|
Author
|
Topic: Did the Flood really happen?
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
You do have show where you stand in a discussion. Otherwise, what am I going to talk to you? I don't have to convince you Noah's Flood did happen. Ultimately it is a faith (which is science+)problem.
This thread is for the scientific discussion of whether Noah’s Flood occurred as described in the Bible. If you cannot make a scientific case you may as well leave the thread. (And if you can, you really don’t need Tangle to explain his position)
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Time scales
quote:
Because the earth has way way more granitic rock than ANY planets/satellites have in the solar system. (I guess you are confused again. Sorry, the story is too long. What I said is a condensed conclusion)
Even if it is true (and granites are known elsewhere), that is not valid argument. That there is more on Earth than elsewhere does not mean that there is enough on Earth. So it seems that you are the one who is confused. And I note that you offer no evidence at all for your supposed alternative mechanism, so I guess that is another fantasy.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
It is either correct or not correct. It is not a right age, then why would the 6000 years age of the earth be right? Why must the global flood be a recent geological event?
None of the others ARE literally true.
quote:
If it a right age, then the current biological knowledge is wrong. If that is true, then what is the point to insist Noah has to be one lived in the time frame of human history as we know it?
Well, nobody is insisting on the time frame of written history, but obviously the point of insisting that Noah must have lived at a time when there were humans and animals and trees is because the story demands it.
quote:
Now you see the reason of considering the Noah's age together with the timing of global flood.
Yes, it’s just a pretext for some bizarre fantasy you’ve made up. That isn’t a valid reason.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
Tell me which planet/satellite in the solar system has granite on it.
Science Direct On the Moon for one.
On Moon, 4.4—3.9 Ga granite clasts display dry mineral assemblages. They correspond to at least 8 discrete intrusive events. Large K/Ca enrichment and low REE abundances in granite relative to KREEP are consistent with silicate liquid immiscibility, a process observed in melt inclusions within olivine of lunar basalts and in lunar meteorites. Steep-sided domes identified by remote sensing can represent intrusive or extrusive felsic formations. quote:
I will surrender to you if you can find one.
I doubt it.
quote:
Do you even know how much water stored in 1 kg of granite? In fact, granite is one of the largest water reservoir on the earth.
I thought you were arguing that water was released by the formation of granite. That’s not very consistent with it as a reservoir.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Critical Thinkers, Trolls,Atheists & Believers
quote:
What I'm trying to get him to see is the different thought process demanded in our Science Forums.
I know that process. What I am trying to do is to make one feel shame or inferior in operating that process.
That sounds like a topic. Why don’t you start one explaining why people should be ashamed of preferring science to your opinions.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
So much for:
Tell me which planet/satellite in the solar system has granite on it. I will surrender to you if you can find one. And so much for, this, too.
granite is one of the largest water reservoir on the earth. And you don’t know how much granite there might be on Venus. Interestingly, on Earth The A-type granites are considered to dominantly form along tectonic rifts or within stable continent interiors
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Critical Thinkers, Trolls,Atheists & Believers
Interesting coming from someone who has great difficulty in basic research. Again, if you really think that your methods are so much better start a topic. Or I will. But you probably won’t like it.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Critical Thinkers, Trolls,Atheists & Believers
What I am talking about is Message 2038 I know that process. What I am trying to do is to make one feel shame or inferior in operating that process. Because, believe me nobody is feeling inferior to you. Nor should they.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Critical Thinkers, Trolls,Atheists & Believers
quote:
Because, believe me nobody is feeling inferior to you. Nor should they.
You should. Particularly if we talk about science and theology
I absolutely shouldn’t. You say:
If a person can not think in logic, which is in contrast to "thinking free", his argument can not go far, even in faith and belief And you obviously can’t. Message 412 Which I guess is the reason you try to make people feel inferior - it’s the only way you can win. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
Since you claim to be so good at reasoning it’s about time you laid it out. How do you get from the long life span attributed to Noah to Noah being a pre-human - and what do you think that Noah actually was?
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
Glad that you finally ask.
I am going to be brief here, and see how far YOU can go. The farther you can go, the farther I try to follow
We shouldn’t have to ask.
quote:
Some physical/astronomical events took place from the time of Genesis to the time of Abraham. These events modified the time frame of the earth. The time we experienced today is entirely different from the time Noah experienced.
What does this have to do with your claim that Noah was not human? Moreover, why would the Bible use any timeframe other than that experienced on Earth? Also, what events would do this and what evidence do you have that they occurred?
quote:
I am trying to confine the idea and argument to the realm of science as much as possible.
Then you had better provide good answers to the above questions. And show your reasoning. Which I asked you to do - and which you are not doing.
quote:
Once you accuse me to be fictional, nonsense, or imaginary, then I will stop.
It is your job to provide the evidence and reasoning to support your claims. If you do not the natural conclusion is that you are making things up. As indeed you have already done on other issues.
quote:
This issue should be much harder on YOU than the issue of global flood. I just wonder what kind of question/comment you can make.
It certainly isn’t any harder - in fact it seems easier. It was long ago now, but I actually took an undergraduate course in Special Relativity, so I have some know,edge of the subject.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Time scales
quote:
I never said Noah is not a human. He IS a human
You have asserted that Noah was not a normal human and sufficiently different that his remains would not be identifiable as human. And that he lived at a time when - by all the evidence we have - there were no humans at all. Your vagueness doesn’t not help you, in fact it just makes you look evasive.
quote:
the Bible describes those events/features without providing explanation. The idea is: believe it or not.
