Evidence of the flood

No, we have multiple evidence that animals do this often.

Let's see that evidence. And define "often".

riVeRraT writes: Percy, if you can't debate the topic, please fuck off.

If you don't want to become frustrated, don't make contradictory statements that you then blame on others.

The only one who has made a hash of things is you not being able to debate the topic.

I've only responded to things you've said.

You are too interested in assaulting character.

I have no interest in assaulting your character. People will not be assessing your character based on things that I say, but on things that you say. Are you arguing for a global flood around 4000 years ago, or are you trying to obscure that fact? Are you a creationist, or are you trying to obscure that fact?

Typical, and is why I left this shit hole.

You appear to have come back angry and obfuscative. The door is still open.

It is also why my faith was increased being here.

I'm glad for you.

If being an atheist and a scientist means being mean, then I am out.

I'm not an atheist, but I do expect people to say what they mean and mean what they say.

You do nothing to win me over. You pretend to care about people knowing the truth, but you don't.

I care a great deal about people knowing what is true.

It's just the same old sad tired story in this forum. Liberal debate tactics. Keep arguing and talking until something doesn't jive and then say "there, see I told you". But by then you are so far off topic, it is invalid and has nothing to do with it.

I see. Your contradictory statements were the forum's fault. Okay, yeah, sure.

I suggested there was evidence of a flood. I did not suggest the flood actually happened. Am I not allowed to speak loosely like everyone else?

You can speak as loosely as you like. Immerse yourself in your own style to your heart's content. Just put the blame in the proper place when slipshod exposition and brevity butcher clarity and you end up saying something that makes no sense.

Jar's statement was technically incorrect if you are a scientist. You can say there is no evidence of a flood, but you cannot say there was no flood. You close the door, and are no longer open minded at that point.

If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out if you believe the evidence points to a global flood 4000 years ago. You seem awfully reluctant to commit yourself.

Since I just provided *weak evidence of part of the story of the flood, I think we shouldn't even be saying there is NO evidence of a flood. There IS evidence. We just choose to ignore it.

If you want to think so, go ahead. Doesn't that make you a creationist?

--Percy

Still no one has provided any kind of explanation as to why, or how animals have evolved in to this behavior

Still no one has provided any reason to believe such behavior is widespread.

rr writes: Jar's statement was technically incorrect if you are a scientist.

Sorry but that is simply incorrect and absurd.

Change leaves evidence.

If a claim is made that an arrow hit the target then the fact that there are no arrow holes in the target is sufficient to conclude "The arrow did not hit the target!"

If a claim is made that there was a world-wide flood during the time humans existed then there must be evidence that there was a world-wide flood during the time humans existed.

The fact that there is evidence of cultures that continued without interruption, living things that existed bore and after the dates attributed to the flood, that there are objects that predate the flood but have never been under water is sufficient to say "There has never been a world-wide flood during the time humans existed."

Change leaves evidence and that's a fact Jack.

ok flood is over

How would the hawk trapped in a cage know the flood was over. Actually an uninjured hawk would have just flown away from the flooded areas.

IMO the reason for the hawk's actions are pain and lack of food. He ended up in the car as the first place out of the wind he could find. He was unhappy around people (based on the intensity of his glare at everyone) but wasn't able to leave. Notice in the video from the shelter that as he recovered and was fed, he got nastier.

I am not a creationist. Creationist do not conduct real science. I believe Creation is possible, more than random evolution. Perhaps we were even created to evolve.

For the inth time, I am not saying there was a flood. I said Harvey the Hawk is direct evidence that part of the story of the great flood is true. Can you debate that maybe?

FYI whether the flood is true or not, is irrelevant to me. The moral of the story is good. I like the topic, that is all. If we are going to discuss the topic, and after reading years worth of Christian bashing, lets at least be honest. There is evidence of a flood, we just choose to ignore it, because there is more evidence there wasn't a flood. Too many people in here say there is NO evidence.

When I watched this video of Harvey, my subjective feelings told me it was God. Made me think of this place, so I posted it.

JonF writes: Still no one has provided any reason to believe such behavior is widespread.

On the contrary it is very widespread and research on animal behavior regarding this topic goes way back. They tried to use animals to predict natural disasters. Did you know that like only 2 animals were killed in the Indonesian Tsunami? They all ran for higher ground. The animals in the zoo sought shelter long before the wave hit. There has been no significant answer to this. All they can say is animals have some kind of sixth sense, and that we used to have it but lost it. But no proof.

Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

JonF writes: Easy. There would be no life on Earth. There's no place the water could have been that wouldn't make the Earth uninhabitable just by being there or by falling

And you can prove this how?

Phat writes: How has your life been away from here, anyway? Do you still fly the model airplanes? What made you come back to this frustrating place anyway? (Yeah we missed you)

Life is good. Still fly, and now do racing drones (free style). I work 2 jobs now, I am a directory of Plant Ops, and own an HVAC business. Not much time for anything. Harvey the Hawk brought me back. I will never forget some of the debates that took place here over the flood. Some pretty ridiculous stuff has been said here. I can't wait to come back and read it in 20 years if I am alive.

jar writes: The flood in Houston was expected, is recurring and man made.

LMAO! Climate change made that storm stall didn't it? LMAO It didn't know where to go because CO2.

Not at all. But I also am not part of the Christian Cult of Ignorance.

Right, you have your own cult, I know.

The Biblical Flood stories in the Bible are simply neither factual or historical beyond the fact that they are historical fiction.

You believe in God you say? He created the universe, and He could have hid the (objective)evidence of a flood from us. Which is what I think happened. God wants us to believe by faith, what good then would evidence serve us?

Seeing that you believe in god(small g for you), this is one scenario that could have happened. Saying it didn't happen as absolute is not really faithful, or scientific minded of you.

jar writes: Sorry but that is simply incorrect and absurd. Change leaves evidence. If a claim is made that an arrow hit the target then the fact that there are no arrow holes in the target is sufficient to conclude "The arrow did not hit the target!" If a claim is made that there was a world-wide flood during the time humans existed then there must be evidence that there was a world-wide flood during the time humans existed. The fact that there is evidence of cultures that continued without interruption, living things that existed bore and after the dates attributed to the flood, that there are objects that predate the flood but have never been under water is sufficient to say "There has never been a world-wide flood during the time humans existed." Change leaves evidence and that's a fact Jack.

And we always are able to see that evidence........said no one ever. I think they sell tricorders on amazon....

hey they do!
https://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=tricorder&tag=...

1417dm writes: How would the hawk trapped in a cage know the flood was over. Actually an uninjured hawk would have just flown away from the flooded areas. IMO the reason for the hawk's actions are pain and lack of food. He ended up in the car as the first place out of the wind he could find. He was unhappy around people (based on the intensity of his glare at everyone) but wasn't able to leave. Notice in the video from the shelter that as he recovered and was fed, he got nastier.

Thank you for the response. Yep that is all possible. But even though he was injured, why would he let a human pet him? That hawk was as gentle as could be. I am slightly aware of bird behavior as I have owned a Parrot for 31 years. I think that hawk would have been nasty, just like all other birds taken in for rehab. Matter of fact they don't want the birds interacting with humans and getting comfortable with us. I know a particular Bald Eagle who can't fly anymore, is injured, and is in captivity for years, and is still nasty towards humans.

As he recovered, just happened to co-inside with the end of the flood. Odd, no? And if he was trapped in a cage, how would he know it is over? I am asking that question.

They never even said what his official injuries were.

Paulk writes: Well I am not saying that it is evidence against the Flood.

Cool Beans.

So now all you need is a part of the story where Noah takes on animals that just randomly happen to show up because of the rain. Please quote the verses which say that.

Genisis7:20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.

Coyote writes: Nonsense. The claimed global flood during historic times simply did not happen. The evidence against it is absolutely overwhelming, while the mere presence of water and a lost bird is pretty damn flimsy evidence of that such a global flood occurred during historic times. If we went with your line of reasoning we'd be able to claim evidence for every kooky idea ever. That certainly would not be following the scientific method, nor the guidance of the Enlightenment which says we no longer have to kowtow to religious belief.

Good thing I am not implying that.

Genisis7:20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.

1) That is not a random arrangement.
2) It happened before the Flood not during according to the account.