Facts according to who?
Facts are not open to argument
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Facts according to who?
Facts are not open to argument
Yes they are.
Fact : a thing that is known or proved to be true.
If it does not meet that criteria then its not a fact and making unsubstantiated claims based on bronze age myth doesn't meet that criteria.
What claim? Has a fact ever been disproved? Who decides what is fact?
You have made several claims on this thread, you choose
Such as?
Are you not capable of remembering what you posted?
By what mechanism does God poof this canopy of water into being? You're positing magic as a geomorphological agent.What about the environment? At Genesis 1:9 God creates a canopy of water surrounding the earth. 2 Peter 3:5-6 God uses the canopy to flood the earth. The lifespan falls from 800-900 to 120's (not to be confused with the 120 year period in which God warned there would be a flood)
By what mechanism does God poof this canopy of water into being? You're positing magic as a geomorphological agent.What about the environment? At Genesis 1:9 God creates a canopy of water surrounding the earth. 2 Peter 3:5-6 God uses the canopy to flood the earth. The lifespan falls from 800-900 to 120's (not to be confused with the 120 year period in which God warned there would be a flood)
answering to the title......yesI think it is possible. I think it is because my 4 month old puppy lost her baby teeth, and grew new teeth within 3 days, literally. She will also die much sooner than me, as this is my 6th dog, and they always die, and I always get a new one.
It's all written in the DNA. And if the DNA says 400 years, then 400 years it shall be.
and the south pole is disappearingBy what mechanism does God poof this canopy of water into being? You're positing magic as a geomorphological agent.
Consider:
Two times the volume of water on earth injected into the atmosphere would raise barometric pressure on Earth 840 times its current level.
That much water vapor would dilute atmospheric oxygen to trace levels unable to support aerobic life.
Water vapor's a powerful greenhouse gas. It already accounts for ~95% atmospheric temperature. An increase of that magnitude would bake the planet.
And if that much that much water vapor were condensed into rain, it would would liberate about 10^28 Joules of energy, baking the planet even more, raising atmospheric temperatures over 6,000 degrees.
How does the Bible explain this? Are these facts even considered by Bible literalists? Are they even aware of them?
Human beings had never lived that long. Those ages are just outright fabrications.I think it is possible. I think it is because my 4 month old puppy lost her baby teeth, and grew new teeth within 3 days, literally. She will also die much sooner than me, as this is my 6th dog, and they always die, and I always get a new one.
It's all written in the DNA. And if the DNA says 400 years, then 400 years it shall be.
By what mechanism does God poof this canopy of water into being? You're positing magic as a geomorphological agent.
Consider:
Two times the volume of water on earth injected into the atmosphere would raise barometric pressure on Earth to 840 times current levels.
That much water vapor would dilute atmospheric oxygen to trace levels unable to support aerobic life.
Water vapor's a powerful greenhouse gas. It already accounts for ~95% atmospheric temperature. An increase of that magnitude would bake the planet.
And if that much that much water vapor were condensed into rain, it would would liberate about 10^28 Joules of energy, baking the planet even more, raising atmospheric temperatures over 6,000 degrees.
How does the Bible explain this? Are these facts even considered by Bible literalists? Are they even aware of them?
Iron melts at 1,580 degrees. With an atmospheric temp > 6,000 degrees I think "bake" is an understatement.and the south pole is disappearing
and the average temp is rising
but I don't don't think you meant 'baking'
how about.....steam cooking
And the difference is...?Not magic, but rather, Jehovah's holy spirit.
Most calculations are simple math, calculated from ordinary chemistry and physics.I have no idea, that's for science to figure out. These facts have been tested, reproduced? Your estimation is true facts without a doubt, not subject to change? Infallible?
And the difference is...?
Most calculations are simple math, calculated from ordinary chemistry and physics.
Subject to change?
We have to assume natural laws are immutable. We've never observed them to change. The universe we observe can only be accounted for by a stable reality.
Physical constants, mathematics, chemical reactions, &c don't suddenly change. That would result in a chaotic, unpredictable world. I couldn't be sure that if i stepped out the door I wouldn't sink through the sidewalk or float into space.
Positing a different physics in the past, that would allow the phenomena described in your folklore, seems a desperate play.
Are you capable of remembering the claim that you made that I made a claim, other than that Gilgamesh is irrelevant to the authenticity of the Bible, which you haven't bothered to address?
Why should i bother addressing a subject to your whim all you do is make excuses and evade
Nothing's infallible, all science is provisional -- subject to revision as new data is unearthed, but the volume of water that would be needed to raise the oceans above the known elevations of the highest peaks on a sphere of known diameter can be calculated with high school geometry. The latent heat of condensation is well understood and used everyday -- you learned about it in school. Water vapor's greenhouse effects are known and used in every weather forecast. Likewise, the pressure of a known mass added to another known mass is calculable.I'm not going to let you get away with that. Answer the question, please. Is your calculations regarding the impossibility of a canopy infallible? Subject to change? Possibly wrong?