Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for a recent flood
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 181 of 404 (642010)
11-24-2011 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Coyote
11-24-2011 9:02 PM


Re: Doubting the flood
You should embark on a 10 volume telehone sized set of books listing the factors in the Hebrew bible which are not myth. This will give a percentage by ratio of the stats which cannot be questioned and were introduced to humanity for the first time as no other writings can or do. Then question if I am twisting things when listing actual verses and aligning them with independent historical and logical factors. I say, all writings and scriptures are not equal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 9:02 PM Coyote has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 182 of 404 (642011)
11-24-2011 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 9:10 PM


Re: Not just off topic bullshit but irrelevant bullshit as well
More irrelevant nonsense from you.
Where is the evidence of the local flood you now claim?
What specific physical geological evidence do you have?
What are the sites where this evidence can be found?
Do you plan on presenting any evidence?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 9:10 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 183 of 404 (642012)
11-24-2011 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 9:13 PM


Re: Doubting the flood
You agree it is a factual flood by default by questioning its dating as well.
Nonsense.
I spent many hours as an undergraduate engaging in literary criticism, while getting a degree in English.
That didn't make any of the fiction or poems "factual" or any of the events they described necessarily real.
You need to start learning the difference between myths, wishes, tribal tales, and reality.
What I have been trying to do is get creationists to pin down a date for the flood so scientific evidence can be brought to bear on the question of whether it occurred in any particular area or globally; or at all.
So far you have retreated from the claim of a massive "global" flood with waters higher than Mt. Everest, and are down to a small local or maybe even regional flood.
This actually fits with some post-glacial events in the Black Sea area that have been discovered by archaeologists. The details are still being worked out, and more information is needed, but at least we have something that could be the "genesis" of the flood myth.
That's a good start, eh?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 9:13 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 PM Coyote has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 184 of 404 (642013)
11-24-2011 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Butterflytyrant
11-24-2011 9:16 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Its still the first recording of that mount in correct location; Armenia yet never existed or made such a recording in line with Genesis. The fundamental things apply; you ignore the fundamental and give no credit where it is due.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 9:16 PM Butterflytyrant has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 9:36 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4421 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 185 of 404 (642014)
11-24-2011 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 9:24 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Its still the first recording of that mount in correct location; Armenia yet never existed or made such a recording in line with Genesis. The fundamental things apply; you ignore the fundamental and give no credit where it is due.
This has been explained to you in great detail.
It is the first recording of this name because they RENAMED it Mount Ararat.
Great. I will send the Jews a gold star for renaming a mountain.
Also, no geographical location is given in the Old Testament. How can you claim the correct location is given when no location is given?
You still have not provided the two pieces of information that you claim to posses and have been asked for repeatedly.
1. The time period this flood occured in. The start date and the date the floodwaters receded.
2. The boundaries of the flooded region.
This is information you have said you have. Provide it.
Stop deflecting and wasting everyones time.
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
2011 leading candidate for the EvC Forum Don Quixote award

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 9:24 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Wollysaurus, posted 11-24-2011 10:08 PM Butterflytyrant has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 186 of 404 (642016)
11-24-2011 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Coyote
11-24-2011 9:23 PM


Re: Doubting the flood
There is no credence in the call to prove a flood occured here. The issue gained momentum only because of its mis-reading of a global flood. Anti-creationists have a field day here, even making more ubsurd extensions of it. The Hebrew bible is the most authentic and reliable ancient writings of humanity's early history - this is unchanged.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 9:23 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 10:23 PM IamJoseph has replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4491 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


(2)
Message 187 of 404 (642017)
11-24-2011 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Butterflytyrant
11-24-2011 9:36 PM


Joseph...
For the sake of simplicity, could you address the following:
1. To what time period do you assign the flood described in Genesis?
2. Please define the boundaries of this flood, based upon whatever evidence you have. For example: Global or Regional. If regional, where and to what extent?
3. What physical evidence do you have for this flood, outside the reference in written texts?
I don't necessarily have a problem with a regional, devastating flood giving rise to Babylonian and Hebraic flood myths (possibly including the mythology of even European peoples), but what evidence do you have -- again, outside of the fact that Genesis describes a flood -- showing that the event you accept actually happened?
I think the OP had the traditional "global" flood of Noah in mind, but I'd be interested in anything specific you have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 9:36 PM Butterflytyrant has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 10:16 PM Wollysaurus has not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4421 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 188 of 404 (642018)
11-24-2011 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by Wollysaurus
11-24-2011 10:08 PM


Re: Joseph...
Is this a request for information from me or IMJ?

