The flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-01-2011, 12:51 PM
RE: The flood
(05-01-2011 10:55 AM)theophilus Wrote:  But there is no way of testing the dating methods to find out whether or not they are correct and sometimes there are things that don't fit into the accepted theories.
Quote:If the radioactive element carbon-14 breaks down quickly—within a few thousand years—why do we still find it in fossils and diamonds? It’s a dilemma for evolutionists, who believe the rocks are millions of years old.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles.../carbon-14

Not a dilemma at all. a quick google search gives you the answer:

http://www.scienceforums.net Wrote:Hypothesized explanations:

#1. The small apparent non-zero values are less than measurement error. In other words, the readings are consistent with zero C14 content. In fact, the experiments cited by the creationists appear to be attempts to establish the measurement error of there equipment. Older carbon dating techniques directly detected decays of C14 atoms. The problem: If the material is too old, the small amount of C14 present may not decay in the measurement interval. Newer, more accurate techniques use mass spectroscopy. Mass spectroscopy, like any man-made measurement, is not perfect. In particular, given a pure sample of C12, I suspect a mass spectrometer would indicate that a non-zero amount of C14 present. It is nigh impossible to measure exactly zero.

#2. Contamination. It doesn't take much contamination to spoil a sample with near-zero quantity of C14. Creationists pounce on this explanation as meaning all carbon 14 readings are suspect. False. While that same level of contamination (if this is the explanation) will add some error to the dating of some reasonably aged sample, the error will be small -- so long as the sample is not too old. The contamination is additive, not proportional.

#3. Alternate source of C14 production. Natural diamonds are not pure carbon. The most common contaminant is nitrogen, 0.1% in gem-quality diamonds. Nearby radioactive material could trigger exactly the same C14 production process from nitrogen as occurs in the upper atmosphere, albeit at a much reduced rate. Another possible avenue is C13, which has a small but non-zero neutron absorption cross section. By either mechanism, this is essentially internal contamination.

You should know better than to try to BS like that on the internet. It's to easy to call your bluff.
The fact that you are using answersingenesis.org to back up your statements should tell you how far off track you have gone.

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-01-2011, 01:53 PM
RE: The flood
I still cannot believe that theophilus is trying to defend the flood story. All the atheist on here are giving great arguments. Common sense is the greatest weapon against any story in the Bible though. Common sense is something I cannot even fight against and plays a role in why I am an atheist, but it is not the entire reason why I am an atheist. Again scholars have proven that it is a made up story that was writer interpretation of other myths. The Atrahasis flood myth is one of many stories that was very similiar and no one would ever believe in any of them, but they do the Christian version. I was going to post my paper that I received an "A" on that discussed why the Flood story is made up but I cannot find it, aftrerall I wrote it a year and a half ago, and I thought I still had it saved. I am sure that if you are to research the Atrahasis flood myth and read it then you would get what I mean.

Also theophilus may not want to defend the flood story. It is one of multiple examples that proves Yahweh (the Christian God) is not all knowing and makes mistakes. For he sent the flood to destroy a creation that he disliked. In this case he created corrupt people and sent a flood to make up for his error. Yahweh is arguably one of the most evil, and ignorant, gods ever thought up in the minds of our ancestors and their primative ways of thinking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-01-2011, 03:58 PM (This post was last modified: 05-01-2011 04:05 PM by MasterRottweiler.)
RE: The flood
Hmm I see that this guy Is still throwing hollow arguments based on biblical mumbo-jumbo and pesudo-science religious articles. I am sorry but you have not solid EVIDENCE other than the good ol' book to prove anything that you are saying. I dont know If you are a fundamentalist who believe that every single answer to every mistery out there is in the bible, please! that proves nothing for there are not a single piece of evicence to suport that... The bible say thet earth was fixed and inamobible, and guess what? The earth moves! Common sense, reason and again EVIDENCE are used by true science.

Personally, I dont know If you are one of those fundamentalists who are always trying to convert other people, I do not know if you are here trying to change our minds about being atheists and returning to the fold. Or perhaps you are some kind of civilized troll.

If you are trying to give us some proof you need more than an ancient text written by people of the bronze age, we need SERIOUS EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. If you are trying to convert us to christianity please do not do it, for you will not be able to change our minds with hollow arguments telling us that those arguments are infallible because it is on some ancient book and that book is the word of some diety with a twisted sense of humor.

Seriously, Its like if someone here believe that the Lord of the Rings is a true story and we are living on a modern version of the middle earth, I have no evidence to prove that we are living on Middle Earth but my faith in the book will make me forget about every thing else including scientific evidence debunking the middle earth belief. If you are trying to be convincing give us some evidence other than your holy book and magic, dont be arrogant mellonamin Big Grin. 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
05-01-2011, 04:54 PM
RE: The flood
Black Sea deluge theory may explain the origin o mythical floods.These may have passed from culture to culture until they reached the Israelites.From there it probably made its way into the old testament.

Also , flood myths are common :
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-01-2011, 10:55 PM
RE: The flood
The problem with these kinds of discussions is that one never knows the opponents motivations nor their philosophies. Consequently, we are left arguing vague ideas that may not be pertinent at all. We have to assume that the other is a fundamentalist, bible-literalist; and that may not actually be the case.

Here's all that need be said. Answers-in-genesis ignores evidence that contradicts their thesis and advances only those scientific arguments which bolster their given assertions - occasionally to their own detriment - as science which seems to bolster one biblical claim may actually defeat another.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2011, 11:50 AM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2011 12:19 PM by theophilus.)
RE: The flood
(05-01-2011 11:41 AM)gamutman Wrote:  But why a flood? Why force Noah to suffer the ordeal he and his family suffered? Why not simply blot everything out and start over with Noah replacing Adam? If He could do the 6 day thing once, He could do it again.
He could have done it that way but he chose not to. I don't understand why God does things the way he does.

(05-01-2011 12:34 PM)Kikko Wrote:  First: Are you a fundamentalist who's here just to argue, a troll, or are you here seriously to have a discussion that will end when the other side changes the ones mind?
My post was a response to this article,

http://thethinkingatheist.com/bible_contradictions.html

which claims that the Bible contains contradictions. I am a Christian and I believe the Bible, and I was simply answering two of the questions which were asked. I don't intend to try to explain all of the "contradictions" in the article but here is where you can find the answers for some of them:

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy

http://www.thedevineevidence.com/skeptic...tions.html

Quote:Did you watch the video I linked to you about the scientific method?
The scientific method is an excellent tool for finding out what laws and processes govern the universe. But there are some things that are outside its scope. It can only measure what is going on now but can't directly tell us what has happened in the past. It is possible to make assumptions about past events by assuming that the processes we see now were exactly the same in the past, but it can't tell us whether or not there was some kind of divine intervention that would interrupt those processes.

(05-01-2011 01:53 PM)omega21 Wrote:  All the atheist on here are giving great arguments.
The problem is that since they are atheists their opinions are biased. An atheist must believe that the story of the flood is false regardless of the evidence.

Quote:Again scholars have proven that it is a made up story that was writer interpretation of other myths. The Atrahasis flood myth is one of many stories that was very similiar and no one would ever believe in any of them, but they do the Christian version.
All scholars have proven is that there are many stories of a flood. They can't prove that the Bible version came from the other stories. As I pointed out in a previous post the fact that so many culture have myths of a flood suggests that there must have been some historical basis for them.

Quote:It is one of multiple examples that proves Yahweh (the Christian God) is not all knowing and makes mistakes. For he sent the flood to destroy a creation that he disliked. In this case he created corrupt people and sent a flood to make up for his error.
If you read what came before the flood you will see that God made the first people perfect and the human race became imperfect because they disobeyed him.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2011, 12:33 PM
RE: The flood
Perfect you say. hmm.. wouldn't perfect perfect people in context be the kind of people who would not disobey him in the first place? If they were perfect the fall of Adam could not possibly have happened, could it?

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2011, 12:51 PM
RE: The flood
Quote:My post was a response to this article,

http://thethinkingatheist.com/bible_contradictions.html

which claims that the Bible contains contradictions. I am a Christian and I believe the Bible, and I was simply answering two of the questions which were asked. I don't intend to try to explain all of the "contradictions" in the article but here is where you can find the answers for some of them:

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy

http://www.thedevineevidence.com/skeptic...tions.html
O' yea, the first post.
Quote:Psalm 104:6-9.
Psalms are songs made by people. You claim that the topography of the earth was very different before than after 'the flood' and defend that claim with a part of a psalm. In one or two psalms it is said that the earth is established and unmovable, so do you agree that the earth is fixed?
Quote:The scientific method is an excellent tool for finding out what laws and processes govern the universe. But there are some things that are outside its scope. It can only measure what is going on now but can't directly tell us what has happened in the past. It is possible to make assumptions about past events by assuming that the processes we see now were exactly the same in the past, but it can't tell us whether or not there was some kind of divine intervention that would interrupt those processes.
Why assume that the processes weren't the same in the past? Why assume that physical laws would have changed? How do we know that a some kind of a divine intervention was even possible? And can you tell what sort of a divine intervention you're talking about, so I can properly comment it?
Quote:The problem is that since they are atheists their opinions are biased. An atheist must believe that the story of the flood is false regardless of the evidence.
Nope. I don't believe in the flood story because I'm an atheist or regardless of evidence. I don't believe in the flood story because of the evidence, but if the evidence would be showing that the flood story is true, then I'd accept that it's true, and so would most (if not all) users in this forum.
Quote:If you read what came before the flood you will see that God made the first people perfect and the human race became imperfect because they disobeyed him.
And he knew what was going to happen when he was creating human, so he wanted a mass flood to happen.
___________________
Could you try the defending your past claims with evidence again?

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
06-01-2011, 03:12 PM
RE: The flood
I had trouble being able to quote what theophilus said in his last post.... I pressed reply to post but it wouldn't work.... So I just copied what he posted to this post and replied to what he said to me.....

Theophilus: The problem is that since they are atheists their opinions are biased. An atheist must believe that the story of the flood is false regardless of the evidence.

My Reply: There are plenty of Christians that also don't believe in this story, and before you say they are not true Christians I must say nobody is a true Christian. For example, if you have ever lusted for a girl you committed adultery. After you committed this sin and thought nothing of it then you are not building a life around God. Also the Bible demands that if you rape a girl then she has to marry you. Proud of that statement? I hope not.


Theophilus: All scholars have proven is that there are many stories of a flood. They can't prove that the Bible version came from the other stories. As I pointed out in a previous post the fact that so many culture have myths of a flood suggests that there must have been some historical basis for them.

My Reply: No it doesn't mean that there is an historical basis. The Bible also says the Earth stands on for pillars so I guess that must have some truth to it using your logic. There are too many parallels between the Bible flood and pagan flood stories that predate the Bible. It cannot be a coincidence. Also an all knowing god would be more original don't you think? Furthermore there are other similarities between Bible stories and pagan ones. Such as Jesus having parallels to other gods and saviors. In other words most of the Bible is plagiarized. If I plagiarized as much as the bible writers have done then I would be kicked out of college. Your flood story is just one of many examples of why the Bible is not original. Looks like your way of thinking about the world is even more ancient than you think.

Theophilus: If you read what came before the flood you will see that God made the first people perfect and the human race became imperfect because they disobeyed him.

My Reply:You just helped me. If you want to argue against me then don't say reasons as to why God is not all knowing. You should have just said well I guess God isn't perfect after all. Since he created people that turned against him. Hmmmm kind of like atheist today. Here is what I have to say to the Christian God, "Send a flood again unless you are too scared, you blood thirsty trash."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2011, 04:00 PM
RE: The flood
Quote:All scholars have proven is that there are many stories of a flood. They can't prove that the Bible version came from the other stories. As I pointed out in a previous post the fact that so many culture have myths of a flood suggests that there must have been some historical basis for them.

There was historical basis for floods, yet. But, a flood that covered the entire world? You're talking about Bronze era goat herders, here. They had no idea that there were lands beyond the oceans or how big the world was. It's preposterous to buy into a story about a global flood written by people who thought the world was only as big as they could see.

And, as for things being different in the past, are you suggesting the laws of physics have changed? I'm pretty sure they haven't, and we've got some pretty good proof of that. Those lights you see in the sky at night took a really long time to get here. Many of those starts don't even exist anymore. When you look in to the night sky, you are looking directly into the distant pass. Man now has the power to see that things like the speed of light, for example, was the same a few million years ago as it is today.

And, then there Earth itself and what it tells us. For example, the geological record, the various rock strata, etc. tell us a great deal about the Earth. We can tel when volcanoes erupted, when climates changed, about the climate, etc., And, there is zero evidence of a global flood. Why do you suppose that is?

I can't believe someone who is able to use a computer can still believe in a fantasy like the flood.

Oh, and where if Fr0d0 for this discussion?

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: