Evidence of NOAH's FLOOD

[Eli G]

Got a link about these thousands of non-endemic animal bones in caves?

Search about Għar Dalam cave in Malta and Polledrara di Cecanibbio in Rome.

 

[John53]

Search about Għar Dalam cave in Malta and Polledrara di Cecanibbio in Rome.

Għar Dalam cave has bones of animals that were isolated when Malta became an island and have subsequently gone extinct on Malta. How is that unusual?

Għar Dalam - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Can't find much about the other one that is in English but what I read they have found examples of animals that have gone extinct in Europe like the Straight-tusked Elephant

 

[Eli G]

Bones of animals that do not inhabit the island of Malta—hippopotamuses, pygmy elephants and red deer—can be seen in Għar Dalam cave. No one complete skeleton has been discovered there, indicating that the carcasses of these animals were evidently crushed together as they were washed down a onetime torrent valley. When?

 

[YoursTrue]

What else did Judge Jones say?

Interesting statement made by Jones, the presiding judge:



“After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science.”



So, what may actually be truth, was not the important issue to Judge Jones, i.e., the court.



Jones was more interested in keeping the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment intact, that is, the separation of church & state.



This is the underlying reason for his ruling. What explanation may be accurate, was of lesser importance.



But as usual, those putting their faith in Natural Methodologies take it & run with it, looking for confirmation bias. Not truth.



And Science doesn’t need that mentality.

That would depend on what parts of it you read.

Paul's defamation of Moses:

We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at the end of what was fading away.
2 Corinthains 3:13

Exodus 34​
29	And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.
30	And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.
31	And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.
32	And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that YHWH had spoken with him in mount Sinai.
33	And [till] Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.
34	But when Moses went in before YHWH to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel [that] which he was commanded.
35	And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him.

Paul did not defame Moses. The Israelites were hurting the God that took them out of bondage.

 

[F1fan]

There are many ways to know the truth about many things.

If you have a friend who tells you 40 things, and 35 of them are things you've already proven to be true, isn't there a good chance that the other 5 are true too? Then your friend is reliable; you can trust him.

Sure. But if # 36 is false. Then # 37 is false. Then # 38 is false, then it begins looking like fraud where true things were lined up with the hope the all things are accepted as true. This is why ethics is important in science, but not in religion. Critical thought allows a person to assess the reliability of information. Faith doesn't.

That's the way the Bible is: it says many things that skeptics have questioned for many years... little by little all of them have been proven true. So the Bible is reliable, and skeptics are not.

A blatantly false statement.

You made this claim, where is the evidence?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bones of animals that do not inhabit the island of Malta—hippopotamuses, pygmy elephants and red deer—can be seen in Għar Dalam cave. No one complete skeleton has been discovered there, indicating that the carcasses of these animals were evidently crushed together as they were washed down a onetime torrent valley. When?

Link a reliable source that claims this.

 

[Eli G]

Not interested in responding to polemics seasoned with bad attitude.

Have a good day.

 

[John53]

Bones of animals that do not inhabit the island of Malta—hippopotamuses, pygmy elephants and red deer—can be seen in Għar Dalam cave. No one complete skeleton has been discovered there, indicating that the carcasses of these animals were evidently crushed together as they were washed down a onetime torrent valley. When?

When they died. Bones get washed into caves a lot because the cave is a low point. Gravity rules.

 

[Ebionite]

Paul did not defame Moses.

Paul defamed him when he wrote that Moses wore the veil so that the Israelites wouldn't know that his "shine" had gone.

 

[Eli G]

Again:

Bones of animals that do not inhabit the island of Malta—hippopotamuses, pygmy elephants and red deer—can be seen in Għar Dalam cave. No one complete skeleton has been discovered there, indicating that the carcasses of these animals were evidently crushed together as they were washed down a onetime torrent valley. When?

Until next time.

 

[F1fan]

Besides, frauds happen more often than they should among scientists who are being pressured for results or have vested interests.

If all that I have said before is true, should I blindly believe all scientists say? Isn't that blind faith?

You are looking for excuses. Notice you cite no actual cases, nor any sort of percentage that it happens. You offer no evidence, but you want us to trust you? Scientists usually work at universities and get grants to perform studies. Some studies are poorly thought out and don't end up with results. Scientists have the reputations on the line so must be ethical and show their work, even if it fails to deliver results. There have been mistakes and even rare cases of fraud, but it is rare. What you might be looking at is how industry will hire scientists willing to play with the numbers for the right price. Unethical people. Examples are those who work for the fossil fuel industry and create false reports about climate change.

The irony is that what you describe is what happens at Answers in Genesis and the Discovery Institude. These businesses exist to make money off of gullible Christians, and give them bogus materials that look like science to poorly informed folks. There's your fraud.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bones of animals that do not inhabit the island of Malta—hippopotamuses, pygmy elephants and red deer—can be seen in Għar Dalam cave. No one complete skeleton has been discovered there, indicating that the carcasses of these animals were evidently crushed together as they were washed down a onetime torrent valley. When?

Malta was not a lone island during the last glacial maximum. Your claim about how they got there has not been substantiated. If there were people inhabiting the cave it would not be unreasonable for them to bring bones in at times:

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not interested in responding to polemics seasoned with bad attitude.

Have a good day.

"Polemics"? Where?

 

[Eli G]

You are looking for excuses. Notice you cite no actual cases, nor any sort of percentage that it happens. You offer no evidence, but you want us to trust you? Scientists usually work at universities and get grants to perform studies. Some studies are poorly thought out and don't end up with results. Scientists have the reputations on the line so must be ethical and show their work, even if it fails to deliver results. There have been mistakes and even rare cases of fraud, but it is rare. ...

Mmmh, no. Be real.

There’s far more scientific fraud than anyone wants to admit | Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus

Despite recent scandals of research misconduct and error, the academic world still seems determined to look the other way

www.theguardian.com

 

[F1fan]

Mmmh, no. Be real.

There’s far more scientific fraud than anyone wants to admit | Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus

Despite recent scandals of research misconduct and error, the academic world still seems determined to look the other way

www.theguardian.com

I've seen this already and the major dilemma is less and less funding. As the world get more complex there is less money available to conduct work. Things break down when money is tight. There is more getting spent on areas that will help profits of corporations. I'd prefer the wealthy get taxed more so funding can be increased and the norms of science restored. As I noted the lack of funding has meant some scientists work for corpotations, and they do have a vested interest in certain results, and people need to pay their bills, including scientists.

 

[Eli G]

Are you retracting accusing me of falsifying my claims?

It is said: you were right.

Do you think any other of the above statements I've made is false? Do you need any other proof?

If not, then you see that I am right: scientists do not always tell the truth to the common public. The Bible has shown me to be more truthful than men. That's why I think what it says is true.

There are many reasons why I consider the Bible reliable:

1) is frank in speaking of the weaknesses and mistakes of God's faithful servants, such as Moses, David, and others;

2) contains advice that is still valid for the family, personality, dealings with others, etc.

3) contains exclusive information in its time, such as the quarantine, the roundness of the earth, the water cycle, that the earth hangs upon nothing, etc

4) contains detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled and others that are already coming

5) contains data on events, characters and historical places that no one can deny that they existed

6) Give details such as the measurements of the ark that God told Noah to build, the materials he should build it, the floors it should have, the roof he should make, how he should waterproof it, and other interesting details. Although there are other ancient flood stories, none are as specific.

There are more proofs that the Bible is reliable.

 

[F1fan]

Are you retracting accusing me of falsifying my claims?

It is said: you were right.

Do you think any other of the above statements I've made is false? Do you need any other proof?

If not, then you see that I am right: scientists do not always tell the truth to the common public. The Bible has shown me to be more truthful than men. That's why I think what it says is true.

There are many reasons why I consider the Bible reliable:

1) is frank in speaking of the weaknesses and mistakes of God's faithful servants, such as Moses, David, and others;

Stories already existed that refer to flawed humans.

2) contains advice that is still valid for the family, personality, dealings with others, etc.

Like how to treat slaves. Immoral.

3) contains exclusive information in its time, such as the quarantine, the roundness of the earth, the water cycle, that the earth hangs upon nothing, etc

It calls the earth a circle. But the Greeks already knew it was a planet. So no supernatural needed.

4) contains detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled and others that are already coming

False. Jews disagree with Christians about this, so far from true.

5) contains data on events, characters and historical places that no one can deny that they existed

So does A Tale of Two Cities by Dickens. It refers to the French Revolution, but with fictional characters.

6) Give details such as the measurements of the ark that God told Noah to build, the materials he should build it, the floors it should have, the roof he should make, how he should waterproof it, and other interesting details. Although there are other ancient flood stories, none are as specific.

The Noah flood never happened, so this is laughable.

There are more proofs that the Bible is reliable.

You have zero so far.

 

[Eli G]

If doctors are able to falsify studies that end up killing thousands of people... what do you think other scientists will do who may think they don't directly affect anyone's life?

Have you ever meditated on the paleontological frauds that have to do with the theory of evolution?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mmmh, no. Be real.

There’s far more scientific fraud than anyone wants to admit | Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus

Despite recent scandals of research misconduct and error, the academic world still seems determined to look the other way

www.theguardian.com

You should have read it. A lot of the sources are from the field of medicine where publishing is very directly associated with the money that one earns. And they tend to be in the more predatory journals that are pay to publish. They have lowered their standards so that they could publish more papers. From the article:

" Particularly when it comes to medical research, fakery hurts real people. Take the example of Joachim Boldt – the German anesthesiologist who, with 186 retractions, now sits atop the Retraction Watch leader board of scientists with the most pulled papers."

In the more "boring" sciences, one where people do it because they want to know, not because they want to be rich, the retractions are still rather low.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If doctors are able to falsify studies that end up killing thousands of people... what do you think other scientists will do who may think they don't directly affect anyone's life?

Have you ever meditated on the paleontological frauds that have to do with the theory of evolution?

Since frauds are so easily caught most know that it would not do them any good. And money does not follow publishing as it does in the medical fields. Do you know who is caught lying at an even greater rate? Creation "scientists". They have a pathetic record. Of course they do not publish in real peer reviewed journals so they may not count.