It is to those people who do not believe, some scientific explanations are needed. The Bible is a Book of faith, not a book of science, even every word in the Bible is scientifically true.
It is not the case that every word in the Bible is scientifically true and we know that for a fact (e.g. Genesis 30:31-42 especially verses 38, 39, 41 and 42). Moreover, we do not simply need stories by which the events might happen. We need evidence that they did happen.
quote:
One very simple possibility is that the day/year in early time has different length than that of today. We count day/month/year by the rotation and orbiting of the earth. And we know those factors are not contents, but are variables. For a simple example, one day on Mars is xxx days on the earth.
Indeed, I suggested earlier that months and years might have gotten confused as the stories were passed down. However, the length of the year is controlled by orbital dynamics and cannot greatly change unless the Earth’s orbit changed. And I note again that you come up short on evidence, reasoning and even in explaining your ideas. That only makes it seem that you lack any confidence in your ideas - if you even have any concrete ideas.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
950 years old Noah is a human, but is not a normal person according to the biology today. That is what I said.
Then in what way was Noah different and why does it matter.? Continuing to evade the matter does not help you.
quote:
It seems you stalled after my first introductory explanation on the longevity issue
No.
quote:
Any more question can you ask about Noah's age? BTW, nobody was confused on anything about calendar. People in Noah's time counted number of day and year as precisely as we do today.
I am not sure what this is in reference to. The nearest thing is your idea that the year might be a different length.
quote:
That is in the realm of biology. I am pretty bad in biology. So, no comment. Try something else. To you, there should be plenty of scientific errors in the Bible.
And yet your comments on Noah’s age relate to biology. And you don’t seem much better at physics, yet you’ve recently made suggestions there.
quote:
That is all because you do not understand.
It is a clear scientific error. But OK explain to me the reason why I should lie about it.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
Re: Time scales
quote:
Does biology today recognize that a human can live 960 years? Why not?
In principle it might be possible without obvious changes. The ageing process is not well understood and varies between species.
quote:
The alternative is that the 960 years were counted under an environment different from that of today. It seems both of us agreed on this "possibility"
I do not agree that this is a plausible possibility. If you wish to argue otherwise you need a concrete proposal, supported by evidence.
quote:
My questions, in two folds, to you are:
1. Since it is a possibility, then why do you insist that Noah is a fictional person?
2. How would you reason on that possibility? (how did the earth change its orbit?)
1. Because the story is an obvious myth and because the scientific evidence is strongly against any literal reading of the story. The age attributed to Noah is more 2. I would consider the fact that the Earth’s orbit would have to drastically change, and that would have effects that should be noticeable. Not to mention that we would need some mechanism for it. It is not something that can be considered at all likely in the timescale available.
quote:
One more: Is that (the orbiting time) the only way to explain the longevity?
That’s not my problem. There is no good reason to consider the supposed longevity fact. Maybe as I suggested there was confusion in the transmission of the stories and months became years. Maybe it’s just a common feature of the myths and legends of that region and time. These are more likely explanations.
quote:
Sigh, I have to ask these questions for you. Do you know to give question is harder than to answer question?
Then you should spend more time answering questions instead of ignoring them.
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17828 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.5
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Time scales
quote:
The part I quoted for a reply is the useful part in your response. The rest is not worthwhile to react
Oh but it is. The quality of the post has nothing g to do with your personal dislike of the views expressed.
quote:
So, can you explain HOW should the earth orbit be changed so that the change would be reflected through the time duration of an year? [hint: how many earth day is an year on the Mercury?]
The calculations are reasonably simple, and yes the Earth would have to be closer to the Sun. But it’s your idea, it’s up to you to support it.
quote:
If you want to talk in science, then DO NOT dismiss anything with an excuse of myth or imagination. Otherwise, you are not qualified to talk about science and should quit the discussion.
If you want to talk about science we have to establish what the evidence actually is. We have a story, written down long after it supposedly happened. In fact we have a composite of two versions of the story. Which are versions of an apparently older story common in the region. The story involves various extreme implausibilities, none of which can be adequately supported with scientific evidence. Myth:
a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon Merriam-Webster We may note the explanation of the rainbow, for instance. So I think on a scientific basis we can be very comfortable with calling it a myth. If you wish to disagree it is for you to produce the evidence. Moreover if we are trying to be scientific we cannot say that the story is definite fact and start inventing ways it could have happened without regard to the evidence. That is apologetics, not science.
quote:
Sure, to explain the story of Noah is not your problem. But if you want to dismiss the possibility of the story, then it becomes your problem
I certainly do not have to invent wild interpretations without evidence. I can stick to a plain reading of the text and the fact that the evidence is greatly against that. If you wish to argue for some other reading then it is for you to produce the evidence - including evidence that your ideas even are a viable reading. And you have failed even in that.
quote:
You can not say that something is not true. And when asked why? Then you say: it is not my problem.
And I have not done that. I gave reasons why it is not true, You asked me to help support YOUR ideas and THAT is not my problem.
quote:
I am now holding your hand to go through YOUR problem.
You certainly aren’t doing that at all. You’re still trying to get me to help you support your ideas. Which is your job. Edited by PaulK, : Restored lost text, corrected tags
|
™ Version 4.2
