Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for a recent flood
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 151 of 404 (641931)
11-24-2011 4:26 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Wollysaurus
11-23-2011 12:45 PM


Re: Evidence for a recent flood
quote:
problems like the Tower of Babel story and language.
The issue here is, did language begin with one or many all over the place; did they happen simultainiously or subsequentially? What is the evidence for either?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Wollysaurus, posted 11-23-2011 12:45 PM Wollysaurus has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 152 of 404 (641936)
11-24-2011 5:16 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 4:23 AM


Re: Evidence for a recent flood
You have yet to demonstrate that Genesis is science. In fact it is acknowledged as magic by right minded people every where.
Again, no evidence from the creo crowd.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong.
Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 4:23 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:14 PM Larni has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 153 of 404 (641950)
11-24-2011 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 4:23 AM


Topic?
Any chance that anything you spout will be remotely related to the topic? You do this on every thread you "participate" in.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 4:23 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:11 PM Theodoric has seen this message but not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4421 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 154 of 404 (641957)
11-24-2011 9:44 AM


Lets take the initiative
This website is a gathering point for a great many individuals who research, analyse and critically evaluate information on a daily basis. For many of us it is what we do in our careers.
Instead of asking questions that will likely never get a straight answer, how about we try to find evidence of some of these claims.
Its the Mythbusters approach (no joke intended here).
Take a claim, then try to see if we can get it to work.
If it wont work, try to establish what would be required to get it to work.
In this case, we have two ideas, a recent global flood and a recent regional flood.
Can someone from the creationist side of the fence supply an estimated date that this flood occured? If you have a date, please supply a source.
If the flood was regional, is there any estimate on what region it occurred in?
If we have this estimated date, we can look for evidence of this flood
whether it was global or regional.
If we have a region, we can examine this region to see if a regional flood would be plausible for that area.
I am willing to put my research skills into this activity.
Creationists, give us a place to start and we will use our combined scientific knowledge in an attempt to test your proposed hypothoses.
It would be good if you actually worded it as a hypothosis. e.g The flood of Noah was a global flood that occurred in 1500 BCE.
Can we start with time and location ideas first, then we could move onto hypothoses related to how it occured and the aftermath etc.
What do you reckon?
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
2011 leading candidate for the EvC Forum Don Quixote award

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 AM Butterflytyrant has seen this message but not replied
 Message 160 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:28 PM Butterflytyrant has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 155 of 404 (641960)
11-24-2011 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by Butterflytyrant
11-24-2011 9:44 AM


Re: Lets take the initiative
It would be good if you actually worded it as a hypothosis. e.g The flood of Noah was a global flood that occurred in 1500 BCE.
This is the last thing creationists want. If they specify a date for the flood then that can be examined scientifically.
Why do you think the age estimates range from several thousand years ago to the Cambrian (500+ million years ago) and everywhere in between? It's a moving goalpost precisely so it can't be disproved!
They simply can't admit that the idea of a recent global flood is a myth.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 9:44 AM Butterflytyrant has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 12:05 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 159 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:22 PM Coyote has replied
 Message 190 by Portillo, posted 11-24-2011 10:55 PM Coyote has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 156 of 404 (641968)
11-24-2011 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Coyote
11-24-2011 10:05 AM


Re: Lets take the initiative
This is the last thing creationists want. If they specify a date for the flood then that can be examined scientifically.
The above is an inaccurate charge. There are plenty of YECs who are completely convinced that they can date Noah's flood to within 50 years or less. If I am not mistaken, one such person posted in this thread.
Yes, it is true that the physical evidence cited for such a thing does not bear close scrutiny, and might even be laughable, but let's not pretend that such people do not exist.
Other Christians honestly hold beliefs that the flood and the beginning of the universe are much more ancient events that happened an unknowable time in the past. They aren't necessary moving the goal posts just because they acknowledge that a that your evidence that the the flood did not happen during some particular time period is correct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 AM Coyote has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 157 of 404 (641969)
11-24-2011 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by Theodoric
11-24-2011 8:40 AM


Re: Topic?
Either that - or the only correct issues are raised by me. This can be seen in a recent science thread by the monitors asking me not to post there after I challenged that the universe is finite: as if I made an unscientific statement. In fact I put them on the line with a scientific check mate.
Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Theodoric, posted 11-24-2011 8:40 AM Theodoric has seen this message but not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 158 of 404 (641970)
11-24-2011 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Larni
11-24-2011 5:16 AM


CHECK MATE.
quote:
You have yet to demonstrate that Genesis is science.
The universe had a 'BEGINNING' [Genesis].

