How do you define SCIENCE?

[cladking]

they have told you that water that exist in the mantle, are chemically bound to minerals as ringwoodite.

I never said it wasn't bound. I said "water welled up from below according to the Bible.

I'm sure you already know that bound water can't be released and couldn't be reabsorbed.

And lastly, cladking & YoursTrue, if Flood did happen, what do you think would happen to salinity level in water. It would turn brackish, which are not only not drinkable for humans, it wouldn’t be good for most terrestrial animals, as well as it would most plants. Even most plants can only tolerate minimal salinity in water.

The Bible suggests everything dies anyway, remember. It doesn't matter if you drown in good water or bad.

Actually if the world flooded higher than Mt Everest then the oceans would be about the same concentration as saline solution.

What Genesis 7 & 8 describe isn’t remotely possible.

That is an opinion.

I might agree that the probability it happened is remote but then I don't know everything. Maybe it happens like clockwork.

 

[shunyadragon]

There were and are springs below. Anyway remember the drifting continents.

This has nothing to do with water welling up from the ground. The subduction zones take water down in the form found in the ocean sediments and are compressed into rock with water bonds in the rock.

The spreading zones of the mid-ocean ridges are volcanic rock containing water and hydrothermal vents mixing seawater from the ocean floor sediments with volcanic gases. No very deep water welling up from the interior of the Earth.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There were and are springs below. Anyway remember the drifting continents.

The proper name of what used to be called continental drift is Plate Tectonics, and includes a great deal more than what Wegener understood.

 

[Little Dragon]

The discussion is about SCIENCE -- Creation -- and religion. How do you define science, first of all? One definition of science: (yes, I know there are different "branches" of science, but looking for a broad definition):
Science: "The systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained:"
If possible, limit discussion to the definition of SCIENCE before striking out to other areas.

Personally, I would define science as the objective inquiry into the natural and physical world, by using observation and measurement and computer simulations as well as pure logical deduction to create mathematical models of reality. That can make accurate predictions of future events in the physical universe. Moreover, these observations and measurements etc must all be independently reproducible, different scientists should measure and observe the same results. For that model or theory, to be verified and not falsified by the peer review process.

A good example. Is chemistry. Chemists, knowing the oxidation states of atoms, can make predictions about what kind of molecular compounds they will form, to test this, they mix up those atoms and heat them and subject them to UV light and everything else, to see what they get. If what they get is what they expected to get, then the theory of chemical oxidation states and therefore electron shell configurations, is proven.

If I pass Hydrogen gas over a piece of graphite (which is an allotrope of Carbon) knowing that Hydrogen atoms need 1 electron to complete their shell of electrons and that a Carbon atom can share up to 4 of its own electrons with Hydrogen atoms. Then not only can I predict what molecule they form is going to be, methane, but by what ratio. With this simple formula. Which can applied to any chemical reaction, if you know the oxidation states of the reactants.


(2)H2+C=CH4

Therefore:
To make 1 molecule of methane (CH4) I will need 2 x molecules of Hydrogen (H2) and 1 Carbon atom.

 

[YoursTrue]

The proper name of what used to be called continental drift is Plate Tectonics, and includes a great deal more than what Wegener understood.

ok. But there was/is a lot of water. I'll look into it more, it's kind of interesting.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yup but peer review is a lot less likely to be incorrect; and you did equate the two. Whether meant to or not is another story.

"You know like majority opinion, peer reviewed etc."

That places them in the same category.

You obviously misinterpreted but what you are doing is showing me your recalcitrance. Have a good evening.

 

[Soandso]

You obviously misinterpreted but what you are doing is showing me your recalcitrance. Have a good evening.

Honestly, it did come across to me as well that you were equivocating the two since you listed them together. I wouldn't have thought otherwise without you clarifying

 

[syo]

A group of retards.

 

[YoursTrue]

Honestly, it did come across to me as well that you were equivocating the two since you listed them together. I wouldn't have thought otherwise without you clarifying

ok...

 

[The Hammer]

You obviously misinterpreted but what you are doing is showing me your recalcitrance. Have a good evening.

First smart thing you've said all day.

 

[gnostic]

The Bible suggests everything dies anyway, remember. It doesn't matter if you drown in good water or bad

I was referring to what humans and animals would drink, AFTER THE FLOOD, if the water were contaminated with higher salinity that usually occurred after any flood.

Such a massive flood as narrated in Genesis would mean no water were safe to drink for awhile.

 

[shunyadragon]

I might agree that the probability it happened is remote but then I don't know everything. Maybe it happens like clockwork.

Concerning the subject of the thread in the nature of Science.

I can confirm one thing probability has nothing to do with whether science can determine or predict the chain of cause-and-effect outcomes of the nature of our physical existence. The predictable outcomes of the chain of cause-and-effect events are falsified by Methodological Naturalism.

Science today is defined by the results of Methodological Naturalism not opinions.

Probability may be a factor in confirming the validity of the sampling of the population in a research project. See:

Probability Sampling: Definition, Methods and Examples

Probability sampling is a technique which the researcher chooses samples from a larger population using a method based on probability theory.

www.questionpro.com

 

[shunyadragon]

I was referring to what humans and animals would drink, AFTER THE FLOOD, if the water were contaminated with higher salinity that usually occurred after any flood.

Such a massive flood as narrated in Genesis would mean no water were safe to drink for awhile.

How about thousands if not millions of years?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

ok. But there was/is a lot of water. I'll look into it more, it's kind of interesting.

Plate Tectonics is my favorite part of Geology. I don't know if you find it interesting or not. I used to be able to rattle off the lines of evidence for it, but that was so long ago

 

[YoursTrue]

Plate Tectonics is my favorite part of Geology. I don't know if you find it interesting or not. I used to be able to rattle off the five lines of evidence for it, but that was so long ago

Yes, I learned about it a while back and I find it interesting.

 

[shunyadragon]

Plate Tectonics is my favorite part of Geology. I don't know if you find it interesting or not. I used to be able to rattle off the lines of evidence for it, but that was so long ago

Yes, plate tectonics makes a lot of things rattle, rock and roll..

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Do you know the sea levels thousands of years ago?

Good question.

Regarding ancient sea levels…. There are many areas where we see river channels extending far beyond the continental shelves. Indicating water levels were lower.

It’s fascinating to study!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Interesting post.

I do have a question though. Given that these were not literate cultures, and left no writings, how would we know about these festivals? I mean, it's one thing to examine graves. It's quite another to claim we know all the traditions surrounding festivals.

I don’t think I properly understand your question….

I would say, “because these cultures still celebrate them, or were still celebrating them at the time they were discovered”?

Does that answer your question?

You know, ancient cultures all had their own calendars, their own way of keeping track of days & months. Yet these festivals, according to Haliburton & supported by Garnier, were mostly held on the days that coincide with our October 30 thru November 3.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don’t think I properly understand your question….

I would say, “because these cultures still celebrate them, or were still celebrating them at the time they were discovered”?

Does that answer your question?

No, because you haven't supplied any evidence towards your claim. Maybe you are right. But I don't know that you are right, because you are not supplying evidence. For all I know, you could simply be making up the whole thing.

My question, again, is that if there is no written record about these so-called festivals, how then do you know they happened?? If you can't answer that, then don't keep pushing it.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

@IndigoChild5559 ,
I didn’t write the books, I just found them. They are presenting the evidence, I’m just reporting it.