Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8781 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-20-2017 8:52 PM
356 online now:
Coyote, dwise1, JonF (3 members, 353 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,579 Year: 21,185/21,208 Month: 1,618/2,326 Week: 73/881 Day: 73/119 Hour: 2/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3529
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 5.8


(3)
Message 16 of 85 (803954)
04-06-2017 12:21 AM


Something from davidjayjordan.com
From http://www.davidjayjordan.com/...rkandtheWorldwideFlood.html:

quote:
And it is because of this, that over 200 different cultures have recorded the Flood in their histories, to document in similar but different ways this worldwide geological event. Why, because the deluge effected all cultures, as all following cultures stemmed sociologically from the Mid-East. For from the Gilgamish Epic of babylonians, to the Creation tablets of Nineveh, to the Rosetta Stone of Egypt, to the stories told among the Eskimos and Indians of North America, all these cultures knew and passed on their history from the Great Flood. And it is mentioned in most of them that Noah and his Family were the only human survivors.

Since all of these "over 200 different cultures" were wiped out by "the flood", how did they record the flood in their histories? Dead people don't write histories.

quote:
...Noah and his Family were the only human survivors.

Therefore, the only possible source for any flood history would be Noah and his Family.

Those "over 200 different cultures" must have been recording some other sort of flood event, not "THE BIG ONE".

Moose

Edited by Minnemooseus, : Fix formatting that came from the source page (removed extra line feeds).


Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:20 AM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply
 Message 26 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:51 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25863
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 17 of 85 (803958)
04-06-2017 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Minnemooseus
04-06-2017 12:21 AM


Re: Something from davidjayjordan.com
The quote is a little confused but he doesn't say they were "wiped out" in the Flood. He shouldn't say they "recorded" the Flood in their "histories" because obviously that couldn't have happened, but all people and cultures are descendants of Noah's sons and the reports of a Flood that are really quite universal have to go back to what they heard from their ancestors. That accounts both for the prevalence of so many accounts of a worldwide Flood and for the differences among them, the distortions, the embellishments etc. These people didn't remember such an event, they recorded what was passed on to them.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-06-2017 12:21 AM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25863
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 18 of 85 (803959)
04-06-2017 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by PaulK
04-06-2017 12:15 AM


No way the strata represent great eras of time
And as we know from discussions here the strata were deposited over a long period of time and are certainly not the result of a single short-term event.

No you do not "know" any such thing. It's commonly believed here but the actual observed facts of the strata don't fit that long-term scenario but are best explained by rapid deposition. The strata are laid one on top of another quite straight and flat, there is nothing about them to suggest there was ever anything like a normal earth surface to any of them, they are flat as a pancake stretching over huge distances and stacked to huge depths. There couldn't have been any "time periods" of millions of years marked by any of them, they are just deposits of sediment, obviously by water, lying flat, containing the remains of dead life forms which must have died in the deluge. The standard idea is really absurd if you just think about it carefully.

Core samples taken all over the Midwestern US all show a stack of sedimentary rocks one on top of another over a great distance. You can see the same thing in the Grand Canyon walls. Straight and flat with dead things fossilized in many of them. No hint whatever of any of them ever having formed anything like a normal surface of the earth as we experience it today.

The surface we have today was formed after all the strata were laid down. They are folded and pushed up in blocks, showing the layers were already in place. Canyons are cut into them to great depths, showing that cutting occurred after they were all in place. The strata from which the hoodoos form aren't being laid down any more, the strata have been there for thousands of years while erosion slowly carves away the softer parts leaving the characteristic hoodoo forms.

The idea of deposition over millions of years is truly ridiculous.

Oh and they are all so clearly different from each other, sharply different layers from each other. Given millions of years how did that happen? But it would be easily explained by their being carried in water and deposited one on top of another, one kind of sediment with a particular kind of living things in it on top of another, to very great depths, a mile in the case of the Grand Canyon.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 12:15 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 2:05 AM Faith has responded
 Message 22 by Pressie, posted 04-06-2017 6:43 AM Faith has responded
 Message 57 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-06-2017 7:32 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12969
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 19 of 85 (803960)
04-06-2017 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
04-06-2017 1:33 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
quote:

No you do not "know" any such thing. It's commonly believed here but the actual observed facts of the strata don't fit that long-term scenario but are best explained by rapid deposition.

On the contrary, the facts demonstrate that long time periods are required.

quote:

The strata are laid one on top of another quite straight and flat

In places, and rapid deposition is hardly required for that.

quote:

there is nothing about them to suggest there was ever anything like a normal earth surface to any of them

Except for things like riverbeds and embedded tree roots...

quote:

There couldn't have been any "time periods" of millions of years marked by any of them...

Maybe one day you will explain what you mean by that.

quote:

...they are just deposits of sediment, obviously by water, lying flat, containing the remains of dead life forms which must have died in the deluge.

Except that there are extensive deposits that were not laid down by water, plenty laid down in lakes and especially seas (and not by a flood) and no reason to attribute the vast majority of deaths to even a local deluge (the dominance of marine fossils being an obvious example)

quote:

The surface we have today was formed after all the strata were laid down.

Rather obviously, regardless of who's right.

quote:

They are folded and pushed up in blocks, showing the layers were already in place

And we have strata obviously laid on top of folded rock.

quote:

Canyons are cut into them to great depths, showing that cutting occurred after they were all in place.

We have buried canyons, which were obviously cut before they were filled in.

quote:

The strata from which the hoodoos form aren't being laid down any more, the strata have been there for thousands of years while erosion slowly carves away the softer parts leaving the characteristic hoodoo forms.

And when they are eroded away the surface will be flat.

quote:

Oh and they are all so clearly different from each other, sharply different layers from each other.

Not all. But they have to be distinct in some ways to be labelled as different strata.

quote:

Given millions of years how did that happen?

Which is more likely? That there would be many significant changes in conditions over millions of years or the same changes over just one ? Anyone who thinks seriously about the issue can see that you are being absurd. The sequences produced according Walther's law are an example - changes in sea level change the sort of sediment deposited at a location, in ways a flood would not be expected to mimic.

quote:

But it would be easily explained by their being carried in water and deposited one on top of another, one kind of sediment with a particular kind of living things in it on top of another, to very great depths, a mile in the case of the Grand Canyon.

No, it wouldn't. Where does all this sediment come from ? How was it sorted ? How were the living things sorted ? Why doesn't it look like a catastrophic flood deposit (e.g. the preservation of delicate features in some strata). It is much easier to explain it in terms of long periods of time

And this is just repeating points from previous discussion. As I said, we've established here that you don't have a viable case for the flood.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:33 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 3:13 AM PaulK has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25863
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 20 of 85 (803961)
04-06-2017 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by PaulK
04-06-2017 2:05 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
No you do not "know" any such thing. It's commonly believed here but the actual observed facts of the strata don't fit that long-term scenario but are best explained by rapid deposition.

On the contrary, the facts demonstrate that long time periods are required.

Utterly false.

The strata are laid one on top of another quite straight and flat

In places, and rapid deposition is hardly required for that.

Actually it's the only realistic explanation. Over long periods of time you aren't going to get such flat deposition. Wherever the layers are seen lying straight and flat that would be the form of the original deposition. There are plenty of places where they have been folded or otherwise distorted, all showing that the strata were laid down first and they were deformed in a block. Explanation: The Flood laid them all down over the year, and sometime afterward, or at the very end when the Flood was draining away (which I think is demonstrated in the Grand canyon/Grand Staircase area), the Atlantic ridge formed and the continents split apart causing all kinds of tectonic effects to whole continents. All the strata of the British Isles are pushed up as a block. In some places you see the breakiup of strata, the cutting of canyons and cliffs, the pushing up of mountains. All these things exhibit the original deposition of the strata now being deformed in blocks, many layers at a time.

there is nothing about them to suggest there was ever anything like a normal earth surface to any of them

Except for things like riverbeds and embedded tree roots...

The "riverbeds" are channels that run through some of the sediments. All it shows is that water ran there, otherwise there's nothing about them to suggest an actual riverbed. Water would have run through the sediments during deposition, on top of some before the next layer was laid down, continuing between them in some cases. Tree roots would certainly have been carried along in the Flood waters and buried like anything else. What they usually actually show is that the time period explanation is really a fantasy because they can span more than one layer and even within one layer they are just Stuff carried along with it, not part of any scenario or landscape.

There couldn't have been any "time periods" of millions of years marked by any of them..
.

Maybe one day you will explain what you mean by that.

Perhaps I can try to make it clearer if it isn't clear enough.

...they are just deposits of sediment, obviously by water, lying flat, containing the remains of dead life forms which must have died in the deluge.

Except that there are extensive deposits that were not laid down by water, plenty laid down in lakes and especially seas (and not by a flood) and no reason to attribute the vast majority of deaths to even a local deluge (the dominance of marine fossils being an obvious example)

Surely vast numbers of marine deaths would be expected in a worldwide Flood.

