Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 12:51 PM
34 online now:
dwise1, GDR, jar, PaulK, PurpleYouko, RAZD, ringo, Stile, Theodoric (9 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,826 Year: 9,862/19,786 Month: 2,284/2,119 Week: 320/724 Day: 45/114 Hour: 4/16


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
25NextFF
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
Repzion
Member (Idle past 3590 days)
Posts: 22
From: Renton,Wa
Joined: 12-04-2006


Message 196 of 372 (420434)
09-07-2007 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by RAZD
09-05-2007 9:42 PM


quote:
Nope, because the "common ancestor" concept does not mean there was a single individual, rather that there was a population of breeding organisms that shared the same basic genetics. It is more proper to refer to "common ancestor populations" to avoid this problem.

And single cell life does not breed with others, but divides, so it is not restricted by inbreeding problems


Nope, because the "common ancestor" concept does not mean there was a single individual, rather that there was a population of breeding organisms that shared the same basic genetics. It is more proper to refer to "common ancestor populations" to avoid this problem.

And single cell life does not breed with others, but divides, so it is not restricted by inbreeding problems.

Now responding to Anglagards post.

quote:
80. Leakage – A wooden ship of this size would flex due to stress to such a degree that no tar type sealant would work to prevent leakage and eventual sinking within a few days.

In 2003 nine members of the Korea Research Institute of Ships and Engineering published a paper called Safety Investigation of Noah’s Ark in a Seaway. Their conclusion was that the ark could have navigated seas with waves higher than 30 meters. As for the statement "no tar type sealant would work to prevent leakage and eventual sinking within a few days" I doubt that is true. People have used things found in nature for building and manufacturing long before the industrial revolution and people still use natural today in different medicines. http://www.worldwideflood.com/ark/safety_aig/safety_aig.htm

quote:
89. Sargon and the Akkadian Empire – How could Sargon conquer Sumeria and create the Akkadian Empire either underwater or immediately after a global flood with no troops?

He didn't - this was after the flood. According to wikipedia Sargon of Akkadia ruled from 2333 -2279 B.C. Genesis 10:10-12 says the first centers of Nimrod's kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar and from there he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen. There are different theories to identify Nimrod in other civilizations and was Sargon. One theory is that Nimrod was the inspiration for the Gilgamesh written centuries after the flood. The author makes an interesting argument although I question his translation of Genesis 10:9
http://www.ancientdays.net/nimrod.htm

That's all I have for now, I'll get back to your posts.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by RAZD, posted 09-05-2007 9:42 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by anglagard, posted 09-07-2007 9:06 PM Repzion has responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 197 of 372 (420444)
09-07-2007 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Repzion
09-07-2007 8:12 PM


So When Was this Flood?
From yours truly:

quote:
89. Sargon and the Akkadian Empire – How could Sargon conquer Sumeria and create the Akkadian Empire either underwater or immediately after a global flood with no troops?

Repzion writes:

He didn't - this was after the flood. According to wikipedia Sargon of Akkadia ruled from 2333 -2279 B.C. Genesis 10:10-12 says the first centers of Nimrod's kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar and from there he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen. There are different theories to identify Nimrod in other civilizations and was Sargon. One theory is that Nimrod was the inspiration for the Gilgamesh written centuries after the flood. The author makes an interesting argument although I question his translation of Genesis 10:9

OK, Wikipedia says "Sargon of Akkadia ruled from 2333 -2279 B.C."

Here is what else Wikipedia says: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah's_Ark

quote:
For the date of the Flood, literalists rely on interpretation of the genealogies contained in Genesis 5 and 11. Archbishop Ussher, using this method in the 17th century, arrived at 2349 BC, and this date still has acceptance among many. A more recent Christian fundamentalist scholar, Gerhard F. Hasel, however, summarising the current state of thought in the light of the various Biblical manuscripts (the Masoretic text in Hebrew, various manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint), and differences of opinion over their correct interpretation, demonstrated that this method of analysis can date the flood only within a range between 3402 and 2462 BC.[24] Other opinions, based on other sources and methodologies, lead to dates outside even this bracket—the deuterocanonical Book of Jubilees, for example, providing a date equivalent to 2309 BC.

Let's do some math. Let's see, Book of Jubilees places the flood at 2309 BC, which is between 2333 and 2279 BC, which places Sargon underwater. Ussher places the flood at 2349 BC, which is 16 years from Sargon's rule which started in 2333 BC according to your own source. This means that Sargon's military machine conquered his own close relations who by definition had to be less than 17 years old, unless of course he was conquering that 600 year old geezer Noah and his few adult compatriots. Notice also that Sargon would have also been less than 17 years old. Personally I feel sorry for those poor women on the Ark who would have had to pop out entire armies of teenagers and kids in less than 17 years.

