How we know that there was no Flood of Noah.

[nPeace]

I'm going to heed the words of my God, and return evil for evil to no man... or woman. @Audie @Subduction Zone Have a wonderful day.
My smiley is back... and my emojis

 

[Audie]

Why are we playing a game? Who's gonna win? Hahaha wow this is my first active day on here and it's so funny how people are so rude when forums are supposed to promote free thinking open discussion etc.

It's fine. Nothing new but most people quoting me on here sound like angry teenagers so far.

You cannot defend your ignorant claims.

So make it someone elses fault.

Post a lot of nonsense, call names. A terrific start.

 

[CLee421]

The amount of life alive at any one time would only make one thin layer of fossils. If you look outside right now and reduced every bit of life to its hard preservable parts and nothing else you would see a barren wasteland. And please, don't make blanket claims that only demonstrate your ignorance. When you don't know you should ask questions.

In South Africa and a bit into its neighboring countries there is a formation called the Karoo Supergroup. This was an area of deposition for well over 100 million hears and there are by some estimates on the order of 800 billion land animal fossils in that one site alone:

Karoo Supergroup - Wikipedia

Think of 800 billion sheep on the face of the Earth at once (they range from large dinosaur to small lizard) and you only begin to see how much life had to be buried at once with your myth.

And no, your chart only tells us that people who live next to water often get flooded. That is all.

800 billion fossils was an estimate by an excited man. That hasn't been confirmed.

The point of the connections in flood stories is the matching properties of stories. Not just "a flood" but identical storylines or details.

Regarding carbon dating - since you reference a deposit of over "100 million years" you have to know how much carbon was there in the first place to know how much has been depleted - and they've found tissue of dinosaurs that wasn't fossilized.

I understand what you're saying regarding questioning the number of fossils but 1. That's speculation 2. How many TOTAL fossils have we found? 3. How many living creatures are there now (even though the living creatures now would not automatically determine the number of creatures at some point in the past)

 

[URAVIP2ME]

What are you talking about? Mt. Everest is millions of years old.
You do realize that this thread is supposed to be based upon real science, don't you?
EDIT: The collision that caused Mt Everest to grow began about thirty to fifty million years ago. I may have underestimated the age of the mountain:

Thank you for your reply. I don't disagree that Everest is millions of +years old.
I am saying the possibility about how high its height was appearing 'before' the Flood could be a factor.

 

[CLee421]

You cannot defend your ignorant claims.

So make it someone elses fault.

Post a lot of nonsense, call names. A terrific start.

Sweetie I don't have to defend anything.

You came in saying I knew "nothing" about geology and claimed I was parroting. Saying I'm ignorant. That's not a contribution to anything resembling a conversation. I can't do much with that. You clearly weren't trying to do anything productive.

My statements about the lack of courtesy is just an observation. I haven't actually called a name.

 

[Subduction Zone]

800 billion fossils was an estimate by an excited man. That hasn't been confirmed.

The point of the connections in flood stories is the matching properties of stories. Not just "a flood" but identical storylines or details.

Regarding carbon dating - since you reference a deposit of over "100 million years" you have to know how much carbon was there in the first place to know how much has been depleted - and they've found tissue of dinosaurs that wasn't fossilized.

I understand what you're saying regarding questioning the number of fossils but 1. That's speculation 2. How many TOTAL fossils have we found? 3. How many living creatures are there now (even though the living creatures now would not automatically determine the number of creatures at some point in the past)

Please, as a Christian you should avoid breaking the Ninth Commandment. The 800 billion figure was based upon the volume of the deposit and how much had been found to date. It was not made by an "excited man".

And the stories are far from matching. They have similar causes so the narratives will be similar. And they do not explain how some civilizations lived through these supposed floods without a hitch.

No one mentioned carbon dating. Carbon dating is only good for roughly 50,000 years.

Lastly you need to learn what "speculation" means. Your use of the term is once again a violation of the Ninth.

If you want more detail in response then ask your questions properly. One per post and I will gladly go over them with you. When you spray out a bunch of false claims I will merely point out your errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sweetie I don't have to defend anything.

You came in saying I knew "nothing" about geology and claimed I was parroting. Saying I'm ignorant. That's not a contribution to anything resembling a conversation. I can't do much with that. You clearly weren't trying to do anything productive.

My statements about the lack of courtesy is just an observation. I haven't actually called a name.

You continually prove that you are ignorant of geology. You should not complain when others point that out. The correct response is to try to learn, not to complain. You do not seem to realize that when you deny the work of people that know far more than you do in a field that that is rude behavior on your part. If you are polite others will respond politely. If you are rude, whether intentionally or by ignorance, people will respond rudely at times.

 

[CLee421]

Please, as a Christian you should avoid breaking the Ninth Commandment. The 800 billion figure was based upon the volume of the deposit and how much had been found to date. It was not made by an "excited man".

And the stories are far from matching. They have similar causes so the narratives will be similar. And they do not explain how some civilizations lived through these supposed floods without a hitch.

No one mentioned carbon dating. Carbon dating is only good for roughly 50,000 years.

Lastly you need to learn what "speculation" means. Your use of the term is once again a violation of the Ninth.