Besides the many dinosaur beds as evidence of the sort of death a worldwide Flood would cause, the enormous Karoo formation is a staggering graveyard of dead things. Enormous numbers of creatures piled up in one place certainly fits the idea of such a deluge.

The surface we have today was formed after all the strata were laid down.

Rather obviously, regardless of who's right.

The point is important: It means the strata were never on the surface of the earth, they were all laid down as flat slabs of sediment, they stayed flat until deformed by tectonic force, which is the cause of the present lumpy hilly dippy surface we live on.

They are folded and pushed up in blocks, showing the layers were already in place

And we have strata obviously laid on top of folded rock.

Here and there you have an angular unconformity which is often though not always made up of one or two layers straddling a block of upright or tilted layers, which I think is best explained as the result of tectonic movement tilting the lower block without disturbing the horizontal layer above. The remaining horizontal layer would formerly have been the lowest of a deep stack of layers that subsequently broke up and washed away due to the tectonic disturbance, leaving the one in place --because it stuck there due to the friction from the movement of the block beneath it. It's just one of the many ways the worldwide tectonic movement affected the strata in some places.

Canyons are cut into them to great depths, showing that cutting occurred after they were all in place.

We have buried canyons, which were obviously cut before they were filled in.

Which I explain as all happening beneath the surface as the Flood waters drained away, cutting the canyon and then filling it in/

The strata from which the hoodoos form aren't being laid down any more, the strata have been there for thousands of years while erosion slowly carves away the softer parts leaving the characteristic hoodoo forms.

And when they are eroded away the surface will be flat.

More or less.

Oh and they are all so clearly different from each other, sharply different layers from each other.

Not all. But they have to be distinct in some ways to be labelled as different strata.

Yes, and they are identifiable as different strata, even in those cases wshere the material is the same. Which again suggests water deposition.

Given millions of years how did that happen?

Which is more likely? That there would be many significant changes in conditions over millions of years ...

Significant changes sure but not abrupt knife-edge distinctions between the sedimentary deposition of one "era" and the next. That's what makes no sense, that there should have formed a stack of disparate kinds of sediments with tight contacts all flat and straight if they occurred over millions of years. Change would be expected but not sharp change, rather messy lumpy mixedup change.

...or the same changes over just one ?

Don't know what you mean by "same" changes. The layers suggest deposition by water. Water does layer sediments, it layers them in rivers and according to Walther's Law as sea level rises. It would make sense to expect layering from the Flood as well, especially since it is an example of rising and falling sea level

Anyone who thinks seriously about the issue can see that you are being absurd.

I doubt that.

The sequences produced according Walther's law are an example - changes in sea level change the sort of sediment deposited at a location, in ways a flood would not be expected to mimic.

On the contrary, Walther's Law is an excellent explanation for the layering that would have occurred in the Flood as the water rose and then receded.

But it would be easily explained by their being carried in water and deposited one on top of another, one kind of sediment with a particular kind of living things in it on top of another, to very great depths, a mile in the case of the Grand Canyon.

No, it wouldn't.

Yes it would.

Where does all this sediment come from ?

Now you are changing the subject but most of it would have come from the land mass, and no doubt some from the ocean as well. Think what happens in a very small flood as streams carry down an enormous amount of "dirt." Heavy rain pounding the earth for forty nights and days followed by the rising water that eventually covered all the land would certainly have filled the water with sediments.

How was it sorted ? How were the living things sorted ?

Don't know. But water is known to sort sediments into layers. And besides, it's even harder to explain how you'd get such neat sorting of sediments and creatures on the Geologic Time Scale model. At the least there should be more gradation of creatures than there is, not the highly segregated types that are actually found.

Why doesn't it look like a catastrophic flood deposit (e.g. the preservation of delicate features in some strata). It is much easier to explain it in terms of long periods of time

Some things may be easier to explain that way. But the Flood probably had violent phases and quiet phases.

And this is just repeating points from previous discussion. As I said, we've established here that you don't have a viable case for the flood.

You've concluded that, I haven't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 2:05 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Pressie, posted 04-06-2017 5:39 AM Faith has responded
 Message 23 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 8:16 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1714
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 21 of 85 (803965)
04-06-2017 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
04-06-2017 3:13 AM


Old earth models work
Faith, this needs to be repeated here. Old earth models are tested. Science.

A paper by eight professional geologists who are members of the Biblically conservative Presbyterian Church of America (PCA)
http://www.asa3.org/...ics/Physical%20Science/EarthAntiquity

From there.

One of the best ways of making a name for yourself in the scientific community is to challenge a widely held scientific understanding with a strongly defended alternative theory. It is thus of considerable significance that the tens of thousands of geologists worldwide are virtually in complete agreement that the question of the earth's age has been answered: roughly 4.6 billion years.

The agreement is perhaps even more striking in the world of economic geology (oil and mineral exploration) where theories that lead to increased revenue always win, even if philosophically distasteful. Understanding the age of the earth and its layers plays a critical role in natural resource exploration, yet to our knowledge there is not a single oil or mining company anywhere in the world that uses a young-earth model to find or exploit new reserves. Old-earth models work. Young-earth models do not.

Old earth models work and are employed by thousands of exploration and mining companies all over the world. Old earth models work. They put their money where their mouths are.

Creationists don't. They preach a lot. That's it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 3:13 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:04 PM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1714
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 22 of 85 (803970)
04-06-2017 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
04-06-2017 1:33 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
Faith writes:

No you do not "know" any such thing.

Yes we sure do. We do know that some "strata" take millions of years to form and other "strata" take minutes to form.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:33 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:12 PM Pressie has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12969
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 23 of 85 (803978)
04-06-2017 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
04-06-2017 3:13 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
To briefly answer your points

So you say that rapid despoliation is "the only realistic explanation" because in some places tectonic forces have distorted the strata. That doesn't exactly follow.

As you haven't examined any of the riverbeds in question I wonder how you can insist that they aren't riverbeds. And when we have in situ tree roots, I think we can say that they weren't moved around by the assumed flood.

Strata "represent" the time period in which they were deposited by providing evidence of the conditions in which they were deposited. I really don't see how you can object to that.

I can't think of a good reason why a flood would affect marine life worse than land life, and the terrestrial examples you refer to are not mass kill sites so your point remains obscure.

The fact that the current surface IS the surface is all we need to show that it was formed "today". So calling it an important point is odd. Besides we know that there ARE examples of buried topography so claiming that they don't exist doesn't work either.

I would think that a sensible explanation would be better than an absurd fantasy. The sensible explanation for angular uncomformities is that the strata above the uncomfority were deposited after the underlying strata were tilted.

Buried canyons were obviously filled AFTER they were cut, even in your "explanation" - so they still disprove your claim that all the rocks were deposited first.

I note that you still have provided no explanation of how your abrupt changes occur assuming sudden deposition. Contrary to your assertion mainstream geology does have such explanations. For instance if deposition were to stop and start again thousands of years later there is no reason to expect the new material to be the same as that last deposited (or uncovered by erosion in the interval)

The sequences of Walther's law depend on normal deposition - the huge amounts of sediment supposedly deposited by the flood have no reason to follow it. the flood is not a long-term change in sea level and your claims for it are quite at odds with any such idea.

Asking for details of your "easy explanation" is NOT changing the subject.

quote:

Don't know. But water is known to sort sediments into layers. And besides, it's even harder to explain how you'd get such neat sorting of sediments and creatures on the Geologic Time Scale model. At the least there should be more gradation of creatures than there is, not the highly segregated types that are actually found.

On the contrary, it is quite easy. Which is not "even harder" than "impossible"

And so we are left - yet again - with the fact that the flood makes no sense as an explanation of the geological record and even less sense as an explanation of the fossil record. That you refuse to accept these facts is your problem.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 3:13 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:34 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 1026
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 24 of 85 (803994)
04-06-2017 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by PaulK
04-06-2017 8:16 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
Well done Faith.....

Not so well done, Coyote, as your 'stakes' are rather RARE and uncooked, untested, and unscientific.

But good on ya, for proposed this NEW TOPIC and getting it approved instantly. I told you could do it, at Proposed New Topics and you did.
Ive been trying to suggest NEW TOPICS, there for a while and haven;t succeeded as yet.

Anyway your shots in the dark and slow nothing ever happens around HERE, non catastrophic events dogma (except for comets hitting the heads of dinosaurs and making them extinct) of evolution, is contrary to the geological evidence, as even seen by Darwin himself.

But lets get at the exact year of the Flood and the numerous and multiple ways a true scientist and researcher can find out when it happened. No billions or trillions of years, and new estimates and new projections and guesses like with your folks, just simple math, simple measurements, obvious connections with historical landmarks etc etc.

Its a multifaceted confirmed over and over again and again dating system that anyone can prove for themselves.

