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)

1…2829313334…232

Comments

  • #902
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Systemsready, you're advancing an argument which requires us to accept that a scientist is genuinely unware that the whale is a marine mammal, and I'm the one grasping at straws?


    Haha indeed!
    Didnt you watch the programme? Didnt you hear him asking that question? In no possible way could it have been misunderstood.
    He asked, how could a whale fit in the boat?


  • #903
    Lantus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,873 ✭✭✭Lantus


    Wiggles88 wrote: »
    Now I havent seen the program myself so I'm not fully aware of the context however just on the whale thing: assuming the flood happened as described it would introduce so much water that the salt concentration in the sea would become negligible thereby making all the worlds waters essentially fresh water. Now whales are salt water creatures, while the length of time a whale can survive in fresh water is still somewhat debatable, no whale has been observed living in fresh water for more than a few weeks. Therefore assuming noah was real he would have had to have some sort of salt water compartment on board to accommodate all those salt water creatures who cannot survive in the fresh waters of the flood.

    quite, or the sea would of made all the fresh water salty ad so all the fresh water creatures would of needed containers.

    The noah story is "quite the story" and with todays level of information and education we dont have to look too hard to see just how totally unbelievable it is.

    If he was on the ark for 360days and an elephant drinks 200 litres per day and there were 2 of them he would of needed 144 cubic metres of water JUST for the elephants. Thats 144 tons of water. now take into account all the other animals and the food required and the housing and the fact that most wouldn't survive being incarcerate for such a time period and the fact that 8 people is woefully insuficient to clean out and maintain and pilot such a vessel.

    Afterone year the dove brings backa 'fresh' olive leaf. Unlikley if all plant life had been submerged for 300+ days as it would of been dead.

    Not to mention that god kills all of mankind because hes in a huff. Pregnant women, babies, young old and infirm. All loving and all kind.....??


  • #904
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Actually, the bigger problem is the freshwater species.

    The notion that salt concentration becomes negligible in the flood-enlarged oceans presumes that salinity is evenly distributed. But in fact we know that, even now, salinity is not evenly distributed through the oceans; adjacent bodies of water present different salt concentrations. So there is the (highly theoretical) possibility that, during the flood, some parts of ocean retained high salinity, or at least high enough to enable saltwater species to survive. Oceans near coasts would of course be heavily diluted by runoff from the land. But the middle of large oceans? You'd have your layer of fresh water falling out of the sky onto your enormously deep column of salt water, and quite possible no rising currents to cause the two to mix.

    But if the waters covered the face of the earth to a point where they inundated Mount Ararat, then there was very little fresh water left, and none at all outside of high mountain ranges. So the freshwater species which cannot survive in high mountain streams - and that's most of them - would have had no sustainable habitat for the duration. Bye-bye, trout and pike.


    Ok, so you are saying that the flood waters were fresh water? where did all that fresh water come from?
    They say it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, where does rain come from?
    Its just water recycled from already existing water on earth, whether its stored in ice or is in rivers lakes and seas. The volume of water on the earth doesn't change. How could it? Does water multiply?
    If it rained for 40 days and 40 nights or more then that rain came from already existing water from earth. Water that was salty, the salt remained on the sea and the freshwater rain fell back to the sea and resalted itself. The flood waters receded by the earth swallowing it all up

    http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/2010/gallery/global-water-volume.html


  • #905
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Lantus wrote: »
    quite, or the sea would of made all the fresh water salty ad so all the fresh water creatures would of needed containers.

    The noah story is "quite the story" and with todays level of information and education we dont have to look too hard to see just how totally unbelievable it is.

    If he was on the ark for 360days and an elephant drinks 200 litres per day and there were 2 of them he would of needed 144 cubic metres of water JUST for the elephants. Thats 144 tons of water. now take into account all the other animals and the food required and the housing and the fact that most wouldn't survive being incarcerate for such a time period and the fact that 8 people is woefully insuficient to clean out and maintain and pilot such a vessel.

    Afterone year the dove brings backa 'fresh' olive leaf. Unlikley if all plant life had been submerged for 300+ days as it would of been dead.

    Not to mention that god kills all of mankind because hes in a huff. Pregnant women, babies, young old and infirm. All loving and all kind.....??

    There are streams and pools of freshwater in the sea, that maintain their status , never mixing with salt water.
    http://phys.org/news/2011-04-fresh-arctic-shift-gulf-stream.html
    Do the research


    You said ..."Afterone year the dove brings backa 'fresh' olive leaf. Unlikley if all plant life had been submerged for 300+ days as it would of been dead."
    How long does the tree need to be above water before a leaf sprouts on it again? They found the leaf after one year, it didnt say the tree suddenly appeared after one year. They found it after 1 year, maybe that tree was un-submerged after 3 months and had 9 months to grow a leaf...easy.


  • #906
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    There are streams and pools of freshwater in the sea, that maintain their status , never mixing with salt water.
    http://phys.org/news/2011-04-fresh-arctic-shift-gulf-stream.html
    Do the research
    How do you propose rivers will empty into the sea to create freshwater pools if the whole planet is under water??
    The oceanographers said Tuesday the unusual accumulation has been caused by Siberian and Canadian rivers dumping more water into the Arctic and from melting sea ice. Both are consequences of global warming.

    And how do you propose that the saltwater would remain in pools if it is evenly diluted by huge volumes of rain falling all over the planet?

    Any chance you will answer the question I asked you? Surely the creationist propaganda sites have a ready excuse for this mystery already?
    My question was how exactly you expect us to believe that Noah gathered up millions of species if insect, spider, slugs, worms etc. etc.

    But of course you can't answer this, so by all means answer a different question.


  • Advertisement
  • #907
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,692 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    systemsready wrote: »
    Didnt you watch the programme? Didnt you hear him asking that question? In no possible way could it have been misunderstood.

    He asked, how could a whale fit in the boat?
    Systemsready, you may not realise this, but you are displaying exactly the kind of cognitive disassociation which many people think is necessary in order to sustain a belief in “creation science”.

    Whales are marine mammals. This is common knowledge; pretty well universal, I would say. So, when you seek to understand exactly what the scientist meant when he asked “how could a whale fit in the boat?”, you either need to accept that the scientist knew that the whale was a marine mammal, or you need to demonstrate a plausible case that he somehow didn’t know that.

    There are two possible explanations for the scientist’s question that occur to me.

    The first I’ve already pointed to; he was being ironic or humorous.

    The second others have pointed to. The whales couldn’t in fact have survived in the oceans (because of reduced salinity, or the enormous amount of silt and dirt washed into them, necessary to create in just over a year all the sedimentary rocks that creation science insists were laid down during the flood) and the scientist’s question was inviting precisely your simplistic response (“whales can live in water!”) as an opener to a discussion of why, although whales can live in salt water, they can’t live in salt-free mud, and they would therefore have to have been accommodated in the ark. Note that I’m not asking you to accept that the scientist would have been correct in arguing this; just that he might have argued it.

    Your favoured explanation is that the scientist somehow didn’t know that whales are marine mammals. I’m afraid that looks to me like much the least likely explanation - it’s barely credible, and your own critical faculties should tell you this - and you’re going to have to produce some reason for dismissing more obvious and more likely possibilities before you can expect anyone to take it seriously. And the fact that you don’t appear to see any of this confirms all our worst suspicions about supporters of creation science.


  • #908
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    @ Perigrinus
    To say that he was joking makes no sense. It doesn't work as a joke in the first place. Now you will say he is a scientist and scientists have a quirky sense of humour.
    I say he made a mistake. Thats all. He said something extremely stupid and didn't realise it.
    Option 2
    He could have been trying to be clever and asking about the whales, then when one of the believers says "Whales can swim!"...the scientist throws his 'trump card' then about whales being unable to survive in fresh water.
    That's a possibility he tried that..
    So now we are left with this detail, we have accepted the Ark story, but a niggling detail (for you) is how the whales survived.
    I'm sure if you research enough you will discover how the whales survived.
    Welcome to the fold :)


  • #909
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    @ Monty...Your question
    " how exactly you expect us to believe that Noah gathered up millions of species if insect, spider, slugs, worms etc. etc."

    They came to him!


  • #910
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    So now we are left with this detail, we have accepted the Ark story, but a niggling detail (for you) is how the whales survived.
    I'm sure if you research enough you will discover how the whales survived.
    Welcome to the fold :)


  • #911
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    They came to him!
    Is that seriously the best you can do? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA


  • Advertisement
  • #912
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Haha (not)

    Well, how else could it have been done?

    Animals travel u know? See the herds of animals travelling on the prairies of this world? Are they just wandering round or do they have direction?


  • #913
    Gumbi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,682 ✭✭✭Gumbi


    systemsready wrote: »
    Haha (not)
    They came to him. How? Magically? A teleportation device?


  • #914
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Gumbi wrote: »
    They came to him. How? Magically? A teleportation device?
    They probably had a vote. Spiders are very sceptical, so I imagine the butterflies had a hard time convincing them.


  • #915
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    To be honest, I hadn't really thought that much about the details of it before watching Maxwells rubbish on TV. But now that I think about it more and look at the **** that people are presenting as 'fact'. I'm certain now it is a very possible event.
    Without a doubt this event of Noah's Ark happened.
    God is Amazing!


  • #916
    Gumbi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,682 ✭✭✭Gumbi


    systemsready wrote: »
    To be honest, I hadn't really thought that much about the details of it before watching Maxwells rubbish on TV. But now that I think about it more and look at the **** that people are presenting as 'fact'. I'm certain now it is a very possible event.
    Without a doubt this event of Noah's Ark happened.
    God is Amazing!
    Answer the question. Stop making claims and then dodging challenges to said claims.


  • #917
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    I'm certain now it is a very possible event.
    Well it can be easily proved. All you need to do is get a family of people to build a giant ark using late stone-age technology and then fill it with a pair or seven pairs of every single species on the planet in a week.

    Easy peasy. Why don't they prove it, seeing as you say it is 'very possible'?


  • #918
    Lantus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,873 ✭✭✭Lantus


    systemsready wrote: »
    There are streams and pools of freshwater in the sea, that maintain their status , never mixing with salt water.
    http://phys.org/news/2011-04-fresh-arctic-shift-gulf-stream.html
    Do the research

    This article says nothing about there being distinct pools of freash water existing in the ocean. It's about freshwater MIXING with sea water and altering the salinity of the sea. You cannot put freshwater and sea water next to each other and expect them to respect their boundaries. They are both essentially water and will mix.

    Salt water is highly damaging to most plants, soils and food crops. After one year severe damage would of been done to the ecosystem. It is not likley that any of these larger animals would of survived after getting off the boat. The variety of ecosystems needed to support them would not of existed. Lions need to eat to survive. Once they had eaten the last pair of gazelles in the world shortly after getting off the boat (and most of the other animals) where did they then come from? Assuming of course they hadn't become totally domesticated and unable to function in the wild, or sucummbed to disease or illness or any other ailment or accident.


  • #919
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Gumbi wrote: »
    Answer the question. Stop making claims and then dodging challenges to said claims.

    I answered the question.
    If Noah's Ark existed, then obviously God ordered the building of it. Is God then not able to direct all the animals towards the ark?
    That would seem an easy thing to do for God.
    Think of it logically and you will get it.
    Stop thinking with things other than your brain


  • #920
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Lantus wrote: »
    This article says nothing about there being distinct pools of freash water existing in the ocean. It's about freshwater MIXING with sea water and altering the salinity of the sea. You cannot put freshwater and sea water next to each other and expect them to respect their boundaries. They are both essentially water and will mix.

    Salt water is highly damaging to most plants, soils and food crops. After one year severe damage would of been done to the ecosystem. It is not likley that any of these larger animals would of survived after getting off the boat. The variety of ecosystems needed to support them would not of existed. Lions need to eat to survive. Once they had eaten the last pair of gazelles in the world shortly after getting off the boat (and most of the other animals) where did they then come from? Assuming of course they hadn't become totally domesticated and unable to function in the wild, or sucummbed to disease or illness or any other ailment or accident.

    When you seek detail of an event that happened thousands of years ago, you will be seriously misled. Because a fragment of 'evidence' or a theory constructed from a single notion can always result in a complete misunderstanding of what actually happened.
    Darwin's theory for example


  • #921
    shizz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    systemsready wrote: »
    Gumbi wrote: »
    Answer the question. Stop making claims and then dodging challenges to said claims.

    I answered the question.
    If Noah's Ark existed, then obviously God ordered the building of it. Is God then not able to direct all the animals towards the ark?
    That would seem an easy thing to do for God.
    Think of it logically and you will get it.
    Stop thinking with things other than your brain
    Why would god go through all that trouble when all he has to do is make everything so by a click of his fingers? If he is so powerful to manipulate everything at will, why couldnt he do this?


  • Advertisement
  • #922
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    If the earth was going to be destroyed by a comet or something in 50 years, and man had the capacity to travel in space to another planet that could support human life, (but on that planet were no animals or edible fruits etc, just fertile soil, air, and water and sunlight, HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION!) Don't you think we would take as many creatures with us as possible, in pairs, and that we would make a means to transport these creatures in safety and release them on the new land?

    Why do we think that ancient man was unable to think like that?

    And dont say ancient man hadn't the means. Humans today would find it difficult to build the pyramids.


  • #923
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    shizz wrote: »
    Why would god go through all that trouble when all he has to do is make everything so by a click of his fingers? If he is so powerful to manipulate everything at will, why couldnt he do this?

    If God would do everything at a 'click of his fingers' for us then what would be the point of our existence. We could ask that why didnt God have houses and all the things we need for survival on the earth , ready made for us, rather than us having to discover ways to protect ourselves from the elements.

    Thats the way things are.


  • #924
    Lantus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,873 ✭✭✭Lantus


    systemsready wrote: »
    When you seek detail of an event that happened thousands of years ago, you will be seriously misled. Because a fragment of 'evidence' or a theory constructed from a single notion can always result in a complete misunderstanding of what actually happened.
    Darwin's theory for example

    Dont question anything eh? Just accept it as written? A simpler mind may accept that but with the benefit of information we have today most people are unable to accept this and rightly so question everything! You cannot be misled by how much water an animal needs per day to survive or how much food and waste is produced and how could you place so many animals in such a tiny vessel side by side for 1 year and expect them to be alive let alone in any fit condition maaned by ONLY 8 people who up until that point had no knowledge or experience dealing with large dangerous and wild animals.

    No educated person with access to information could accept this story as written.


  • #925
    shizz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    systemsready wrote: »
    shizz wrote: »
    Why would god go through all that trouble when all he has to do is make everything so by a click of his fingers? If he is so powerful to manipulate everything at will, why couldnt he do this?

    If God would do everything at a 'click of his fingers' for us then what would be the point of our existence. We could ask that why didnt God have houses and all the things we need for survival on the earth , ready made for us, rather than us having to discover ways to protect ourselves from the elements.

    Thats the way things are.

    But he wasnt doing something for us. He wanted to basically start again. Why involve a human in this? Was he not capable of conpleting the task himself?

    He has power over everything yes? Considering he is the creator, Just stop time set things right and begin again. Maybe he just loved the idea of killing everyone on earth and forcing a family to squish 2 of every animal tetris style on to an ark. Sounds rather sadistic to me.


  • #926
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    shizz wrote: »
    But he wasnt doing something for us. He wanted to basically start again. Why involve a human in this? Was he not capable of conpleting the task himself?

    He has power over everything yes? Considering he is the creator, Just stop time set things right and begin again. Maybe he just loved the idea of killing everyone on earth and forcing a family to squish 2 of every animal tetris style on to an ark. Sounds rather sadistic to me.

    If he started everything over again without using Noah, how would we know about it. We would have no narration of the story from father to son.
    The whole purpose of the flood was to clean the earth of corruption and start again with the non corrupted believers-Noah and family. We know about the wrath of God and we know that we must be like Noah in order to be spared the wrath. Thats why.


  • #927
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    Lantus wrote: »
    Dont question anything eh? Just accept it as written? A simpler mind may accept that but with the benefit of information we have today most people are unable to accept this and rightly so question everything! You cannot be misled by how much water an animal needs per day to survive or how much food and waste is produced and how could you place so many animals in such a tiny vessel side by side for 1 year and expect them to be alive let alone in any fit condition maaned by ONLY 8 people who up until that point had no knowledge or experience dealing with large dangerous and wild animals.

    No educated person with access to information could accept this story as written.

    I question everything, but as I question I understand my limitations. We are unsure how many things work or exist in our universe but yet they exist, even though they may defy scientific understanding at the moment.


  • #928
    Gumbi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,682 ✭✭✭Gumbi


    Where are the dinosaurs now, by the way?


  • #929
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    I answered the question.
    If Noah's Ark existed, then obviously God ordered the building of it. Is God then not able to direct all the animals towards the ark?
    That would seem an easy thing to do for God.
    Think of it logically and you will get it.
    Stop thinking with things other than your brain
    So perhaps your god was working for Zeus? Zeus can make him do whatever he wants, as he's the father of the gods.


  • #930
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    systemsready wrote: »
    If he started everything over again without using Noah, how would we know about it.
    If he existed, he could have told us. Or he could have implanted the story in our brains. The god you postulate seems a bit impotent, or at least not very smart.


  • Advertisement
  • #931
    shizz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    systemsready wrote: »
    shizz wrote: »
    But he wasnt doing something for us. He wanted to basically start again. Why involve a human in this? Was he not capable of conpleting the task himself?

    He has power over everything yes? Considering he is the creator, Just stop time set things right and begin again. Maybe he just loved the idea of killing everyone on earth and forcing a family to squish 2 of every animal tetris style on to an ark. Sounds rather sadistic to me.

    If he started everything over again without using Noah, how would we know about it. We would have no narration of the story from father to son.
    The whole purpose of the flood was to clean the earth of corruption and start again with the non corrupted believers-Noah and family. We know about the wrath of God and we know that we must be like Noah in order to be spared the wrath. Thats why.

    How would we know about it? Oh I dunno, he could tell us all at once by appearing to everyone. "ok guys the last time I made you all I ****ed up bad. So here is what you shouldnt do so i don't go all hulk again. Basically don't be a dick. Oh no wait I wasn't supposed to tell you that until the new testemant."

    So he cleaned the Earth of corruption? That went well didn't it? He should pop along again sometime soon to start over again at this rate.

    It's nice of him to create me just so he can put his "wrath" upon me. Sadist.


Advertisement