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
2011 leading candidate for the EvC Forum Don Quixote award

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Wollysaurus, posted 11-24-2011 10:08 PM Wollysaurus has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 189 of 404 (642019)
11-24-2011 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 10:05 PM


Re: Doubting the flood
There is no credence in the call to prove a flood occured here. The issue gained momentum only because of its mis-reading of a global flood.
You creationists really have to get your stories straight. It does none of you any good, nor does it enhance your credibility, to come up with dozens or hundreds of different interpretations of the bible, all of which are the one true interpretation.
And none of which are confirmed by empirical evidence.
Anti-creationists have a field day here, even making more ubsurd extensions of it.
By "anti-creationists" do you mean scientists, and others who rely on empirical and testable evidence instead of ancient tribal myths?
The Hebrew bible is the most authentic and reliable ancient writings of humanity's early history - this is unchanged.
Off topic. Reserve your catechism for another thread maybe?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by IamJoseph, posted 11-25-2011 12:45 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Portillo
Member (Idle past 4160 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 190 of 404 (642022)
11-24-2011 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Coyote
11-24-2011 10:05 AM


Re: Lets take the initiative
quote:
Why do you think the age estimates range from several thousand years ago to the Cambrian (500+ million years ago) and everywhere in between? It's a moving goalpost precisely so it can't be disproved!
Have you ever considered that those that believe in a flood about 4000 years ago are young earth creationists and those that believe in millions of years are old earth? Creationist organisations like Answers in Genesis believe in a recent flood and never "move the goalposts".
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.

And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 11:07 PM Portillo has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(5)
Message 191 of 404 (642023)
11-24-2011 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Portillo
11-24-2011 10:55 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Have you ever considered that those that believe in a flood about 4000 years ago are young earth creationists and those that believe in millions of years are old earth? Creationists organisations like Answers in Genesis believe in a recent flood and never "move the goalposts".
Yes, I am aware of that.
But that's not something to be proud of. There are an estimated 4,000 different world religions, with an estimated 40,000 different versions of Christianity alone.
Those who are proposing a global flood should first work out their disagreements among themselves and then try to convince others of the accuracy of their claims. Having so many different claims really ruins any credibility creationists in toto may aspire to.
No sooner does one creationist group proclaim the absolute TRVTH of one date and characteristic for the flood that another group decries that as heresy and proclaims their version of the TRVTH. Of course, dozens or hundreds of other groups all have their own versions.
This is what I mean by moving the goalposts; creationists as a whole just can't agree on much of anything, let alone the date and nature of the global/regional/local/mythical flood.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Portillo, posted 11-24-2011 10:55 PM Portillo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 11:23 PM Coyote has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 192 of 404 (642026)
11-24-2011 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by Coyote
11-24-2011 11:07 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
creationists as a whole just can't agree on much of anything, let alone the date and nature of the global/regional/local/mythical flood.
I think the above sentiment is absurd. For one thing, the term creationist does not refer to all people who believe that God created the universe. The term specifically refers to a specific type of Genesis literalist who believes that the entire universe was created during one seven day week, about 6000 years ago.
IMO, that particular group of people are deluded, and this particular Christian does not accept even the smallest responsibility for any nonsense they spout. Even if you expand the term creationist to include YEC literalists, I don't feel any responsibility to defend their take on Genesis either. They are wrong.
Two different people, each of whom steadfastly maintains a constant position should not be accused of shifting the goal posts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 11:07 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 11:43 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 193 of 404 (642029)
11-24-2011 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by NoNukes
11-24-2011 11:23 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Your post shows that what I claimed is pretty accurate.
But that's fine, let creationists all espouse different beliefs; let each one espouse a different belief.
But until creationists can come up with some kind of evidence to evaluate these competing claims, why should scientists and others who rely on evidence not just summarily reject them all?
Really, discussing things with creationists is a case of moving goalposts. No sooner does one claim the flood was ca. 4,350 years ago but another interjects that the K-T boundary represents the flood, and then another chimes in with the Cambrian explosion. It doesn't matter that any particular creationist or group sticks to their own TRVTH. In the aggregate, they can't agree on much of anything.
Why should those who rely on evidence pay any attention to any of them?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 11:23 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 11:53 PM Coyote has replied
 Message 196 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-25-2011 12:41 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 404 (642031)
11-24-2011 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Coyote
11-24-2011 11:43 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
But until creationists can come up with some kind of evidence to evaluate these competing claims, why should scientists and others who rely on evidence not just summarily reject them all?
I didn't say that scientist shouldn't summarily reject them.
Really, discussing things with creationists is a case of moving goalposts. No sooner does one claim the flood was ca. 4,350 years ago but another interjects that the K-T boundary represents the flood, and then another chimes in with the Cambrian explosion. It doesn't matter that any particular creationist or group sticks to their own TRVTH. In the aggregate, they can't agree on much of anything.
Yeah, you earthmen are an inconsistent bunch. You can't seem to agree on whether there is heaven above you or just sky. Why should we Frizbatans believe anything you say?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 11:43 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by Coyote, posted 11-25-2011 12:04 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 195 of 404 (642034)
11-25-2011 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by NoNukes
11-24-2011 11:53 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Yeah, you earthmen are an inconsistent bunch. You can't seem to agree on whether there is heaven above you or just sky. Why should we Frizbatans believe anything you say?
Now that's a good point!
Humans certainly have a lot of learning to do, and perhaps a lot of unlearning as well.
"To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods."
Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 11:53 PM NoNukes has seen this message but 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