common ground that water in possibly liquid form altered geography--as if the ice when it receded sublimated rather than melted!

I already acknowledged the "common ground" when I said "agreed" in my post.

The rest of it was me asking you why that has any bearing on this discussion. You have not answered that. My best guess is that you're obfuscating things to keep your actual position shielded from scrutiny. My second best guess is that you're just fucking with us, seeing how long you can keep us responding before we either all put you on ignore or you get banned.

Is it some third thing I've overlooked? If it is, please explain it. I'd really like to fucking know.

Or, he's delusional and believes he is making sense.

I'm going with that one. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
Okay. I tried to read.

But, I'm confused.

Can someone please explain what's being discussed?

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 03:33 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(25-02-2015 10:15 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

You're full of something, but it's not logic. Chas says there can't be a flood because "it can only go back as far as people" when he knows darn well people have been around 2-4 million years and society for 100,000 years or more based on the very type of cave evidence we've discussed.

And Robby doesn't know why I mention the ice age--when I've repeatedly said I'm asking if we can find common ground that water in possibly liquid form altered geography--as if the ice when it receded sublimated rather than melted!

And I've addressed the Exodus on another thread several times, for our goalpost shifter.

I'm not trying to pick a fight--rather the opposite--find common ground. Science says most of the Earth was covered by water...

"Common ground" is not you squirming away from the explicit words of your holy book.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fodder_From_The_Truth's post
25-02-2015, 03:35 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(25-02-2015 03:30 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Okay. I tried to read.

But, I'm confused.

Can someone please explain what's being discussed?

How insane Q is, that's all I got.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
25-02-2015, 06:41 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(23-02-2015 01:56 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  *There are interesting anomalies worldwide that stump geologists that grow far less confusing when looking at catastrophes like a large flood

Really? Do Tell.

I'll grant, there are a few things like D-double prime that we aren't up to speed on yet. Mind you, it's 3400 km straight down so we've not had much of a chance for field trips.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 08:44 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(25-02-2015 03:30 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Okay. I tried to read.

But, I'm confused.

Can someone please explain what's being discussed?

I honestly don't know, and I'm looking for an answer.

The best I can glean is Q is saying that when the world was covered by glaciers, that that would constitute the world being covered with water. He also is saying we can find "common ground" in agreeing on this. I don't dispute that, but I've yet to get him to explain why he is saying that in the context of the Genesis flood myth when his stated position is he doesn't (necessarily?) think that the flood was ice.

So, I honestly have no idea where he's going with this, aside from obfuscation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 06:54 AM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(25-02-2015 08:44 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, I honestly have no idea where he's going with this, aside from obfuscation.

Q is teaching an on-line course: Straw Grasping 101

We are all unwilling students

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like unfogged's post
26-02-2015, 11:32 AM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
All,

Yes, I know the flood story does not contain ice. I want you to see the arc of history:

1. The West accepts the Flood story and is a religious culture.

2. The West moves toward enlightenment and toward science that says it must stay away from the scriptures as reliable.

3. The Flood story is derided as myth.

4. One of the less religious scientists of his day sees evidence of erosion and upheavals and looking at the data, concludes ice covered all or nearly all of the planet.

5. Christian academics and scientists account for anomalies in the slow-moving water (ice) theories with revisiting the scriptures and looking at the data, both in the scriptures and science. In the NT, for example, the Flood is described not as mere rain but as a catastrophe causing tremendous upheaval, a shaking of the planet.

Common ground.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 11:45 AM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  1. The West accepts the Flood story and is a religious culture.

Citation? I would love to know the real percentage of people in the West who actually think this is true.

(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  2. The West moves toward enlightenment and toward science that says it must stay away from the scriptures as reliable.

The scriptures show that they are unreliable on their own, science doesn't have to say anything about it. Science also does not care about the scriptures because the claims are not testable, predict nothing, and are useless in that sense.

(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  3. The Flood story is derided as myth.

There is literally NO physical evidence that supports the claim, therefore, it is reasonable that it is not true. If you have evidence, please present it. And your previous posts about the water are pretty bad.

(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  4. One of the less religious scientists of his day sees evidence of erosion and upheavals and looking at the data, concludes ice covered all or nearly all of the planet.

Reference please.

(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  5. Christian academics and scientists account for anomalies in the slow-moving water (ice) theories with revisiting the scriptures and looking at the data, both in the scriptures and science. In the NT, for example, the Flood is described not as mere rain but as a catastrophe causing tremendous upheaval, a shaking of the planet.

Reference please. Also, I nave never heard or read of any geologist who would agree. But since you are going to provide your references we can see what you are talking about. I await eagerly to be convinced. So far, you have not presented anything tangible that can be evaluated. Please continuuuuuuu on.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:22 PM
RE: Dat Noah Flood
(26-02-2015 11:32 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  5. Christian academics and scientists account for anomalies in the slow-moving water (ice) theories with revisiting the scriptures and looking at the data, both in the scriptures and science. In the NT, for example, the Flood is described not as mere rain but as a catastrophe causing tremendous upheaval, a shaking of the planet.

Common ground.

So, taken in context with what you said in the cave thread:

(26-02-2015 11:38 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I believe every word of the Bible is literal and true where it plainly speaks literally, not poetically. Hebrew scholars have said that "son of" can also indicate "notable descendant" as in "a true son of Scotland wouldn't drink" Wink or "Jesus, Son of David" since there are 27 generations between Jesus and David!

...are you saying that the Genesis account is a "poetic" account of the latest ice age?

Or are you saying something else?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: