Evidence of NOAH's FLOOD

[John53]

Oh, brother! Why are you ignoring what I’ve posted, specifically on Psalm 104:8,9?
I’m not going over it again.

I don't see the relevance. It's a poem where the author praises the greatness of their God

Covered it.
It was the Flood that created the Permafrost, encasing the animals we find within it.

You're not offering any evidence to back your claim.

In some areas, the fresh water Permafrost is over 1500 meters deep.

I don't know and we're getting roof repairs done at the moment but I will do some permafrost investigation when they finish.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh, brother! Why are you ignoring what I’ve posted, specifically on Psalm 104:8,9?
I’m not going over it again.

Covered it.
It was the Flood that created the Permafrost, encasing the animals we find within it.

In some areas, the fresh water Permafrost is over 1500 meters deep.

No. The ice caps can be dated using several independent means. They are far too old to be from after the flood. Do you need links?

 

[McBell]

I’m always surprised when Bible- bashers apply natural limits to an event that the Bible specifically describes as divine / supernatural.

I am not the least bit surprised that even though your ultimate answer is "GodDidIt" you are still trying real hard to explain it with those very natural limits...

If the natural limits do not apply as you claim, then why are you wasting everyone's time trying to explain how it happened within those limits?

 

[We Never Know]

I am not the least bit surprised that even though your ultimate answer is "GodDidIt" you are still trying real hard to explain it with those very natural limits...

If the natural limits do not apply as you claim, then why are you wasting everyone's time trying to explain how it happened within those limits?

Being science can't say if a god exists or not, for people, a god existing is just faith(faith isn't knowing), I find it rather to odd ask anyone to explain what isn't known.

 

[We Never Know]

Oh, brother! Why are you ignoring what I’ve posted, specifically on Psalm 104:8,9?
I’m not going over it again.

Covered it.
It was the Flood that created the Permafrost, encasing the animals we find within it.

In some areas, the fresh water Permafrost is over 1500 meters deep.

How did the flood create the permafrost?
If you already answered, link the post.

 

[Spiderman]

Guy at lunch asked me to google the meaning of the name Noah. It's rich with meaning involving a Meadow Lark, an Ark of the covenant I turned my spider cage into that I called "Meadow's Ark", filling it with sacr d items (like the Ark of the old covenant, present currently in Ethiopia, which I printed out) them finding carved into the sidewalk tonight "your pain, the Meadow Lark had stolen it , plucked it from your heart, cleansed you".

Meadow is a girl who died from 9 wounds shielding someone from bullets who I call "Messiah, Parkland Princess.

That bird that landed an hung out for a bit at my window, I have no recollection of seeing a bird fly and hang out at that window, here , or anywhere on fourth floor (in the more than a year I have lived here).

Very odd it should happen on the day where Noah, Ark, Meadow, and Lark, are most relevant for that.

Inanna , Queen of heaven, called her "Holy Vulva" the "boat of Heaven". The Catholic feast of "our lady of victories", celebrates "the battle of Lepanto, feast of the Rosary."

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I am not the least bit surprised that even though your ultimate answer is "GodDidIt" you are still trying real hard to explain it with those very natural limits...

If the natural limits do not apply as you claim, then why are you wasting everyone's time trying to explain how it happened within those limits?

I’m not. I’m simply posting the evidence we have, that resulted from it!
That should be quite clear.

If you feel that I’m “wasting” your time, there’s a simple solution: don’t read my posts on this topic.
Lol.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

How did the flood create the permafrost?
If you already answered, link the post.

Hello, We Never Know, hope you’re doing well.

Here’s one place:

Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

In Scripture I find Not authors (plural), but that the ' authors ' were God's secretary as per 2 Timothy 3:16-17. ALL of the figurative six days are summed up by the word ' day ' at Genesis 2:4. Thus, like today the word ' day ' has shades of meaning including when we speak of grandfather's day...

www.religiousforums.com

If you have another explanation for how it formed with it’s fresh water, & also provides a reasonable explanation for how megafauna got encased within it….

I’m willing to listen. Or read, in this case.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’m not. I’m simply posting the evidence we have, that resulted from it!
That should be quite clear.

If you feel that I’m “wasting” your time, there’s a simple solution: don’t read my posts on this topic.
Lol.

And I need to point out that it appears after all of these years you still do not understand the concept of evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hello, We Never Know, hope you’re doing well.

Here’s one place:

Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

In Scripture I find Not authors (plural), but that the ' authors ' were God's secretary as per 2 Timothy 3:16-17. ALL of the figurative six days are summed up by the word ' day ' at Genesis 2:4. Thus, like today the word ' day ' has shades of meaning including when we speak of grandfather's day...

www.religiousforums.com

If you have another explanation for how it formed with it’s fresh water, & also provides a reasonable explanation for how megafauna got encased within it….

I’m willing to listen. Or read, in this case.

LOL! It is rather hard to take a source seriously that does not even know the plural of evidence. Here is a hint, is it one sheep two sheeps? Oh, my spellcheck does not like that word. Oh oh.

 

[McBell]

LOL! It is rather hard to take a source seriously that does not even know the plural of evidence. Here is a hint, is it one sheep two sheeps? Oh, my spellcheck does not like that word. Oh oh.

That "source" they linked to is their own post made earlier in the thread...

 

[McBell]

I’m not. I’m simply posting the evidence we have, that resulted from it!
That should be quite clear.

If you feel that I’m “wasting” your time, there’s a simple solution: don’t read my posts on this topic.
Lol.

Except you did try talking about crevices...
Why mention them at all if you were merely going to jump to "GodDidIt"?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Except you did try talking about crevices...
Why mention them at all if you were merely going to jump to "GodDidIt"?

That wasn’t me.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And I need to point out that it appears after all of these years you still do not understand the concept of evidence.

You mean, like you do?

Oh, I’ll never be as good as that.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

LOL! It is rather hard to take a source seriously that does not even know the plural of evidence. Here is a hint, is it one sheep two sheeps? Oh, my spellcheck does not like that word. Oh oh.

Are you seriously going there again?

You were shown your error that time, too. From someone other than me.

Now it’s my turn:

However, in academic English the plural evidences is sometimes used: (specialist) The cave contained evidences of prehistoric settlement.

Oxford Learner's Dictionaries

Evidence - Oxford Learner's Dictionaries​

It’s rather hard to take you seriously.

Arrogance is never an endearing quality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean, like you do?

Oh, I’ll never be as good as that.

It is not that hard of a concept to understand. Trust me, if you can be honest you can understand the concept very very quickly.

The problem is that it will quickly become obvious to you that you have no evidence. This is the same definition of evidence that scientists use. Here it is in my own words:

Scientific evidence consists of observations that support or oppose a scientific theory or hypothesis.

That is it. Now the observations are usually of an empirical nature because if only one person can observe it it clearly cannot count. It has to be something that many people can observe.

Do you have any questions yet?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you seriously going there again?

You were shown your error that time, too. From someone other than me.

Now it’s my turn:

However, in academic English the plural evidences is sometimes used: (specialist) The cave contained evidences of prehistoric settlement.
View attachment 83320
Oxford Learner's Dictionaries

Evidence - Oxford Learner's Dictionaries​

Sorry, but since the do not even have one piece of "evidence" that use is still wrong. It is doubly wrong no matter what. To have "evidences" even by that source one needs more than one piece of evidence.

Zero is less than one and you need something more than one.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Sorry, but since the do not even have one piece of "evidence" that use is still wrong. It is doubly wrong no matter what. To have "evidences" even by that source one needs more than one piece of evidence.

Zero is less than one and you need something more than one.

Still can’t apologize, I see. That’s really a problem for you. Only you can change that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Still can’t apologize, I see. That’s really a problem for you. Only you can change that.

There is nothing to apologize for. If anything you need to apologize for using such a poor source. You can get your ideas from dishonest sources, but please do not link them here. It really harms your arguments.

If you can show that they have even one piece of evidence I will apologize. But you need to go back to the appropriate definition of evidence for a scientific discussion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Okay @Hockeycowboy , my mistake. I thought that you linked to a known lying source. Instead you admitted defeat by linking to an argument that you lost badly. In effect admitting that you are wrong again.


The offer still stands. Demonstrate that you have even one piece of scientific evidence and I will apologize to you.