But first HERE are the basic articles from my research

http://www.davidjayjordan.com/NoahsArk.html

20 articles, maybe six of them referring to the timeline of History, all hyperlinked and cohesively together

This can be cross-referenced with the prophetic MARKER of

http://www.davidjayjordan.com/GreatPyramidProphecy.html

Again confirming the Biblical exact year of 2348 BC

Amazingly perfectly matching the number of seconds in a day corelation with the GENESIS exact year dating

http://www.davidjayjordan.com/OneDayTilNoahsFlood.html

This all perfectly co-related to the so called boring Genesis account, that has no missing links, but exact years

http://www.davidjayjordan.com/ForeFathersGraphic.html

So from every angle, every direction, every resource, all history points to the Worldwide Flood taking place in 2348 BC.

That was downhill, or descending until the ascending of Earths planned and Designed History ... see Great Pyramid Prophecy for further details

The overall historic confirmed points of contact and progression of the DESIGN of History can be found HERE.

Remember History is by DESIGN, Life is by Design, the future is by DESIGN (its called prophecy), You were by Design, your freedom of choice is by DESIGN.

So choose wisely, and take some time to study.

But this thread is hardly for you, its surely for visitors and readers rather than yourself. True scientists are not afraid of the convergence of facts and times, and resources and observations... it makes them concentrate their efforts until they figure it out.

You got to learn to be exact, folks, get it exactly right. Billions and trillions of years just isnt very mathematical and isn;t very scientific


Evolution is not science and is pure religion, forced upon the young to ensure their faith in luck and chance rather than mathematics and design.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 8:16 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 04-06-2017 10:48 AM Davidjay has not yet responded
 Message 28 by JonF, posted 04-06-2017 11:38 AM Davidjay has not yet responded
 Message 29 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2017 12:14 PM Davidjay has not yet responded
 Message 48 by caffeine, posted 04-06-2017 3:17 PM Davidjay has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Admin, posted 04-06-2017 5:54 PM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5937
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 25 of 85 (803997)
04-06-2017 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Davidjay
04-06-2017 10:34 AM


Real world evidence
Davidjay writes:

Word salad

Davidjay writes:

Again confirming the Biblical exact year of 2348 BC

Hmmm. I have obtained radiocarbon dates of BC 2344, 2334, and 2306 in a couple of my excavations. Didn't see any evidence of floods.

I also have continuity of mitochondrial DNA from before to after your 2348 BC date. That shows there was no population change.

Perhaps you should knock off your mathematical models and look at real-world evidence for a change?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:34 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2017 10:52 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 1:25 PM Coyote has responded

Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 1026
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 26 of 85 (803998)
04-06-2017 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Minnemooseus
04-06-2017 12:21 AM


Re: Something from davidjayjordan.com
Minn...exactly

Noah and his three sons, Ham, Shem and Japheth repopulated the Earth, each going a different direction... and all having went through the worldwide flood. Ham - black people
Shem- Yellow, Japeth white.

Easy to comprehend and harmonious and TRUE. Now you know...good point.... each of them telling the story in their cultures as they developed them via their offspring.

Were all brethren stemming from the same ancestry.. not different bangs, different couples banging, all from the same stock, and spreading outward..

Being fruitful and mutiplying. Thank the Lotrd for multiplication..Amen and awomen.


.
Evolution is not science and is pure religion, forced upon the young to ensure their faith in luck and chance rather than mathematics and design.

The Lord created science and all things. Laws did not create themselves. Nothing happened by chance and accident.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-06-2017 12:21 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 04-06-2017 12:42 PM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12969
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 27 of 85 (803999)
04-06-2017 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Coyote
04-06-2017 10:48 AM


Re: Real world evidence
Please don't insult mathematical modelling. David's nutty numerology does not qualify.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 04-06-2017 10:48 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3891
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.3


(2)
Message 28 of 85 (804001)
04-06-2017 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Davidjay
04-06-2017 10:34 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
If you have any mathematical or logical proof, present it here.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:34 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5765
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 29 of 85 (804007)
04-06-2017 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Davidjay
04-06-2017 10:34 AM


Re: No way the strata represent great eras of time
I am not going to go to your website. What you are doing is against forum rules. Either present your evidence here or retract your claim or just move along.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:34 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25863
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


(2)
Message 30 of 85 (804010)
04-06-2017 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Davidjay
04-06-2017 10:51 AM


Check which message you are replying to
David, I think you aren't replying to the messages you intend to be replying to. Be careful which "Reply" button you are clicking on. It's going to confuse us all if you give a reply to the wrong post.

abe: Also I agree with Theodoric, which is probably a First, that you must spell out your evidence here and not just refer us to links. For one thing I can't read a lot of material at links, it's hard on my eyes, but besides that we need to see the argument spelled out here on the board. So if your links demonstrate the timing of the Flood it would be good to see exactly how you arrived at that, but in your own words here.

Thanks.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Davidjay, posted 04-06-2017 10:51 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017