The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-12-2017, 07:30 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  So just from biblical text, I know that ...
Yes, that is the root of your gullibility problem .

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  water did not originally flow downhill.
Magic (no evidence needed)

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  In chapter 1 of Genesis, G-d commanded water to gather into one place, and dry land appeared.
Magic, done by magician (no evidence needed)

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  So that is an example of G-d changing the nature of things.
Magician at work (no evidence needed)

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Before the flood, there were no rainbows.
Magic (no evidence needed)

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  And yet, the text says...
And i say you are gullible
And every other text agrees with me.

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  that G-d caused a mist to descend to the ground.
Magician at work (no evidence needed)
Btw, what do you think happens when you fully spell out the job description of the creator of everything. Will the magician get mad at you and strike you with a lightning? (no evidence needed)

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  That should have created a rainbow in our reality.
Uhh, now you are talking about reality, after demonstrating for a whole paragraph, that you dont give a shit about reality? Consider

(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  But rainbows didn't exist until after the flood. So there are two examples of the nature of reality being changed.
Again, having you talk about what reality is, is....magically casting a smile on my face. (and no, im not going to give you any evidence for that)

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like Deesse23's post
19-12-2017, 07:38 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:04 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  I didn't expect you to be convinced. You want to use science to understand religion. I don't do that. When my car won't start (actually I don't have a car), I don't pull out the bible to troubleshoot my car. When I don't understand religion, I don't pull out the troubleshooting manual for my car.
Rainbows and water flowing is religion, but starting a car isnt? Consider

No, what is actually happening here is you picking and chosing what is *science* (because it can be supported with evidence) and what is *religion* (anything you just make up, or made up bullshit you accept at face value) which you dont want to be scrutinized because, frankly... its bullshit.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Deesse23's post
19-12-2017, 07:41 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:21 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 07:04 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  I didn't expect you to be convinced. You want to use science to understand religion. I don't do that. When my car won't start (actually I don't have a car), I don't pull out the bible to troubleshoot my car. When I don't understand religion, I don't pull out the troubleshooting manual for my car.

I want you to back your ignorant statement with actual evidence not another rambling about religion and science as NOMA. As things stand your fairy tale called flood was disproved and no amount of evasion about not using science to understand religion will change it.

I haven't asked anyone to believe in anything. Essentially, I was agreeing with the Original Post, who felt that it was silly that Creationists were attempting to use science to prove the flood.

I sometimes have passionate arguments with myself that almost come to blows.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2017, 07:43 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:04 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  You want to use science to understand religion.

No actually this is dishonest.

Religion "explains" the natural world in terms of supernatural events and myths and fables.

Science explains the natural world with ever-increasing accuracy.

Your's is a strawman fallacy.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Silly Deity's post
19-12-2017, 07:45 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:41 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 07:21 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  I want you to back your ignorant statement with actual evidence not another rambling about religion and science as NOMA. As things stand your fairy tale called flood was disproved and no amount of evasion about not using science to understand religion will change it.

I haven't asked anyone to believe in anything. Essentially, I was agreeing with the Original Post, who felt that it was silly that Creationists were attempting to use science to prove the flood.

Actually their standards are infinitely higher than yours. At least they are looking for good reasons to believe in flood bullshit. You need no reasons at all for believing bullshit. I know who is more silly any whom i respect more.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Deesse23's post
19-12-2017, 07:49 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:43 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 07:04 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  You want to use science to understand religion.



Religion "explains" the natural world in terms of supernatural events and myths and fables.

I don't think that this is what religion does. I don't think that it is what it is intended to do. It certainly isn't something that I do with religion. Your description of religion is a strawman.

I sometimes have passionate arguments with myself that almost come to blows.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2017, 07:55 AM (This post was last modified: 19-12-2017 07:58 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:41 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 07:21 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  I want you to back your ignorant statement with actual evidence not another rambling about religion and science as NOMA. As things stand your fairy tale called flood was disproved and no amount of evasion about not using science to understand religion will change it.

I haven't asked anyone to believe in anything. Essentially, I was agreeing with the Original Post, who felt that it was silly that Creationists were attempting to use science to prove the flood.

Sure, you don't ask anyone to believe absurdity you spout, that's true. You just try to defend your ignorant beliefs by speaking about yet another variation of NOMA.

ETA: You claim to not use religion to understand science, but here is the issue. Religion isn't needed to understand science, like at all. Science on the other hand could be useful in understanding religion, that is in getting to know why silly superstitions and tribal taboos still holds so many minds hostage and how they could have started.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Szuchow's post
19-12-2017, 08:34 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 07:49 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  I don't think that this is what religion does. I don't think that it is what it is intended to do. It certainly isn't something that I do with religion. Your description of religion is a strawman.

Don't be dense. Of course this is what religion does. It is an essential component of any religion that suggests an omniscient, omnipotent supernatural being or beings as a creator or creators of the universe.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Silly Deity's post
19-12-2017, 08:36 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 06:54 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 06:44 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  The flood was? Have some evidence to back it up? Same with "cosmological reset button", or rules of nature being different pre alleged flood and now.

As a theist, I have never felt the need to use science to understand religion, or religion to understand science. So just from biblical text, I know that water did not originally flow downhill. In chapter 1 of Genesis, G-d commanded water to gather into one place, and dry land appeared. So that is an example of G-d changing the nature of things. Before the flood, there were no rainbows. And yet, the text says that G-d caused a mist to descend to the ground. That should have created a rainbow in our reality. But rainbows didn't exist until after the flood. So there are two examples of the nature of reality being changed.

Only in your imagination. Because when you ask us to consider that the laws of nature and reality have changed in the past, and you admit that there is no evidence of this except for a storybook, we have no alternative but to imagine such a thing. But the imaginary is not real, we know this as adult thinkers.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like true scotsman's post
19-12-2017, 08:44 AM
RE: The Rebuttal of the Noachian Flood - by Creationists
(19-12-2017 05:23 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  
(19-12-2017 03:33 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  An interesting paper on how the work by creationist "geologists" to prove the Flood happened, actually proves quite the opposite.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/Flood%20geology.pdf

As my academic background is in earth sciences I've always found it profoundly idiotic for anyone to claim the Genesis Flood occurred, let alone those who purport to have studied geology and call themselves geologists.

As a theist, I have never felt the need to use science to understand religion, or religion to understand science. I personally would not expect to find any evidence of the flood in this world. The flood was sort of an other-worldly event. Aside from the survivors of the flood, the world as it was prior to the flood is an erased world. It is like it never existed, because a cosmological reset button was pressed. Our reality now, is not the same reality of the pre-flood world. Some of the rules of nature are even different.

Do you understand that when you say stuff like this, what you're saying at root is that you've never felt the need to use reason to understand religion. Because science is the consistent application of reason to the task of understanding what we observe.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like true scotsman's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: