51 scientific facts that disprove the Bible

Actually, using what the bible tells us, we can determine pi. You divide circumference by diameter to get a rough approximation of pi.30 cubits divided by 10 cubits equals 3 cubits. Ergo, pi=3.Of course, the babylonians figured pi to be 3.125 by 1900 BCE. The egyptians figured it to be 3.16049 around the same time. The indians, in the shatapatha brahmana got it to be 3.139.So the bible is far worse than much earlier texts. Even assuming some of the interpretations to bring it in closer in line, you still have a text that gives the wrong number for pi.

You know, in swedish we've moved from saying "I skolen" to "Ni skall" to "Du ska". All in the last 60 years, no less.Oh, it basically means "you will".What was that about not witnessing micro-change?If necessary, I can point you to texts that use the three forms, though the second two or more or less contemporary, depending on whether you're speaking, writing, and the level of formality.

did I mention anything about macro-change? Of course not.Try actually arguing against what I put forward, instead of creating some silly strawman.RAZD claimed micro-change in language had never been witnessed. That is, one word changing.*Although I see I got that slightly wrong, as he defines micro-change as one word changing into another kind of word. So I'm guessing noun-to-verb or something like that. I'm not personally familiar with such in swedish, but the english word "impact", originally a noun, has come to be used as a verb.If you want evidence of macro change, I point you to the norman invasion of England in 1066 and the subsequent change of Old English into Middle English (and they are two separate languages, as Middle English is somewhat understandable without study unlike Old English). Although that's a somewhat unique case, as it's more like two languages merging to become one than it is one language splitting into two.

perhaps my first post with the "" wasn't enough? should have used another one?

Funny how God is using greek names for constellations in a jewish story. Clue you in. Even we wouldn't understand "And f-22 Raptors launched ICBMs from the sky". Mainly because F-22 Raptors, and all planes, are incapable of carrying intercontinental ballistic missiles. The Minuteman 3, for example, weighs 79,000 lbs and is almost 60 ft long. The Trident is 130,000 lbs and 44 ft long. The Midgetman is 30,000 lbs and 46 ft (and no longer operational). The JDAM, which the F-22 can carry, is 10 ft long and between 500-2000 lbs.

I'm sorry, but ballistic missiles won't cut it either. That's because they follow sub-orbital flight paths, that is, they go really, really high without entering orbit. They just cannot be launched from fighter jets.The missiles carried by fighter jets and the like are known as air-to-air or air-to-surface missiles, whose designs are really quite different, not to mention their purposes.