Since according to fundamentalists, the Bible is completely internally consistent and easily interpreted, or should I say actually requires no interpretation whatsoever, It should be easy for you to provide an exact date for the Flood. Without this exact date, not only is further discussion of this exact point futile, but you will have also shown that Biblical literalism, infallibility, and perfect internal consistency is either a false assertion or you don't know how to literally comprehend the text.

I can defend the entire list just like this. Please feel free to start a thread on each individual point and we will see how good you, and anyone else you can use for support, is at making a convincing argument when challenged by those who disagree due to overwhelming evidence to the contrary.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Repzion, posted 09-07-2007 8:12 PM Repzion has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Repzion, posted 09-08-2007 5:31 PM anglagard has responded

  
Repzion
Member (Idle past 3590 days)
Posts: 22
From: Renton,Wa
Joined: 12-04-2006


Message 198 of 372 (420610)
09-08-2007 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by anglagard
09-07-2007 9:06 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
quote:
Here is what else Wikipedia says: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah's_Ark

That doesn't address my response to the original question which was “How could Sargon conquer Sumeria and create the Akkadian Empire either underwater or immediately after a global flood with no troops?” There’s no mention of Sargon on that page but I will address a couple of things on that page:

"Was Noah commanded to take one pair of each clean animal into the Ark (Gen 6:19–20) or seven pairs (Gen 7:2–3)?"

Many biblical scholars believe Genesis 6:19-20 was a general command and Genesis 7:2-3 was a more specific command.

There's a link on that page to an article on wikipedia about the documentary hypothesis:

"The documentary hypothesis (DH) proposes that the first five books of the Old Testament (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, known collectively as the Torah or Pentateuch), represent a combination of documents from four originally independent sources."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

This hypothesis was formed by a scholar by Julius Wellhausen in the late nineteenth century. He believed that the narrative for the flood came from four sources including manuscripts he called the Jahwist text and the Priestly source and were written about 920 B.C. and 720 B.C. respectively. This was long before the Israelites were taken captive to Babylon so Wellhausen must not have believed that the Jews took the story from the Babylonians.

It says on that page “The hypothesis became the consensus view on the origin of Pentateuch for much of the 20th century, but its assumptions, methodology and conclusions have been seriously questioned in recent decades and it no longer dominates the field. Nevertheless, no new paradigm has replaced it, and scholars continue to draw on its terminology and insights even as they explore alternative models.”

There are some interesting comments about higher criticism by Melvin Kyle, Egyptologist and Professor of Biblical Archaeology at Xenia Theological Seminary.

http://www.xmission.com/~fidelis/volume1/chapter17/kyle.php
(See Harmony With Scripture)

Another interesting article on the Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch and the documentary hypothesis is at
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/13

There is no concrete evidence that the Q document ever existed or that Wellhausen's hypothesis is correct. Yet, some people claim that Jesus never lived even though there are about 5,400 manuscripts, papyri and fragments of the New Testament and it has better support than other ancient documents.

One of the arguments against the historicity of the flood is that it was taken from the Sumerian account by way of the Babylonians. The Babylonian account is similar to that in Genesis because the kings are recorded as having lived to very long lives. If the Hebrews took the flood story from the Babylonians they would have had to insert several chapters into Genesis without objection from any scribe or Rabbi and those who read from the Torah on the Sabbath would have been fully aware of the addition. But, there’s no record of either until the school of nineteenth century “higher criticism.” Also, they would have kept a record of the kings who reigned in Edom (1 Chro. 1:43-54, Gen. 36:41-43) and a record of the descendants of Esau (Gen 36:1-29) but not kept a record of their own ancestors and those who descended from them. Yet the table of Nations is clearly spelled out in Genesis 11 and Josephus describes the migration and descendants of Noah’s sons in Antiquities of the Jews, 1:6:1
http://www.studylight.org/his/bc/wfj/antiquities/view.cgi?book=1&chapter=6.

There is a conflict between the masoretic text and the Septuagint in Genesis 11:13. In the Hebrew text Gen 11:12-13 says after he became the father of Shelah, Arphaxad lived 403 years and had other sons and daughters. In the Septuagint it says when Arphaxad had lived 35 years, he became the father of Cainan. 13 And after he became the father of Cainan, Arphaxad lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters, and then he died. When Cainan had lived 130 years, he became the father of Shelah. And after he became the father of Shelah, Cainan lived 330 years and had other sons and daughters. (From biblegateway.com, footnote for Gen. 11:13)

In the Hebrew text Genesis 10:24 also leaves out Cainan but he is included in the Septuagint and in the genealogy of Jesus as recorded by Luke (Luke 3:36). The Septuagint was translated in the third century B.C. and it is more likely that a deletion like this would have occurred over a period of more than 2,200 years than less than 300 years if it did occur before the Jews left Babylon.

If the Hebrews took the flood story from the Babylonians it raises some other questions. Numbers 13:33 says “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them" (NIV). Genesis 6:4 says “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown” (NIV).

If the Israelites added the flood story and were able to edit it as they pleased it makes no sense to mention the Nephilim in Genesis 6 and allow it to be understood that a race of people somehow survived the flood. The term Nephilim probably refers to giant people and the term applied to people who lived both before and after the flood.

Psalms was written about 1,000 B.C., almost five hundred years before the Israelites returned from Babylon. Psalm 104:5-9 says “He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. But at your rebuke the waters fled, at the sound of your thunder they took to flight; they flowed over the mountains, they went down into the valleys, to the place you assigned for them. You set a boundary they cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth (NIV).

If the Israelites added the flood story to Genesis why did they state that the water covered all the high mountains or hills when Psalm 104:9 says never again will the water cover the earth?

quote:
Let's do some math. Let's see, Book of Jubilees places the flood at 2309 BC, which is between 2333 and 2279 BC, which places Sargon underwater. Ussher places the flood at 2349 BC, which is 16 years from Sargon's rule which started in 2333 BC according to your own source.

I haven’t read Usshers Annals of the World. It was written in the mid seventeenth century, there have been many archeological discoveries since that time and it’s possible that Ussher was wrong. The book of Jubilees was written in the late second century B.C. and it is also possible that the date they give for the flood is wrong. The poster made no attempt to prove that any of his dates were accurate but he used them because they fit the conclusion he wants. Trying to fix a chronology for ancient cultures is not an easy task and historians often disagree. This is true of Egyptian Chronology and the Chronology of the ancient Near East.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_chronology

It says this about Ussher’s chronology on wikipedia:

“Ussher's specific choice of starting year may have been influenced by the then-widely-held belief that the Earth's potential duration was 6,000 years (4,000 before the birth of Christ and 2,000 after), corresponding to the six days of Creation, on the grounds that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Peter 3:8); This view had been almost completely abandoned by 1997, six thousand years after 4004 BC.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology

Only at first glace does 2 Peter 3:8 support the idea that from the time of creation to Jesus’ birth is exactly four thousand years and one must consider context, that is, read the next verse as well. Also, other verses should be considered such as Acts 1:6-7. If we knew the exact date of creation and could infer from 2 Peter 3:8 that Jesus would return six thousand years later we could know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

Using Sargon to try and disprove the flood is not good argumentation. Sargon was a Sumerian king and the Sumerians recorded the flood in cuneiform tablets. The Sumerians recorded four kings in the first Dynasty of Kish as living more than one thousand years and several others as living three hundred years or more. In the First Dynasty of Uruk one king lived to be 420 and another lived 1,200 years.
Besides that, the Egyptian chronology, which has been revised more than twenty times and is often justly criticized, is probably the standard used by historians to arrive at the dates for which the Sumerian kings lived.

quote:
Without this exact date, not only is further discussion of this exact point futile....

yet you are either ignorant of the problem with Egyptian chronology or choose to ignore it. No offense. You can choose. =)

Edited by Repzion, : No reason given.

Edited by Repzion, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by anglagard, posted 09-07-2007 9:06 PM anglagard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Coragyps, posted 09-08-2007 7:42 PM Repzion has not yet responded
 Message 200 by anglagard, posted 09-08-2007 10:39 PM Repzion has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5393
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 199 of 372 (420634)
09-08-2007 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Repzion
09-08-2007 5:31 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
The Sumerians recorded four kings in the first Dynasty of Kish as living more than one thousand years and several others as living three hundred years or more.

The Hebrews recorded a passel o' folk living 930 years, 969 years, and the like. What's your point here? Do you think that the accepted dates for Sargon somehow depend on the Sumerian's own mythical chronology?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Repzion, posted 09-08-2007 5:31 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 200 of 372 (420657)
09-08-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Repzion
09-08-2007 5:31 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
You are the one arguing that Noah's flood happened. Can't you and your supporters even come up with a simple date since it is supposedly based on the inerrant and literal interpretation of the Bible? If you have trouble providing an answer, ask the self-proclaimed infallible scholars at AIG, ICR and all the other people who say they know more about Geology and Biology than the 99.85% of those actually working in those fields in the USA that think any global flood is a myth.

