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?
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 128 of 372 (416881)
08-18-2007 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Repzion
07-18-2007 2:59 PM


Refpunk's post was a lengthy cut-n-paste from another website that he provided without attribution and no introductory words of his own. A link to the original site appears below.

Flood Legends from Around the World

Edited by Admin, : Replace lengthy cut-n-paste with link to the original source.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Repzion, posted 07-18-2007 2:59 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 131 of 372 (418268)
08-27-2007 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Repzion
07-18-2007 2:59 PM


Yet I wonder why there ar exactly ZERO accounts of ancient peoples describing their ancestors being cavemen. Why do you think that is?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Repzion, posted 07-18-2007 2:59 PM Repzion has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by jar, posted 08-27-2007 10:10 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 134 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-27-2007 10:54 AM Refpunk has responded
 Message 161 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-29-2007 2:46 AM Refpunk has responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 135 of 372 (418450)
08-28-2007 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Archer Opteryx
08-27-2007 10:54 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.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-27-2007 10:54 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Rahvin, posted 08-28-2007 9:39 AM Refpunk has responded
 Message 138 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-28-2007 11:21 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 165 by nator, posted 08-29-2007 7:18 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 188 by AdminPhat, posted 09-02-2007 7:31 AM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 137 of 372 (418466)
08-28-2007 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Rahvin
08-28-2007 9:39 AM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Your error is in claiming that anyone who finds bones in the dirt and calls them anything he wants to call them, makes it true.

Since the whole goal of evolutionists is to deny God, then they don't even CONSIDER other more rational alternatives to what those skulls and bones could be. In fact, with the evidence of a global flood in all the sedimentary rock layers all over the world, which is where they even find these bones, then not even CONSIDERING that those bones are nothing more than pre-flood humans whose skeletal remains have been crushed and distorted by the bilions of gallons of water that overwhelmed them, is not the sign of people seeking the truth. The skeletons of pre-flood humans a far more rational explanation for the shape of those skeletons than claiming that apes turned into human beings which can't be verified by history OR reality. But history and reality does verify the flood accounts.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Rahvin, posted 08-28-2007 9:39 AM Rahvin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 11:21 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 140 by jar, posted 08-28-2007 11:49 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 141 by Chiroptera, posted 08-28-2007 12:22 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 142 by iceage, posted 08-28-2007 12:28 PM Refpunk has responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 143 of 372 (418495)
08-28-2007 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by iceage
08-28-2007 12:28 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
I've already explained the sedimentary rock layers all over the world which indicates a global flood. There can be no other rational explanation for the existence of global sediment. In fact, some scientists have tried to explain that by saying there was a giant tsunami that once covered the whole earth. Other scientists claim it's snow melt from a huge ice age.

And as I already mentioned, the accounts of a global flood from over 200 cultures, and ZERO accounts in history of any kind of giant tsunami, ice age or apemen ancestors. Those are all made-up stories by scientists that EASILY dupe anyone who thinks that someone with a Ph.D. can make up history.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by iceage, posted 08-28-2007 12:28 PM iceage has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by Chiroptera, posted 08-28-2007 1:43 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 145 by jar, posted 08-28-2007 2:44 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 08-28-2007 5:42 PM Refpunk has responded
 Message 150 by The Matt, posted 08-28-2007 9:38 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 147 of 372 (418533)
08-28-2007 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Percy
08-28-2007 5:42 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.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 08-28-2007 5:42 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-28-2007 8:51 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 149 by Chiroptera, posted 08-28-2007 8:53 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 10:04 PM Refpunk has responded
 Message 158 by Rahvin, posted 08-29-2007 2:20 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 162 by Percy, posted 08-29-2007 6:25 PM Refpunk has responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 152 of 372 (418548)
08-28-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by crashfrog
08-28-2007 10:04 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but you're grasping at straws. The Science Channel introduces these scientists and explain where they got their degrees. All it shows is that scientists are great science fiction writers. They incessantly contradict history and make up their own. All it takes is common sense & a basic knowledge of the birds & the bees to see why monkeys can't breed humans descendant and what causes sediment in rock layers all over the world. Since scientists don't even have common sense, then you're right, the Science Channel is nothing more than science fiction.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 10:04 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 10:43 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 154 by molbiogirl, posted 08-28-2007 10:47 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 163 of 372 (418670)
08-29-2007 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Archer Opteryx
08-29-2007 2:46 AM


And which of these "theories" were all consistent with one another like the flood story is?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-29-2007 2:46 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-31-2007 2:05 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 187 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-31-2007 2:46 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 164 of 372 (418671)
08-29-2007 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Percy
08-29-2007 6:25 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but it can't be erosion because the sedimentary layers are IN THE MIDDLE of the rock layers. If it was erosion then the top parts of the rock layers would have eroded away. So that's another example of scientists not thinking things through well enough because of their eagerness to deny the bible.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Percy, posted 08-29-2007 6:25 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Vacate, posted 08-29-2007 8:26 PM Refpunk has responded
 Message 167 by Percy, posted 08-29-2007 8:29 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 168 by Chiroptera, posted 08-29-2007 8:32 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 169 by bluegenes, posted 08-29-2007 8:51 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 172 of 372 (418711)
08-29-2007 11:01 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Vacate
08-29-2007 8:26 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but ALL SEDIMENT COMES FROM WATER BECAUSE the definition of sediment is: "matter that settles to the bottom of liquid". And the only way sediment could have gotten into the MIDDLE of rock layers is if the rock was once covered in water. So you're incorrect.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Vacate, posted 08-29-2007 8:26 PM Vacate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by jar, posted 08-29-2007 11:13 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 174 by Vacate, posted 08-29-2007 11:27 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 175 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-29-2007 11:31 PM Refpunk has responded
 Message 176 by iceage, posted 08-29-2007 11:31 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 179 of 372 (418944)
08-31-2007 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by Minnemooseus
08-29-2007 11:31 PM


Re: Definition of "sediment"
"The Oxford American Dictionary and Thesaurus" is where I found the definition of sediment. So now you'll have to try to deiscredit that dictionary as well as the historical accounts of the hundreds of ancient cultures of a global flood all for the made-up stories of today's scientists. So it appears that atheists are in the habit of denying and making up their own history rather than confirming it in order to deny God. But since the truth never contradicts itself, then atheists paint themselves into a corner, as usual.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-29-2007 11:31 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by jar, posted 08-31-2007 9:50 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 181 by Percy, posted 08-31-2007 10:06 AM Refpunk has responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4193 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 182 of 372 (418969)
08-31-2007 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by Percy
08-31-2007 10:06 AM


Re: Definition of "sediment"
You put those definitions together and the conclusion is simple and obvious, as the truth always is: The sediment that settled to the bottom of water was thus carried to rocks by water or wind. And since no scientist has yet maintained that there was once a global windstorm that carried all the sediment all over the world to the rocks all over the world, then water is how that sediment landed on the rocks all over the world.

So it takes MUCH EFFORT to deny a global flood and trying to change history in the process which can never be done because one cannot go back and change what people claimed happened. Never.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Percy, posted 08-31-2007 10:06 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Percy, posted 08-31-2007 11:39 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 184 by The Matt, posted 08-31-2007 11:53 AM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 185 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-31-2007 1:43 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019