Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

Options
1…221222224226227…232

Comments

  • Options
    #6692
    Achasanai
    Closed Accounts Posts: 730 ✭✭✭Achasanai


    J C wrote: »
    ... it would have been frozen as the land elevated out of the water with stranded dead animals on it. The climate which rapidly emerged after the Flood was a 'nuclear winter' scenaro caused by all of the dust in the atmosphere. It was we call the Ice Age in the upper northern hemisphere ... some of the (frozen) carrion from the Flood still survives and is reputedly edible !!!:)
    https://www.quora.com/Are-the-frozen-mammoths-of-Siberia-still-edible

    This is where it gets very confusing. Are the carnivores choosing to eat the frozen animals when there are living, breathing options?
    J C wrote: »
    They could of course ... but new vegetation would typically be grasses and other small broadleaf plants that would start germinating and growing immediately when the waters started receeding.

    Grasses germinate and grow in a matter of days.
    Quote:-
    "In a week, grass may grow 2-6 inches (depending on temperature, humidity, time of year, etc.). So do the math - that works out to about a 1/25 of an inch/hour."

    Someone mentioned the impossibility of having dead frozen animals in an area where grass is germinating and growing 2-6 inches, and you responded that there was localised extremes ... but in the same place? Remember, the animals are all disembarking from the same Ark. Can you explain why the carnivores have frozen carcasses for eating, while the herbivores have lots of conveniently growing grasses?

    And this doesn't even take into account that you're ignoring that there are larger herbivores (in some cases, gigantic herbivores) for whom grasses would be completely insufficient for feeding. You mention vegetation mats, but it is ridiculous to think that these could hold fully grown trees that would be sufficient for them.
    J C wrote: »
    It could even be possible that Noah too samples of critical crop seeds on-board the Ark and sowed them as soon as the water receeded locally near the Ark ... to kick-start the process.

    I'm guessing magic seeds that would allow them to grow in a 'nuclear winter' scenario.


  • Options
    #6693
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Michael OBrien wrote: »
    Not even remotely possible. We are talking millions of years before humans existed. The continent of Australia had to be isolated so that the diversification worked ONLY in Australia. The diversification lead to speciation events.
    ... could I remind you of what kind of stories begin with ... 'long, long ago and far, far away' !!!:)


  • Options
    #6694
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    robinph wrote: »
    Could nobody else build boats, or already have their own boat for fishing/ trade?
    How quick did the water level rise, in that time surely people would have cobbled together something to float on?
    It is thought that nearly all of the waters currently in the oceans were held in subterranean resevoirs before the Flood ... so boats would not have been needed and wouldn't have been built. That was why everyone laughed at Noah, when he decided to build a boat ... with no water to float it on!!!

    The residue of this underground water is still there, deep inside the Earth.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/


  • Options
    #6695
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,366 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    J C wrote: »
    It is thought that nearly all of the waters currently in the oceans were held in subterranean resevoirs before the Flood ... so boats would not have been needed and wouldn't have been built. That was why everyone laughed at Noah, when he decided to build a boat ... with no water to float it on!!!

    The residue of this underground water is still there, deep inside the Earth.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/

    When was the Flood?


  • Options
    #6696
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    When was the Flood?
    That would be an eucuminical question !!!:D:);)

    ... and I'm in eucuminical mode at present !!!:pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6697
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,553 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Woah there JC, there is quite a lot in that post.

    Nuclear winter, what evidence do we have of that?
    Caused by dust in the air? What dust? What type of dust? How did it get into the air (surely it would have been kept down with all the rain?)
    Only the Northern hemisphere, why not on the southern? That was the epicentre of the flood after all?
    Stranded dead animals? Now, you do know how decomposition works don't you. Are you now claiming that all the dead animals simply maintained a fresh state during the year long flood so as to be available to eat?
    What is the usual timeline for growth after an extended flood, given that there would be a lack of creatures and other plants with which to help recreate the plants through pollination a etc. Do you have any evidence of how quickly land can regenerate after being submerged for a year? And why would animals travel if there was no food in other places since the only seeds etc were on Noahs boat and as such they would only move to get more food.
    Floating vegetation mats caused by the flood? So technically animals could have survived on these mats? So God plan to kill everything had a pretty major flaw in it. And how likely is it that people wouldn't have taken refuge on this mats and thus survived by eating the seeds etc. Thats a pretty big hole in your story.
    J C wrote: »
    It is thought that nearly all of the waters currently in the oceans were held in subterranean resevoirs before the Flood ... so boats would not have been needed and wouldn't have been built. That was why everyone laughed at Noah, when he decided to build a boat ... with no water to float it on!!!

    The residue of this underground water is still there, deep inside the Earth.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/

    That there is another doozy. I'll just add that to the list.

    Thought by whom? Is this just an idea or is there any evidence to back up the claim? You say there is still some residual water, but why didn't the waters go back underground after the flood?

    So let me get this straight. Your assertion is that all the water in the world was held underground, such that nobody had ever thought of, or had need for a boat? And then it rained and the place flooded, and unlike animals we see today that grab onto to floating stuff to survive, the humans (that god created) were so confused that they simply stood there whilst the water over took them?


  • Options
    #6698
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,366 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    J C wrote: »
    That would be an eucuminical question !!!:D:);)

    ... and I'm in eucuminical mode at present !!!:pac:

    So the timeline is just resting in your account?


  • Options
    #6699
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,089 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    J C wrote: »
    It is thought that nearly all of the waters currently in the oceans were held in subterranean resevoirs before the Flood ... so boats would not have been needed and wouldn't have been built. That was why everyone laughed at Noah, when he decided to build a boat ... with no water to float it on!!!

    The residue of this underground water is still there, deep inside the Earth.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/

    Thought by who?

    Was the planet a dry desert before this "flood" then?
    Where did all the fish come from if there were no oceans?
    Were there no rivers that people needed to cross, boats are useful for crossing rivers and lakes too?

    How quick did these water rise if the whole desert planet was to be covered? There is still plenty of time to figure out that things float and hop onto one of these floating vegetation mats that have fully grown trees living on them for the big herbivores to eat after the flood.
    How did the trees get onto the vegetation mats but people and other animals couldn't?


  • Options
    #6700
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Look, the whole thing is a mystery. We don't understand mysteries. The flood happened in a mysterious way which we don't understand. We have to accept it by Faith. We could argue till the cows come home. Neither side has a monopoly about it. Just accept it that God worked in mysterious ways.


  • Options
    #6701
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,458 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    Look, the whole thing is a mystery. We don't understand mysteries. The flood happened in a mysterious way which we don't understand. We have to accept it by Faith. We could argue till the cows come home. Neither side has a monopoly about it. Just accept it that God worked in mysterious ways.

    When all else fails dust this old excuse off :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6702
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    When all else fails dust this old excuse off


    Unfortunately it is not an excuse, which you will find out.


  • Options
    #6703
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,458 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    Unfortunately it is not an excuse, which you will find out.


    Ill tell you what i have told others, im not afraid of your "god" nor any of the other 300 so called "gods" that have allegedly exsisted throughout time. So save your preaching for someone who cares because your preaching to me is a waste of your time.


  • Options
    #6704
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    Ill tell you what i have told others, im not afraid of your "god" nor any of the other 300 so called "gods" that have allegedly exsisted throughout time. So save your preaching for someone who cares because your preaching to me is a waste of your time.


    I don't care what you think. That's your own business. You have made a decision that God doesn’t exist. That's free will. Unfortunately, as you know, every decision has consequences.


  • Options
    #6705
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,458 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    I don't care what you think. That's your own business. You have made a decision that God doesn’t exist. That's free will. Unfortunately, as you know, every decision has consequences.

    I just decided to flip a coin didnt pick heads nor tails just flipped it because i wanted to

    Whats the consequences for flipping that coin?


  • Options
    #6706
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    I just decided to flip a coin didnt pick heads nor tails just flipped it because i wanted to


    I'm afraid what I'm talking about is a great deal more serious than flicking a coin. If I was you, I would review my way of thinking. I'm not telling you to do this, only advising you. You have or will make the final decision, which I will fully respect.


  • Options
    #6707
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,458 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    I'm afraid what I'm talking about is a great deal more serious than flicking a coin. If I was you, I would review my way of thinking. I'm not telling you to do this, only advising you. You have or will make the final decision, which I will fully respect.

    You keep living your life in fear, ill keep living mine to the fullest


  • Options
    #6708
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    You keep living your life in fear, ill keep living mine to the fullest


    Good man, at least you have made a decision.


  • Options
    #6709
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,458 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    Good man, at least you have made a decision.

    And for me its the right one.


  • Options
    #6710
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    And for me its the right one.


    So you say.


  • Options
    #6711
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,089 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    Look, the whole thing is a mystery. We don't understand mysteries. The flood happened in a mysterious way which we don't understand. We have to accept it by Faith. We could argue till the cows come home. Neither side has a monopoly about it. Just accept it that God worked in mysterious ways.
    It's not a mystery.

    There was no world wide flood with one family of humans and a boat full of pairs of animals as the only survivors who then went on to repopulate the planet with the current range of life that now exists all in the space of a couple of thousand years. We know that didn't happen because a story from a book is the only evidence that it happened, and the entire rest of the planet is the evidence that it didn't happen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6712
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    J C wrote: »
    It is thought that nearly all of the waters currently in the oceans were held in subterranean resevoirs before the Flood ... so boats would not have been needed and wouldn't have been built. That was why everyone laughed at Noah, when he decided to build a boat ... with no water to float it on!!!

    The residue of this underground water is still there, deep inside the Earth.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25723-massive-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/
    You have claimed that you are a scientist, a "Creation Scientist". Your belief in the story of the flood is more evidence that you take a story like this, believe it, because of where you read it, and then look for evidence to support the story. That is totally unscientific. As I said before, science is about looking at evidence, examining it and ascertaining what the evidence tells us and writing about it. Reading a story, then trying to concoct some evidence to support it, is what children do with stories like Santa Clause. IT IS NOT SCIENCE!!


  • Options
    #6713
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Safehands wrote:
    You have claimed that you are a scientist, a "Creation Scientist". Your belief in the story of the flood is more evidence that you take a story like this, believe it, because of where you read it, and then look for evidence to support the story. That is totally unscientific. As I said before, science is about looking at evidence, examining it and ascertaining what the evidence tells us and writing about it. Reading a story, then trying to concoct some evidence to support it, is what children do with stories like Santa Clause. IT IS NOT SCIENCE!!


    I think your views are somewhat adolescent. I don't say this to hurt you, it is merely an observation I make.


  • Options
    #6714
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    I think your views are somewhat adolescent. I don't say this to hurt you, it is merely an observation I make.

    Adolescent to point out that JC's belief in the story of the flood is not in any way scientific? Really?


  • Options
    #6715
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Safehands wrote:
    Adolescent to point out that JC's belief in the story of the flood is not in any way scientific? Really?


    The story of the flood is not in any way scientific. It is not meant to be. All we know is that God's people were very disobedient, and broke all His commandments. He issued several warnings, all were ignored. He decided to wipe out the entire world population, save for one pious and devout man. He rescued the animals because they were not in any way complicit in man's disobedience.
    This is going to happen again, but not by flood. The disobedience of the world is outrageous. Of course, just as in Noah's time, the people do not believe that God exists. They are in for a rude awakening.


  • Options
    #6716
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    The story of the flood is not in any way scientific. It is not meant to be. All we know is that God's people were very disobedient, and broke all His commandments. He issued several warnings, all were ignored. He decided to wipe out the entire world population, save for one pious and devout man. He rescued the animals because they were not in any way complicit in man's disobedience.
    This is going to happen again, but not by flood. The disobedience of the world is outrageous. Of course, just as in Noah's time, the people do not believe that God exists. They are in for a rude awakening.

    We know this how exactly? Is there one shred of evidence, anywhere that confirms that story?


  • Options
    #6717
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Safehands wrote:
    We know this how exactly? Is there one shred of evidence, anywhere that confirms that story?


    I know you have no shred of evidence for God. He didn't enlighten you. I wonder why? We're you always a non believer? If so, I know why He didn't enlighten you.


  • Options
    #6718
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    I know you have no shred of evidence for God. He didn't enlighten you. I wonder why? We're you always a non believer? If so, I know why He didn't enlighten you.

    So, the evidence for the flood?


  • Options
    #6719
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    Safehands wrote:
    We know this how exactly? Is there one shred of evidence, anywhere that confirms that story?


    I know you have no shred of evidence for God. He didn't enlighten you. I wonder why? We're you always a non believer? If so, I know why He didn't enlighten you.

    ‘Were you always an unbeliever? If so, I know why He didn’t enlighten you.’ You should investigate that, Safehands. It seems there are a few more hoops that can be jumped through.


  • Options
    #6720
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    The way to sort it all out is not to vote for any of them, and thus bring the whole lot tumbling down.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6721
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,089 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    The story of the flood is not in any way scientific. It is not meant to be.

    Agreed. You are doing well so far.
    lw8ey69ntifmph wrote: »
    All we know is that God's people were very disobedient, and broke all His commandments. He issued several warnings, all were ignored. He decided to wipe out the entire world population, save for one pious and devout man. He rescued the animals because they were not in any way complicit in man's disobedience.

    But there is not one single bit of evidence to back up any of these claims in the slightest, other than what you have read in a book.


Advertisement