Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,421 Year: 3,678/9,624 Month: 549/974 Week: 162/276 Day: 2/34 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Ark - materials, construction and seaworthness
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 210 of 231 (331379)
07-13-2006 6:47 AM
Reply to: Message 182 by ringo
07-12-2006 12:37 PM


Who said there was waves during the flood anyway?
You need to be a lot more critical of your sources. You should be asking them the questions that people are asking you.
I am!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by ringo, posted 07-12-2006 12:37 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by jar, posted 07-13-2006 10:27 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 221 by ringo, posted 07-13-2006 12:21 PM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 212 of 231 (331388)
07-13-2006 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by RickJB
07-13-2006 7:00 AM


Same goes for the old SETI argument. Humanity is one known example in the universe of a civilization with communications technology based around electromagnetism. There *might* be others, although the chances of finding them are very slim. Only a tiny fraction of available research budgets go anywhere near this field.
This is a better example than what I gave, thank you.
There is absolutely no evidence of aliens, only subjective, yet we search for them. According to calculations and odds, we shouldn't even exist in this universe. So, doesn't that make it bad science to waste time looking for aliens?
No one, on the other hand, has ever observed God or intelligent design. Nor does any of the evidence gathered point to it.
I disagree, if you ever experienced what I have experienced from God, you would think differently. It may be subjective, but everything we view in life is through our subjective minds.
The whole story of Noah and the ark comes from a subjective Holy Book. How can you even fathom the ark without contemplating God?
How does the possibility of an ark being built even qualify as Creation science?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by RickJB, posted 07-13-2006 7:00 AM RickJB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by CK, posted 07-13-2006 7:36 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 214 by nwr, posted 07-13-2006 8:47 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 215 by Percy, posted 07-13-2006 9:20 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 216 by RickJB, posted 07-13-2006 9:32 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 226 by ramoss, posted 07-14-2006 9:12 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 227 by JonF, posted 07-14-2006 11:43 AM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 217 of 231 (331431)
07-13-2006 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by CK
07-13-2006 7:36 AM


But then you are involving God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by CK, posted 07-13-2006 7:36 AM CK has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 218 of 231 (331434)
07-13-2006 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by Percy
07-13-2006 9:20 AM


most creationist scenarios make no sense as science and could only occur through divine intervention.
That is pretty much how I see it, based on what we currently know.
But the name Creation science, means that something, or someone did the creating. I see wikipedia makes a reference to being created from nothing, I don't think that means no-one.
So to me, theolgical creationism, and creation science are one and the same. I am having a hard time diferentiating between the two.
Anyhone who thinks the ark was possible without Gods help is a few cards short of a full deck. That is a made-up thought, because the story clearly involves God. There is no way to even discuss it without involving God. Unless we are just totally disregarding the bible, and making up a story about an ark.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Percy, posted 07-13-2006 9:20 AM Percy has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 219 of 231 (331435)
07-13-2006 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by RickJB
07-13-2006 9:32 AM


There IS evidence of intelligent life having arisen in the universe
That is not a rebuttal to what I said. I said there is no proof of aliens. That means life foreign to our own.
You don't have to go through all the rhetoric about it, I am a member of SETI@home and donate my computer time, I have been for over 5 years.
The lack of evidence does not keep me from searching, or helping to search, or does it keep me from searching for God.
Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by RickJB, posted 07-13-2006 9:32 AM RickJB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by RickJB, posted 07-13-2006 12:43 PM riVeRraT has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 224 of 231 (331691)
07-14-2006 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by ringo
07-13-2006 12:21 PM


Try to rein in those galloping goalposts, will ya?
I don't have any goalposts to gallop, that is where you are making the mistake. If one is of scientific mind, he will explore all posibilities, and have no absolutes.
To jar mespo and ringo:
I don' think I want to participate in this discussion anymore. I have stated that I do not think it was possible for this whole thing to happen, except by the will of God, and by the protection of God, and with God's help building the ark.
God gave Noah the instructions, He sealed the door, He flooded the earth, and He brought it to rest on a mountain top. That is the way the story goes.
To argue how this could have happened without God is just retarded, and all the points you have mentioned to me, please save them for the kindegarderners who have no clue what it is to be on the water.
So since this forum does not entertain the concept of God as part of the discussion, then every post I made in this thread is OFF-TOPIC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by ringo, posted 07-13-2006 12:21 PM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Percy, posted 07-14-2006 8:01 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 228 of 231 (331780)
07-14-2006 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by JonF
07-14-2006 11:43 AM


All extant so-called "calculations of the probability of our existance" are rubbish. Nobody has the information required to make such a calculation. Nobody.
Ah, so that is bad science then....I see....
I guess we should throw every thought about other life in the universe out the window, until we actually get around to visiting every habital place in the universe?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by JonF, posted 07-14-2006 11:43 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by MangyTiger, posted 07-14-2006 4:38 PM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 437 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 230 of 231 (331875)
07-14-2006 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by MangyTiger
07-14-2006 4:38 PM


Since you put it that way, I kind of agree.
Your right we don't know the numbers, and to me, life is either very abundant in the universe(relatively speaking), or we are the only ones here. But I say that statement in ignorance.
One thing we are pretty sure of, is that we are rare in our own solar system, and on our very earth, the human kind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by MangyTiger, posted 07-14-2006 4:38 PM MangyTiger has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024