If you want more detail in response then ask your questions properly. One per post and I will gladly go over them with you. When you spray out a bunch of false claims I will merely point out your errors.

I am not here for approval but discussion. And I won't indulge tasteless comments long. You're not the OP and I'm not changing how I think or write on here for you.

Hence, not much else here for now.

 

[CLee421]

You continually prove that you are ignorant of geology. You should not complain when others point that out. The correct response is to try to learn, not to complain. You do not seem to realize that when you deny the work of people that know far more than you do in a field that that is rude behavior on your part. If you are polite others will respond politely. If you are rude, whether intentionally or by ignorance, people will respond rudely at times.

Right.

People who don't agree with you aren't automatically wrong or uneducated. And me disagreeing and saying what I think isn't automatically rude just because I don't swallow what is thrown at me immediately.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not here for approval but discussion. And I won't indulge tasteless comments long. You're not the OP and I'm not changing how I think or write on here for you.

Hence, not much else here for now.

I am the OP. And I have made no tasteless comments. I have merely made your errors clear.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right.

People who don't agree with you aren't automatically wrong or uneducated. And me disagreeing and saying what I think isn't automatically rude just because I don't swallow what is thrown at me immediately.

No, you are demonstrably ignorant. I can support my claims with valid sources. You one the other hand do not seem to be able to do so. I am trying to keep this from being about you and me by helping you with how to post properly. You will never learn with your current attitude.

 

[nPeace]

When you write a book it makes your supposed points much harder to find. It is best to quote a sentence or two and to link to the source.



No, that the Bible got a few things right does not make it "the most reliable book". You are ignoring all of the things that the Bible got wrong.



If the Bible gives the "true history" then why can't you find any reliable evidence that confirms that? We know there was no Exodus, we know that the flood story is a myth. We know that the Garden of Eden story is myth.




TLDR

Unanswered questions are not evidence for the Bible. At best they would be failures of the Bible. When you rely on refuted myths you end up disproving the Bible yourself.

I once saw... where is it... Ah.

So because one has not come across evidence for something, they know it isn't?
Yet you never apply that reasoning to the evolution theory - with all of it's roots, and joints missing, right?
Hope you liked the video.

 

[CLee421]

Ha! My mistake on the OP - talking on more than one thing.

There is work out there done besides the work you cited, that not just contradicts but disproves what you are arguing here.

But tasteless to me is trying to tell me how you want me to write to you in order to get a response. You said ask questions, I did, yet I didn't do it right. .? No thanks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thank you for your reply. I don't disagree that Everest is millions of +years old.
I am saying the possibility about how high its height was appearing 'before' the Flood could be a factor.

It's height has been roughly the same for throughout man's time on the Earth. It is a product of uplift and erosion so it may have even been taller in the past depending upon the rate of those forces.

 

[CLee421]

No, you are demonstrably ignorant. I can support my claims with valid sources. You one the other hand do not seem to be able to do so. I am trying to keep this from being about you and me by helping you with how to post properly. You will never learn with your current attitude.

I saw one reference but I was merely touching on the subject. I thought you asked in OP for comments regarding the flood to look into it further. But you are using it to hammer something you aren't moving on. I've said things I've seen evidence for but I don't document it. I don't live for this but joined after some lax time in forums.

 

[nPeace]

Ha! My mistake on the OP - talking on more that one thing.

There is work out there done besides the work you cited, that not just contradicts but disproves what you are arguing here.

But tasteless to me is trying to tell me how you want me to write to you in order to get a response. You said ask questions, I did, yet I didn't do it right. .? No thanks.

I would have given you more than one rating, but you are only allowed to give one... but very creative.
I see you have met the duet, but I think you can handle yourself.

 

[nPeace]

I saw one reference but I was merely touching on the subject. I thought you asked in OP for comments regarding the flood to look into it further. But you are using it to hammer something you aren't moving on. I've said things I've seen evidence for but I don't document it. I don't live for this but joined after some lax time in forums.

Welcome! Don't let the duet run you. There is always the option to ignore. There are a few nice guys here, so hang around.

 

[CLee421]

My comment regarding the attitudes of people on here is reflective of more than just this thread.

But Audie saying something about "creationists showing their hand" was a bit hysterical to me.

This is a conversation - or it should be. Coming in with the idea we are playing each other in some card game is a badly applied analogy. Especially when no real substance has been contributed by the person implying that. Only cold judgements because they don't like what I'm saying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I once saw... where is it... Ah.

So because one has not come across evidence for something, they know it isn't?
Yet you never apply that reasoning to the evolution theory - with all of it's roots, and joints missing, right?
Hope you liked the video.

When an event would leave massive evidence and there is no such evidence it is reasonable to conclude that that event never happened. Here is an example:

Your friend that lives fairly close to you calls and claims that a herd of buffalo just stampeded through his kitchen. You rush over and are there in five minutes and see that the kitchen looks normal. Do you believe his claim or is the lack of evidence evidence against in this case?

 

[CLee421]

Welcome! Don't let the duet run you. There is always the option to ignore. There are a few nice guys here, so hang around.

Thanks! I figured. And I am not easily deterred