The flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-01-2011, 01:01 PM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2011 02:54 PM by MasterRottweiler.)
RE: The flood
Hello again! Well, as I said before, your arguments are only based on religious explanations, scientifically they are not valid because you have no EVIDENCE to support that other than the good ol' book and religious based pseudo-science articles.

But sources that aren't religious are equally biased. They start by assuming that everything that exists came about by natural processes without any kind of divine intervention. If their assumption is correct their conclusions can be considered reliable, but what if their initial assumptions are wrong?

That is because science has a large amount of empirical evidence to support their arguments. Unlike faith, science is supported by evidence and constantly change their points of view based on new observation, faith on the other hand is just the denial of observation in order to keep a belief system untouched/unquestioned.

We have no way of knowing what conditions were like before the flood. It is possible that their wasn't any difference between the water in the ocean and that in other bodies.

That quite convenient... You have no empirical evidence to support this, then how did the salt water species survived a fresh water flood and vice-versa? Salt water species and fresh water species have existed for millions of years, you cannot just assume that "posibly" there was no diference between fresh water and salt water with zero amount of evidence to proove it, lets take the bull shark for example, Bull Sharks can survive in both fresh water and salt water because it evolved to do so, and it took several millions of years, not all fish species can do that and is not possible to adapt to do that in a few months.

How can anyone know how old it was? The people came up with that age assumed that it formed gradually and didn't take into consideration the possiblity that it was formed by some cataclysmic event such as the flood. There is no way to test their claims to see if they are correct.

They are nor "assuming" because science is based on OBSERVATION, dating techniques are accurate and again there is a substantial amount of empirical evidence to support them, you should investigate other non-religious sources in order to learn more about it.

How do you know they are more reliable? Unless someone invents a time machine and travels back in time to see how the earth was formed there is no way to check their accuracy.

With all due respect my friend, I can see you have a narrow mind and you are not able/willing to learn about any other explanation except the so called "infalible" book, I think thats quite arrogant, believing in a book which has no empirical evidence to support it.

Conclusion from the article: Does Radiometric Dating Prove the Earth Is Old?

The best way to learn about history and the age of the earth is to consult the history book of the universe—the Bible. Many scientists and theologians accept a straightforward reading of Scripture and agree that the earth is about 6,000 years old. It is better to use the infallible Word of God for our scientific assumptions than to change His Word in order to compromise with “science” that is based upon man’s fallible assumptions. True science will always support God’s Word.


Wait what?? Come on! Give me a break. This is an example or circular logic.

   

I mean if the bible is so infalible why do we have intelect in the first place in order to search and find answers using science? I think thats one of the most arrogant and biased things I've ever read. Why in the name of Timothy F**k should we accept an ancient text written by people of the bronze age? People who wrote a book based only on a limited perception of nature. I think again your argument is not valid my friend. Thats quite comformist, its like saying "Ohh gee! There are so many mysteries out there, lets sit, read the infallible book and have faith..." That is not wisdom or knowledge, thats just accepting something for a fact with no evidence to support it at all. I'm sorry but I am afraid that you dont have a point here. Peace.

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 01:11 PM
RE: The flood
(03-01-2011 04:01 PM)The_observer Wrote:  most fossils I find around here are from sea-creatures
care to explain how they would suffer from a flood?
There was more involved that just a flood. The earth was completely changed and some of these changes would have been fatal to much of the sea life.

Tell me...
While your at it, please teach me how you can make a fossil in just over a few 1000 years.
Have you personally ever found a real fossil in free nature?

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 02:29 PM
RE: The flood
Quote:God created nature and works through it.
The burden of proof is on you my friend. Please continue...
Quote:The fact that so many cultures have legends of a flood seems to me to be evidence that it actually occurred.
Just like the fact that so many cultures have legends/myths of a thunder god (usually the head god) seem like evidence that there actually is/was a thunder god. Now to decide if it was Zeus or Ukko or Thor or...
Quote:But what standards do you use to determine which sources are reputable?
Sources thats information is based on the scientific method.
Quote:How do you know they are more reliable? Unless someone invents a time machine and travels back in time to see how the earth was formed there is no way to check their accuracy.
Dating methods don't show how the earth was formed, they show when. You'll find alot information about the working ways and accuracies of different dating methods from Wikipedia(they should have sources) or just by googling.
And the accuracy is improved alot by using many methods.
Quote:And we can only directly observe the present.
Yes, that's why we need to observe the past indirectly. We see a body with multiple stab wounds, so we assume s/he was stabbed to death. We don't know how did it, before we check what the surveillance camera, that happened to be filming the murder, has recorded and we'll see who did it.
__________-
By the way, what did the animals eat when the flood was over? Or was that problem solved with magic too?

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 02:50 PM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2011 03:00 PM by MasterRottweiler.)
RE: The flood
(04-01-2011 02:29 PM)Kikko Wrote:  By the way, what did the animals eat when the flood was over? Or was that problem solved with magic too?

Exactly! I forgot to mention this, If earth's surface was covered with water, then all vegetation must have drowned and died, because it is impossible to feed all species only with stored seeds and plants in the case of hervibores, but what about carnivores? How (again) in the name of Timothy F**k did they restore the food chain in order to make again a fully operational ecosystem? Did they feed carnivores with plants and seeds? or a wizard came along and provided them with unlimited mana?, here we have gigantic plothole again. What about those flaws in the biblical fairy tale? Did a Wizard err... I mean god do it? I can assume that all the plotholes are fixed because god did it, and I can assume that you will answer with a magical explanation again. Peace.

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 03:00 PM
RE: The flood
Quote:Did a Wizard err... I mean god do it?
Yes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uZCC_bdhoo
The video also mentions the problem of imbreeding, but God solves that too. Wink

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 03:26 PM
RE: The flood
(04-01-2011 03:00 PM)Kikko Wrote:  
Quote:Did a Wizard err... I mean god do it?
Yes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uZCC_bdhoo
The video also mentions the problem of imbreeding, but God solves that too. Wink

LOL! That video explains a lot! xD It made my day, thanks Kikko! Remember if something is illogic... A WIZARD DID IT!!

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 04:16 PM
RE: The flood
LMAO Is it me, or did "Jeffrey" replace his fig leaf with a pot leaf?

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 04:35 PM
RE: The flood
(04-01-2011 04:16 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  LMAO Is it me, or did "Jeffrey" replace his fig leaf with a pot leaf?

A wizard did it!

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 05:03 PM
RE: The flood
I just read the "answers in Genesis" explanation of why there are no marsupials outside of Australia. It's sad the lengths people will go to do defend their fantasy life. Oh, and I liked how the answer assumes there was evolution to account for all the different types of cats (lions, tigers, etc).

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2011, 05:15 PM
RE: The flood
Theophilus, your only source is full of holes. Alright I can get that there would be no kangaroo fossils on the way to Austrailia, but that doesn't explain HOW they got to Austrailia, or WHY none of them stayed behind, or went anywhere else. It also does not explain how Penguins survived out of their natural habitat without their natural food sources, and the same with every other animal, and how were the feces taken care of? None of these questions are answered by your only source (other than a magical sky daddy) and it also does not explain how all of these animals fit into such a small space.

How do I know your source is a bad source? Because it is created by an orginization who's soul intent is to make faith into reality through pseudo science. It tries to use as much science as possible to back up what it says, and when real science doesn't fit their needs they through it out and start making shit up. This site adequately answers nothing, especially when you see the lies in there. I suggest you start looking at more than just one source. Wikipedia is usually a good place to start.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: