|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence of the flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: Faith, we are not overlooking the fact that you are lying, but we don't consider it a reason to believe you.
quote: Except when they aren't. And we find evidence of long periods of time between deposition, of massive erosion, of terrain features.
quote: It is indeed "BO-gus". It is also your invention. If you really had "many reasons" why evolution over millions of years is ridiculous, then why on earth would you make up a silly strawman ?
quote: Even the abundance of fossils works against you there are TOO many. But the really obvious evidence is the order of the fossil record. There is no way that rapid deposition in water would produce that. As you know. So this is just another of your failed attempts to destroy the truth. And they will go on failing so long as you rely on ignoring the evidence against you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
In other words just ignore the evidence that proves you wrong and believe your lies instead.
And why exactly should we do that ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Except that your "model" doesn't explain the sorting. That is why you keep inventing excuses to ignore it. So jar was telling the truth and you are dishonestly trying to cover up that fact.
quote: It's not exactly good evidence, in fact it is pretty much worthless as evidence for God. Your evaluation is based on a doctrine which assumes that the Bible is absolutely true ignoring even the internal evidence to the contrary. When you start with a question-begging and false assumption you can't hope to get a reasonable answer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: Even if that were true it only proves me right. You do not have an explanation for the ordering. jar told the truth and you called it an "utter lie" - even though you know it to be true.
quote: If you want to call your God incompetent that's your problem. The fact remains that the Bible is pretty much worthless as evidence of God - and anyone who intended it to be otherwise failed dismally.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: And that is a big part of the problem. Miracle stories are a lot more common than actual miracles, and when the stories come from biased and superstitious people, often far removed from the actual events - let alone when the story is essentially fiction anyway - you haven't got anything like good enough evidence to accept a miracle. I don't want to go off-topic by pushing it too much - but if you really think you have a good case feel free to start a topic on any example you like. Just remember that your idea of a good case often isn't. For instance your guess about a map you can't even read properly is hardly solid evidence, no matter how strongly you believe it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Well what can we expect of someone who calls a statement they know to be true an "utter lie" ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Provided the criteria for "reasonable" is "Faith likes it". From a more rational perspective the Flood utterly fails to account for the strata and the fossils. That is why science has rejected Flood geology - it just doesn't work as an explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The depth is so obviously much better explained by slow accumulation over long periods of time that it isn't even funny. The extent seems to be better explained by features like deserts (the Sahara being a modern example) or epeiric seas (not currently present but a good fit for the evidence - unlike the Flood)
quote: Because obviously you only get sandstorms during a Flood. (Yes, some fossils seem to have been buried by sandstorms). Again, the Flood fails to explain the abundance (you have to assume a ridiculous abundance of - for instance - crinoids) or other features of the fossil like the pervasive order.
quote: The fact that it obviously better explains the evidence you put forward for the Flood is a rather convincing reason.
quote: That something can happen in short periods of time does not mean that it always happens in short periods of time. And there are two major points that you are ignoring. First you have no good idea of the scale of changes involved in the fossil record, second you have failed for the time needed to spread out and become abundant. Your examples of fast microevolution (aside from other doubts) deal with small island populations that are still small island populations. Not something likely to show up in the fossil record.
quote: You mean like the idiotic nonsense you made up in Message 154? That's "BO-gus" Hardly a reason to believe you - just more evidence that you don't have a real case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: That's an opinion. But it should be obviously true that long term gradual accumulation can eventually overwhelm any any single event.
quote: By which you mean that it obviously CAN explain it and the Flood obviously can't. Different sediment from different sources because of different conditions at different times works. "The Flood sorted it" doesn't work.
quote: Misleading. Where the same strata are found on different continents it's because they were together when the strata were deposited.
quote: Nobody says that limestone is deposited in deserts. That's just silly, whether it's ignorance or dishonesty.
quote: If it's so easy go ahead and do it. I'll stick with the explanations that fit the evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: And that claim is false as we have shown. The fact that you have to keep ignoring or trying to explain away so much of the evidence is proof that you are on the wrong track.
quote: Faith, you may be desperate enough to believe obvious falsehoods - after all you'd have to admit that you were wrong about the Flood. But that is nothing to the rest of us. We don't have to ignore evidence that proves you wrong. We don't have to invent or believe daft distortions of the conventional view. The evidence is conclusive. The strata were deposited over long periods of time. The fossils represent a long history of life. Neither were created by a single event lasting only a year. The idea is simply ridiculous. And your efforts do nothing to change that. By repeating false claims again and again, all you show is your refusal to accept the truth. And we have no reason to support you in that refusal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Really Faith. You know perfectly well that there is a huge amount of evidence against the Flood, even though you try to deny it. You can't be bothered to even understand the mainstream view before attempting to refute it with silly misrepresentations.
You aren't telling the truth at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: It still would not imply that science was at all wrong about the Flood, or the age of the Earth or evolution. You might be able to deal with some arguments against your belief by invoking convenient miracles but the evidence would still say that the Flood never happened, that the Earth is very old, that the fossil record shows how life on Earth has changed over time. So really your point is just an attempt to discredit science by appealing to prejudice. Which might fool uninformed Christians but was never going to work here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: If you want to reduce the bit about Noah taking animals two of every animal that needed saving on to the Ark to a few desperate singletons taking refuge, then I guess riverrat has evidence of that. But if he does that he's already removed the big implausibility from that part of the story anyway. Likewise with the implicit reduction of the Flood to a merely regional event. As for your claims, the strata and the fossil record could not have been produced by your Flood and show no sign of anything that might be more plausibly be evidence of a global Flood.
quote: In the same way that bullet wounds are evidence of death by natural causes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: It's unfortunate that people get stuck in ignorance and close their minds. But trying hard to suppress the fact that they are wrong hardly seems a good strategy for dealing with the problem.
quote: Equating an honest concern for the truth with "weak-mindedness" is just one of the ways you show us that you aren't really Christian.
quote: What a silly falsehood. You haven't managed to dent the evidence yet, nor have the major YEC organisations - and they are well ahead of you.
quote: But you aren't sticking with the Bible. You are even going against it in some ways. I guess it does take guts to call yourself a Christian while setting men up above God, twisting and misrepresenting the Bible to prop up your dogma. But it isn't something I can respect.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: No. Even when you aren't lying you are saying things that are untrue, that you could find to be untrue if you were willing to look at it honestly and fairly.
quote: And they are wrong about the Bible. It's not hard to find that out. But you resort to your usual tactics of distortion and smears to suppress that fact.
quote: You mean that I should ignore some truths you don't like? Why should I do that ? Wouldn't it be better for you to admit that you haven't bothered to properly understand conventional geology rather than dismissing it as nonsense ?
quote: And surely you know that I didn't say that they didn't believe it. What I did say is that they are wrong to believe it and more wrong to fight against the truth to cling to those beliefs.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024