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Larni, posted 11-24-2011 5:16 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Larni, posted 11-24-2011 1:58 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 170 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 7:15 PM IamJoseph has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 159 of 404 (641971)
11-24-2011 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Coyote
11-24-2011 10:05 AM


Re: Lets take the initiative
quote:
Why do you think the age estimates range from several thousand years ago to the Cambrian (500+ million years ago) and everywhere in between? It's a moving goalpost precisely so it can't be disproved
The first recorded proof the universe and the earth are billions of years old is in Genesis - even before the notion of 'billions' was yet known by humanity.
How many years account for seperation of light and darkness; day and night; water and land? These actions are listed in Genesis before the advent of life occured and before the Hebrew calendar was given.
A lie by omission is - surprise, surprise - a lie.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 10:05 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by NoNukes, posted 11-24-2011 12:28 PM IamJoseph has not replied
 Message 166 by Coyote, posted 11-24-2011 2:52 PM IamJoseph has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 160 of 404 (641972)
11-24-2011 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Butterflytyrant
11-24-2011 9:44 AM


Re: Lets take the initiative
quote:
If we have this estimated date, we can look for evidence of this flood
whether it was global or regional.
Dated historical archives mention the flood, evidencing it occured.
quote:
If we have a region, we can examine this region to see if a regional flood would be plausible for that area.
The region is around Mount Ararat, a land mark mentioned for the first time, with aerial view location accuracy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 9:44 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Coragyps, posted 11-24-2011 1:21 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 172 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-24-2011 8:04 PM IamJoseph has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 161 of 404 (641973)
11-24-2011 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 12:22 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
Happy thanksgiving brother. And many happen returns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:22 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 162 of 404 (641977)
11-24-2011 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 12:28 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
The region is around Mount Ararat, a land mark mentioned for the first time, with aerial view location accuracy.
You have said this repeatedly.
I'm calling bullshit. Show me where your book even puts Ararat in some specific continent, Joe.

"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:28 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 2:35 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 163 of 404 (641978)
11-24-2011 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by IamJoseph
11-24-2011 12:14 PM


Re: CHECK MATE.
As I said: you have yet to provide any evidence for this being true. Simply you saying it does not mean you are correct.
Evidence my good sir, is the Achilles heel of the creo. Every. Single. Time.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong.
Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 12:14 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by IamJoseph, posted 11-24-2011 2:24 PM Larni has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 164 of 404 (641979)
11-24-2011 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Larni
11-24-2011 1:58 PM


Re: CHECK MATE.
The universe being finite is evidenced by today's foremost science and scientists - before the term science was yet introduced. Of note none have given any alternatives to its veracity - and this includes yourself, nor have you made any factors of its negation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Larni, posted 11-24-2011 1:58 PM Larni has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 165 of 404 (641982)
11-24-2011 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Coragyps
11-24-2011 1:21 PM


Re: Lets take the initiative
quote:
You have said this repeatedly.
I'm calling bullshit. Show me where your book even puts Ararat in some specific continent, Joe
Mount Ararat is mentioned as being in today's Middle-east by virtue of aligning this mount in the region of places like Ninveh [Babylon], Canaan [Israel] and Mizraim [Egypt]. It does not get better proven of specific continents. Such ancient aerial mapology is unseen anywhere else. Bullshit - but whose?
quote:
Genesis Chapter 10
1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and unto them were sons born after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. 3 And the sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 And the sons of Javan: Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 Of these were the isles of the nations divided in their lands, every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. 6 And the sons of Ham: Cush, and Mizraim, and Put, and Canaan. 7 And the sons of Cush: Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah: Sheba, and Dedan. 8 And Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one in the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; wherefore it is said: 'Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD.' 10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and Rehoboth-ir, and Calah, 12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah--the same is the great city.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Coragyps, posted 11-24-2011 1:21 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024