|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence of the flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: I think you need to work more on the delivery. As a joke that fell completely flat. It's not a joke. Are you denying what you seen with your own eyes in the video? It's pretty obvious to me the flood caused that scenario. Do you have an alternate explanation? For clarity, "a flood" and "the flood" are 2 different things.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: Then you agree that jar was basically right. Nit-picking about the difference between a virtual certainty and an absolute certainty seems a bit of a waste of time. No, jar said it as an absolute. Funny how the Christians get "nit picked" but jar and atheists don't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
percy writes: Congratulations on your strong faith, but let's go over the evidence again. Doesn't understand science that well.Makes confusing contradictory statements. Denigrates scientists. Believes there was a global flood. Takes all my statements out of context and makes a fictional argument. I stand behind everything I said. If you don't get it, you are free to read it again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Percy writes: I read your nonsense several times already. Clearly it's not in your best interests to be clear about what you're saying, so you try to be as confusing and ambiguous as possible. Will you be changing your mind again tonight about whether there was a global flood? Me thinks you are confusing "a flood" with "the flood" and now "global flood". But nice try on dodging the topic. Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: In other words, jar was simply speaking s little loosely Then there is that. Only people that believe there was no flood are allowed to speak losely. Those that have been branded to believe in a flood cannot. I hope you can see your bigotry. Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Pollux writes: I have this picture in my head of the Ark covered with insects, birds, and pterosaurs escaping the water. The carnivores would have food for some time, first feasting on the herbivore ones then the bigger eating the smaller until only the biggest and strongest were left, and maybe could have seen out the whole Flood! Except that we have direct evidence that animals do not behave normally in crisis. Thanks for the input.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
So Pollux, Faith, and RAZD are the only ones to reply directly to my point in the OP. What I did by posting this was to show that there is evidence that part of the story on THE GLOBAL FLOOD, is true. If a flood had started, animals have been observed to seek shelter with humans. This is evidence that part of the story could be true. So essentially we have evidence.
The rest of you went on and on how we have no evidence and went off you your usual bigoted attacks on people of faith. Just admit it, this is evidence in support of the story. Doesn't mean it happened. So unless you can show how animals evolved into this behavior, (asked once already) you can no longer say there is zero evidence. Keep in mind I am going against my own personal belief that there is no evidence (of a flood) by posting this. If there was a flood, and God exists, He chose to hide the evidence from us. That is my belief. Or we aren't smart enough to figure it out yet. Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Coyote writes: You might also have claimed that the existence of water in Houston was evidence for a global flood during historic times, as your bird evidence is just about as weak. Weak is more than zero. The water accumulation IS evidence of a global flood, but I am not going to go into that right now. It goes back to one of my posts years ago. Just 52" of rain in 5 days made the water 20' deep. Imagine what 40 days and nights would have done, globally.
OK, there was water in Houston, and one bird looked for high ground. Big deal. Neither is evidence for a global flood no matter how you spin it. Because you say so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
JonF writes: You have evidence that one animal sought shelter and no evidence that it chose that shelter because of humans. That's all. Your wild extrapolation to all animals is unjustified. No, we have multiple evidence that animals do this often. Why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: I hope that you can see that you are a whining liar who is upset because he gets the criticisms he earned. Well that didn't take long, name calling. (liberal debate tactic #2, which means you lose) Go fuck yourself. Should I get you a puppy and a safe space now?
Everyone is allowed to speak as loosely as jar did, at least in ordinary speech. You will rarely find anyone criticised for doing so, no matter what hey believe. You need to look no further than this thread, and your very own comments to prove that one wrong. NEXT please. If you can't debate the topic, step away from your keyboard snowflake.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: Untrue, I also did. Message 42 I missed that one. So Paulk too.
As I pointed out it is NOT part of the story. It does not even seem to be true in general - the vast majority of urban wildlife did not seek shelter. And even if it was part of the story it would be as true if there were only a severe local flood. Not to mention that fictions can and do include known facts, so even if it was a fact (it isn't) and even if it was in the story (it isn't) it still wouldn't be the evidence you claim. So, essentially you have no evidence here of a global Flood. Nope sorry, you can't explain away actual evidence. As in the flood not all the animals went to the ark. Wouldn't it just be weird if the hawk left that guy as soon as all the water receded? My point stands, there is evidence to that part of the story, be it true or false. You can't say the flood never happened because animals seek shelter with humans in disasters, that makes zero sense.
Since I have given four good reasons why it is not evidence of a global flood this hardly applies. It is evidence of that part of the story, not a global flood. Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given. Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
RAZD writes: Except we don't have mating pairs of animals ... Enjoy Good point. Flood wasn't big enough? Still no one has provided any kind of explanation as to why, or how animals have evolved in to this behavior.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Cool. His face says, ok flood is over, let me out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
jar writes: Yup. Had a mating pair of 'roos shown up in Houston with a pair of koalas in their pouches with a whole line of Lions and Tigers and Bears and Ohmys there might have been a news story worth of Faux News. But it wasn't a global flood.
The Biblical Flood is simply a silly sophomoric joke at the very best attempted by an inept, evil, dishonest and untrustworthy God who was trying to get a gig in stand up comedy. Are you an
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 445 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Percy, if you can't debate the topic, please fuck off.
The only one who has made a hash of things is you not being able to debate the topic. (the topic is Harvey the hawk and his behavior, and whether or not to consider this evidence of part of the story of the global flood). You are too interested in assaulting character. Typical, and is why I left this shit hole. It is also why my faith was increased being here. Your way of communicating with people is not how I want to be. If being an atheist and a scientist means being mean, then I am out. You do nothing to win me over. You pretend to care about people knowing the truth, but you don't. It's just the same old sad tired story in this forum. Liberal debate tactics. Keep arguing and talking until something doesn't jive and then say "there, see I told you". But by then you are so far off topic, it is invalid and has nothing to do with it. I suggested there was evidence of a flood. I did not suggest the flood actually happened. Am I not allowed to speak loosely like everyone else? Jar's statement is just factually incorrect, not in that there was or there was not a flood, but in his assertion. Jar's statement was technically incorrect if you are a scientist. You can say there is no evidence of a flood, but you cannot say there was no flood. You close the door, and are no longer open minded at that point. Since I just provided *weak evidence of part of the story of the flood, I think we shouldn't even be saying there is NO evidence of a flood. There IS evidence. We just choose to ignore it.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024