So when did it happen? You can even provide a 95% confidence interval in your error brackets like real scientists do (hey that's less demanding than 99.85%).

Answer with a number first please.

Edited by anglagard, : clarity


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Repzion, posted 09-08-2007 5:31 PM Repzion has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-10-2007 1:02 PM anglagard has not yet responded
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM anglagard has responded

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 201 of 372 (420936)
09-10-2007 11:14 AM


Where is the water?
I haven't seen the issue of water addressed in a convincing manner yet. Those who adhere to the Global Flood myth, please address this if you would. I don't even care to address the question of where it came from but when the flood waters receded, where did they go? The latest figures I have heard that would be required to inundate the entire world and submerge the continents is about 5 times the current global supplies including icecaps, glaciers, subterranean, oceans, lakes, and atmospheric water vapor.

I think this is a valid question and not off topic since the OP is not really a very coherently stated and narrow subject. I don't think the idea of a global flood is possible without addressing this one glaring problem.


"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.


Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by bluegenes, posted 09-11-2007 11:25 PM EighteenDelta has responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 202 of 372 (420964)
09-10-2007 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by anglagard
09-08-2007 10:39 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
This may be useful:

Biblical Chronology.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by anglagard, posted 09-08-2007 10:39 PM anglagard has not yet responded

Repzion
Member (Idle past 3590 days)
Posts: 22
From: Renton,Wa
Joined: 12-04-2006


Message 203 of 372 (421049)
09-10-2007 9:29 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by anglagard
09-08-2007 10:39 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
Anglagard I cannot give you a exact date of when this flood happended. You requires dates, but if bible scholars and historians can't give an exact date this does not disprove this so called " mythical flood." The Bible stops giving the ages of the Father's when they had children after Jacob and we don't know how long it was between creation and the fall of man. All I really can supply you with is this quote from a historian and link.

"Some experiments have even suggested that many periods of time could have been characterized by the growth of one extra ring every one to four years, with evidence in controlled laboratory situations showing extra ring growth tied to short drought periods."
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381

As for the water issue, I'll try responding soon.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by anglagard, posted 09-08-2007 10:39 PM anglagard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by RAZD, posted 09-10-2007 10:33 PM Repzion has not yet responded
 Message 205 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-11-2007 9:34 PM Repzion has not yet responded
 Message 206 by anglagard, posted 09-11-2007 10:06 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19889
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 204 of 372 (421065)
09-10-2007 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Repzion
09-10-2007 9:29 PM


tree rings
"Some experiments have even suggested that many periods of time could have been characterized by the growth of one extra ring every one to four years, with evidence in controlled laboratory situations showing extra ring growth tied to short drought periods."
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381

So now show that periods of drought like what were simulated in the lab actually occurred at the tree locations. That is called completing the thought process.

Note that the carbon-14 data makes this extra tree ring scenario impossible:

http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html

quote:
There presently exist several long dendrochronologies, each comprised of about 10,000 individual growth-rings. These are examined for the possibility of multiple ring growth per year in their earliest portions due to unusual climatic conditions following the Flood. It is found that the tree-ring/radiocarbon data are contrary to the suggestion of multiple ring growth. Since it seems that the Flood must have occurred before the oldest rings of these series grew, the implication is that the Flood must have occurred more than 10,000 years ago.

That is a creationist site article. Now we don't need to use the carbon-14 age calculations, as we can use the actual amounts of carbon-14 in the samples: two samples with different carbon-14 levels cannot be the same age. This gets around any qualms you may have about the accuracy of carbon-14 dating.

Enjoy.


Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM Repzion has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 205 of 372 (421293)
09-11-2007 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Repzion
09-10-2007 9:29 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
The Bible stops giving the ages of the Father's when they had children after Jacob ...

This is true, but we don't need to know this to find out the date of the Flood.

Genesis 47 relates the settlement of the Israelites in Egypt to the age of Jacob:

"The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.

And Joseph brought in Jacob his father, and set him before Pharaoh: and Jacob blessed Pharaoh.

And Pharaoh said unto Jacob, How old art thou?

And Jacob said unto Pharaoh, The days of the years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty years: few and evil have the days of the years of my life been, and have not attained unto the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their pilgrimage."

Exodus 12 gives us the time between the settlement and the exodus:

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.

And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt."

1 Kings 6 gives us the interval between the Exodus and the beginning of the work on Solomon's Temple, which it fixes in the fourth year of Solomon's reign:

"And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD."

And from there on we can use the king lists in 1 & 2 Kings until we get up to a well-attested historical event of which we know the date.

... and we don't know how long it was between creation and the fall of man

Again, this is true, but we don't need to know this to find out the date of the Flood.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM Repzion has not yet responded

anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 206 of 372 (421298)
09-11-2007 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Repzion
09-10-2007 9:29 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
Repzion writes:

Anglagard I cannot give you a exact date of when this flood happended.

Obviously you disagree with Ussher who dates the flood at 2348 BC and AIG which says 2304 BC. See: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v4/i1/noahs_flood.asp

If you don't know despite Ussher and AIG, the word of which many YECs take as gospel, then try a range of dates. Like sometime between 4,550,000,000 BC and yesterday.

Also, if you don't trust AIG, then in the future, don't ask anyone else to either.

I notice the other main organization of YECism, ICR, refuses to provide a date for any global flood, preferring to avoid taking any position involving assertions of fact and instead limiting its 'intellectual' content to unsupported criticism of anyone who does make a testable and/or verifiable statement or prediction.

IMO if you don't have a clue as to when it happened, it is just more evidence it never happened at all. Think how an "I don't have the slightest idea when, but I know it happened" statement would go over in a court of law.

Think about how well it has gone over in a court of law lately, like in Arkansas or Dover.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 650 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 207 of 372 (421307)
09-11-2007 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by EighteenDelta
09-10-2007 11:14 AM


Where the water came from and went.
EighteenDelta writes:

I don't even care to address the question of where it came from but when the flood waters receded, where did they go?

The only theory that matches the evidence is that the waters came from one person's imagination, and went into the imaginations of hundreds of millions of others, where it remains, drowning out reason, and swamping intelligent thought.

This also explains, in passing, why young earth creationists behave as if they have water on the brain, a condition that can lead to serious mental disabilities, including the constant repetition of the phrase "lots of water did it" when explaining just about every geological phenomenon on earth, not to mention all the fossils.

Message content "hidden". Use "peek" if you want to see it.

Bluegenes given 6 hour suspension. - Adminnemooseus

Note by 2nd edit: suspension reduced to 2 hours.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Hid content, added message.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-10-2007 11:14 AM EighteenDelta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-13-2007 12:13 PM bluegenes has responded

EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 208 of 372 (421619)
09-13-2007 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by bluegenes
09-11-2007 11:25 PM


Re: Where the water came from and went.
If this simple question cannot be answered then I guess the simplest answer would have to be 'no' there was never a worldwide flood. Was the Earth flat in the time of Noah, because then I guess the simplest answer would be that the ancients realized it could have just washed over the edges of the world and into the void.

While I am sorry for your suspension, at least thank you for acknowledging my question which seems to have been totally ignored by the target audience. I imagine it will remain ignored since it is not rationally explainable anyways.

Is this a topic suited to it's own thread or part of another thread admins?


"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould
This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by bluegenes, posted 09-11-2007 11:25 PM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by RAZD, posted 09-13-2007 12:39 PM EighteenDelta has responded
 Message 210 by bluegenes, posted 09-13-2007 12:51 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

RAZD
Member
Posts: 19889
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 209 of 372 (421627)
09-13-2007 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by EighteenDelta
09-13-2007 12:13 PM


Re: Where the water came from and went.
I've suggested this "solution" on other threads:

Given that this god is capable of making water divide to make a path across the red sea (if you take the bible as fact), then he is capable of making gravity operate in a direction other than usual.

Apply this to the whole world (ie - let gravity be perpendicular to the surface at every point, topologically it becomes a perfect sphere).

To end the flood restore gravity.

Enjoy.


Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-13-2007 12:13 PM EighteenDelta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-13-2007 1:01 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 221 by The Matt, posted 09-13-2007 6:13 PM RAZD has responded

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 650 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 210 of 372 (421630)
09-13-2007 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by EighteenDelta
09-13-2007 12:13 PM


Re: Where the water came from and went.
While I am sorry for your suspension, at least thank you for acknowledging my question which seems to have been totally ignored by the target audience. I imagine it will remain ignored since it is not rationally explainable anyways.

But it is rationally explainable, and I gave the only possible rational explanation in my post.

Thanks for the sympathy, but the suspension didn't matter. You probably know that you can see the message by using the "peek" button. It wasn't entirely frivolous, and in fact it's the strongest theory for the origin and dispersal of the flood waters that you'll ever see, because it fits the evidence perfectly. It's indisputably true, and I was only guilty of stating the obvious, which can be boring, I suppose.

I'll probably get another suspension, now, for talking about water, of all things, on a thread entitled "Was there a worldwide flood?";)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-13-2007 12:13 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Admin, posted 09-14-2007 7:38 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
25NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019