Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2019 8:49 AM
25 online now:
frako, Sarah Bellum, Theodoric, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (4 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,011 Year: 7,047/19,786 Month: 1,588/1,581 Week: 410/393 Day: 1/43 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 136 of 372 (418460)
08-28-2007 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:45 AM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
That's because there were no neanderthals or ape-men. The theory of evolution is so absurd that it's an emparrassment to people who call themselves educated.

Wow! Arguments from incredulity are no longer fallacious?! Why didn't anyone tell me!

Sarcasm aside: then why do the bones of neanderthals and other evolutionary ancestors to humanity exist (not ape-men, of course, because that's an absurd misrepresentation of what evolution states)?

More to the point of the topic, why do these bones and others in the geological record lie in the order predicted by evolution, rather than being sorted by weight like would be the result of a flood? Why are stone tools, copper tools, tools of any other sort, and all other manmade items that should be on the bottom of the sediment in a flood model, always higher in the geological column than dinosaurs?

Someone's an embarrassment, but I don't think it's the biologists and others who have actual evidence to back up their claims...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:45 AM Refpunk has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 10:42 AM Rahvin has not yet responded

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 158 of 372 (418574)
08-29-2007 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:41 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but I heard about the giant tsunami on the Science Discovery Channel and then again on the History cChannel. So it absolutely did come from scientists

These are the same channels that regularly show programs on UFOs and ghosts. These programs are entertainment. None of what you see on these ridiculous shows are from scientific journals.

And the only "evidence" for evolution is looking at skulls and bones and imagining what they could be. That's called science fiction, not science. So it's about as much evidence as looking at a woman who looks like someone I know then claiming that she's related to that person. That's called speculation, not fact.

Fortunately, that's not all evolution relies on. The bones are one small piece of the puzzle - evolution would stand WITHOUT any fossils at all, simply from OBSERVED CHANGES IN EXTANT SPECIES. If you'd like to discuss all of this, start another thread - it's not really relevant to the flood, except in noting that fossils are sorted as evolution predicts in the geologic column, and nowhere near what would be predicted in a massive flood model.


Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:41 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by NosyNed, posted 08-29-2007 2:45 AM Rahvin has not yet responded

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 300 of 372 (511000)
06-05-2009 12:12 PM


Not presenting evidence in support of a Flood
Note that Peg makes the most common Creationist failing: instead of presenting evidence to support her version of events, she simply attacks the conclusions of the opposition, as if there are only two choices, and if she invalidates part of all of modern geology then she somehow proves that the Flood happened by default.

It doesn't work that way. Even if Peg were to successfully turn modern geology on it's head with her questions regarding so-called "inconsistencies" in geological layers, she still would have produced no evidence whatsoever of a global Flood. After all, even if all of modern science is wrong, evolution never happened, modern estimates of the age of the Earth are completely off, radiological dating is unreliable, etc, the Bible could also be wrong.

Maybe the Hindus got it right.

Or maybe nobody did, and we're all wrong.

In any case, until and unless Peg starts posting evidence that supports the occurrence of a global Flood some thousands of years ago (hopefully with something more substantial than "I disagree," or "that part of the Earth is covered in water means that all of the Earth was covered in water at one point"), she's still failing.


Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019