Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

[Jose Fly]

The events surrounding the Flood do explain much of what is observed. Fortunately, it’s not altered one bit by your assertions, which always seem to lack references.

Absolutely unbelievable.....

 

[nPeace]

If and could be are not arguments. Show your math for such a possibility.

I hear that in science all the time. Have you asked them to show the math? We showed the record. Like the scientists that didn't witness the events, I haven't either. Have you?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Excuse me..."eukaryotic amoebas" evolved into man, then.

For a guy so sensitive about a "srawman",
you are funny, but, rong agin.

“We are a group of fish that lives on land and breathes air. Same kind as the lungfish.
95% consensus on birds. The rest contrarian diehards will die off, as they always do in science.

We are not bacteria, we are multi-cellular version of eukaryotes, the same kind as amoeba. So saying that we are still a kind of amoeba would be correct.

#109 “

You all should get your stories straight.

Do you think that there is something impossible
about a transition from single cell to multicellular
organism?

Yeah....mindless processes creating new, functional information.

Reminds me of this “gem”:

Pleiotropy: Watching multicellularity evolve before our eyes

Lol.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You cannot figure out that this is crazy talk?

I can figure out this is Bible talk as found at Genesis 7:11 B. The floodgates of the heavens were opened.
On the 2nd creative day God made the expanse that formed the division between the waters 'below' and the waters 'above' - Genesis 1:6-8. So, those waters above the expanse remained in place until the Flood.
That is the reference to those waters as found at 2 Peter 3:5-6.

 

[Bear Wild]

You used another bland statement. Was that an explanation?
Since I gave you an argument containing geological information in support of the flood, the best you can do is state specifically what all refers to.

I have given a piece of geologic information about the rate of rise of the himalayin

I can figure out this is Bible talk as found at Genesis 7:11 B. The floodgates of the heavens were opened.
On the 2nd creative day God made the expanse that formed the division between the waters 'below' and the waters 'above' - Genesis 1:6-8. So, those waters above the expanse remained in place until the Flood.
That is the reference to those waters as found at 2 Peter 3:5-6.

Myth on top of myth.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Myth on top of myth.

Can you provide information that a water canopy over the Earth never existed ______

 

[Bear Wild]

Can you provide information that a water canopy over the Earth never existed ______

Yes the information is contained in the geologic record and the concept of the conservation of matter.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You really -really dont get it that every species would
show similar genrtic limitations if they descended from
two individuals?
But never mind. God magiced them, right?

First of all, according to Scripture, Adam and Eve were formed with perfect human health.
They would Not get sick, they would Not die. There was No deadline to being perfectly healthy all the time.
By breaking God's Law they lost their perfect human health, so they could only pass down to us what they now had.
In other words, Not by God, but by themselves they lost health and the right to everlasting life on Earth.
If we could stop sinning we would Not die. Because we can't stop sinning we die.
Since we can't resurrect oneself or another, then we need someone who can resurrect us. Jesus can and will.
Through Jesus we can gain everlasting life as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.
Jesus will undo all the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us - Revelation 1:18.

 

[Audie]

“We are a group of fish that lives on land and breathes air. Same kind as the lungfish.
95% consensus on birds. The rest contrarian diehards will die off, as they always do in science.

We are not bacteria, we are multi-cellular version of eukaryotes, the same kind as amoeba. So saying that we are still a kind of amoeba would be correct.

#109 “

You all should get your stories straight.



Yeah....mindless processes creating new, functional information.

Reminds me of this “gem”:

Pleiotropy: Watching multicellularity evolve before our eyes

Lol.

"Amoeba is still correct"

If you had said 2+2=3, you'd find a way to say it is correct.

The lol is best directed at yourself.

 

[Audie]

First of all, according to Scripture, Adam and Eve were formed with perfect human health.
They would Not get sick, they would Not die. There was No deadline to being perfectly healthy all the time.
By breaking God's Law they lost their perfect human health, so they could only pass down to us what they now had.
In other words, Not by God, but by themselves they lost health and the right to everlasting life on Earth.
If we could stop sinning we would Not die. Because we can't stop sinning we die.
Since we can't resurrect oneself or another, then we need someone who can resurrect us. Jesus can and will.
Through Jesus we can gain everlasting life as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.
Jesus will undo all the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us - Revelation 1:18.

Are you even aware that not one word of
your cut n paste preachin' has anything to
do with what I said?

Doubtful. Just fuhgedaboutit,
as some say in NYC.

 

[Shad]

I hear that in science all the time. Have you asked them to show the math?

Probability assessments are based on math and data which scientists provide all the time.

We showed the record. Like the scientists that didn't witness the events, I haven't either. Have you?

Witnessing an event is not required. See criminal forensics.

 

[nPeace]

Probability assessments are based on math and data which scientists provide all the time.

Give me a good example "based on math and data" that I can compare notes.

Witnessing an event is not required. See criminal forensics.

Agreed. I'm glad we agree.

 

[Shad]

Give me a good example "based on math and data" that I can compare notes.

I am not making a claim about possibility of something, you are.

 

[SkepticThinker]

First of all, according to Scripture, Adam and Eve were formed with perfect human health.
They would Not get sick, they would Not die. There was No deadline to being perfectly healthy all the time.
By breaking God's Law they lost their perfect human health, so they could only pass down to us what they now had.
In other words, Not by God, but by themselves they lost health and the right to everlasting life on Earth.
If we could stop sinning we would Not die. Because we can't stop sinning we die.
Since we can't resurrect oneself or another, then we need someone who can resurrect us. Jesus can and will.
Through Jesus we can gain everlasting life as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.
Jesus will undo all the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us - Revelation 1:18.

Great. Go ahead and demonstrate that this is the case.

 

[Audie]

Great. Go ahead and demonstrate that this is the case.

He has, already, having demonstrated blind faith.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So Christianity is a sect of Jewish religion?

Yes, sort of a spin-off, like "LaVerne and Shirley" was a spin-off from "Happy Days."

By this reckoning, Islam can be likened to "Mork and Mindy," another "Happy Days" spin-off, and Mormonism to "Joanie loves Chachi."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Give me a good example "based on math and data" that I can compare notes.



Agreed. I'm glad we agree.

You seem to think that a probability argument can be made against the theory of evolution. That has never worked. Scientists do not very often make probability arguments because there are usually too many unknowns to make such arguments viable. They are very often based upon one or more false premises. All that it takes to refute such an argument is to find the false premises. Real scientists are aware of this fact and as a result generally avoid such faulty arguments. Creationists are far from being real scientists. They do not follow the scientific method. They love probability arguments, but they all tend to fail. As I said earlier all one has to do is to find the false premise and the argument falls apart.

So you are unlikely to find any serious source that makes a probability argument and you will in all likelihood not be able to find a probability argument that has not already been refuted.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Can you provide information that a water canopy over the Earth never existed

You can provide it yourself with a Google search. Let me help you get started:

The Vapor Canopy Hypothesis Holds No Water

Pretty much all of the evidence you would ever want for any scientific issue for which evidence exists is readily available to those who are interested. You don't need to ask others on message boards if your purpose is to acquire new information. Science books are a good investment as well, as are university and science classes.

By breaking God's Law they lost their perfect human health

That seems a little harsh. When is that ever an appropriate response to a loved one?

If you had said 2+2=3, you'd find a way to say it is correct.

Even more so if the Bible had said it.

“If somewhere in the Bible I were to find a passage that said 2 + 2 = 5, I wouldn't question what I am reading in the Bible. I would believe it, accept it as true, and do my best to work it out and understand it."- Pastor Peter laRuffa

 

[Jose Fly]

Can you provide information that a water canopy over the Earth never existed ______

I swear....it's like you creationists all took a class, "Shifting the burden of proof 101". I guess that's scheduled right after your "Dodging questions" and right before your "Waving away data" courses.

 

[Jose Fly]

You can provide it yourself with a Google search. Let me help you get started:

The Vapor Canopy Hypothesis Holds No Water

When @Hockeycowboy asserted the existence of a "water canopy", I did the unthinkable.....asked questions!! I asked him how much water was in the canopy, how the water got there, what kept it in place, what triggered it to fall, and why there isn't one around the earth now. Guess what he did? Ignored it.

I know, I know....you're shocked that a creationist would do such a thing.