Modern man like footprints found, evolution theory in doubt.

[Guy Threepwood]

We don't even know if there was any genes as we now know them in Noah's day. In fact I doubt it.
What we see now is not relevant to what Adam saw. Not unless you prove the same nature existed.

Science is pagan bias and belief. Their methods reflect their religious bend.
Science has no evidence for a same state past, yet they build all models on that. So clearly science is faith. 100%.

Moreover it's blind faith, faith which does not even recognize itself as such.

 

[gnostic]

The lack of education in science among creationists, is most astonishing.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I know, luckily the nature/laws were not the same eh? Never happened.

You have evidence that the laws of nature were different in the past? Yes. The biblical flood never happened.

You'll have to explain how there was physics as we now see it. Sounds like "done by magic" to me

There is no evidence that the laws of nature have changed over time. Do you have this evidence? No. Magic is your realm, not mine. Repeating me shows that we are beyond your ability to argue.

No errors, save in your comprehension of it.
Good thing for us there is more than one verse in the bible then eh? Context.

The Bible is known for a multitude of errors. It was written by people over time. People make mistakes and time gives them plenty of opportunity. Denying those mistakes is false witness.

You believe that there was not a flood. You haven't got any evidence there was not one. I have the time tested, proven Scripture record there was one. I win.

If I had a dollar for every literal interpreter that declared the Bible time tested and proven followed by a declaration of victory where none exists, I would be a multi-millionaire.

There is evidence that that there has not been a global flood on this earth for millions of years. The point still remains that you have to show that there was a global flood. You can't. If you or anyone could do it, beyond claiming the Bible, it would have been done.

If science could cover that you might have a point. Too bas science can't. Your opinion is wishful doubting for no reason.

I'm not asking science to cover it. I'm asking you. Why are you avoiding it? You don't have to answer. I know.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

If you don't know, look into it.

Belief in God and the Bible are faith-based. There is no evidence for the existence of the former and the validity and verification of the latter. I believe based on faith. I don't have evidence. You don't either, but are falsely claiming you do.

Science is religion.

Science is not a religion. Now you have a new argument to support, but will demand that the rest of us do it. I'd prefer you support your existing arguments before adding new ones.

Uninformed biased opinion.

That seems to be the entire basis of your position.

Because they had half a brain.

Using wishful thinking and unverified sources doesn't require even half a brain. I do admire efficiency like that, but only if it produces valid results.

 

[gnostic]

Belief in God and the Bible are faith-based. There is no evidence for the existence of the former and the validity and verification of the latter. I believe based on faith. I don't have evidence. You don't either, but are falsely claiming you do.

Something that dad1 clearly don’t understand.

You understand what evidences and where they exist and where they don’t exist. dad1 is clearly incapable of it. Especially with him making claims that law of physics being different before the global flood.

And yes, he is repeatedly making one false claim after another.

 

[dad1]

You said, and I quote, “False. None has been presented at all. Your inability to realize that reflects a desire to believe a certain way.” So did you just forget about them, or were you being dishonest just then?

You responded to some of them with more of your baseless claims.

Ha.

In every every case it was shown you offered belief based material. Face it.

Secondly, you said no evidence was provided. Lots of evidence was provided.

You have provided ZERO evidence for your claims and beliefs.You presented only godless religion in drag...dressed as science.

The scientific method is about as far from religious belief as it can get.

It is a selective method of filtering out truth and filtering in idiotic godless beliefs.

All available evidence indicates that is the case.

None does, ONLY your imposed beliefs onto evidences color it a certain godless way in your sight.

Since you have failed to provide any evidence backing up YOUR claims that natural processes were quite different in the past,

Your failure to accept history and Scripture records as evidence does not mean we all got here last week and can make stuff up. Your abject failure to realize that your claims of a same state past are bogus and unsupportable is all you display here.

We can trace genetic lineage into the past and across species. Explain how that is possible in your view where natural processes were different in the past than they are now.

Absurd and false canard, You have not proven genetics existed in early life on earth in the way it now does. You assume, Believe.

Pagan stories? You’re a riot.

Satanic lies, to be precise.

 

[dad1]

Honestly, you look like a joke to me, at this point. You're one of those posters who demands that others present evidence and then turns around and pretends like none was ever presented. It makes it hard to take you seriously.

You reject evidence and molest evidence.

 

[dad1]

Belief in God and the Bible are faith-based.

They are a gift of God. All we need to do is accept. The evidences are all through history. When we sincerely ask God, He removes the blindness men have so they can see.

There is no evidence for the existence of the former and the validity and verification of the latter. I believe based on faith. I don't have evidence. You don't either, but are falsely claiming you do.

Believe what you like The so called science beliefs are what is being roasted here.

Science is not a religion.

Is to.

Now you have a new argument to support, but will demand that the rest of us do it. I'd prefer you support your existing arguments before adding new ones.

My argument is that your arguments are not supported and you evidence that.

Using wishful thinking and unverified sources doesn't require even half a brain.

Then cease and desit, and come on over to the winning side.

 

[dad1]

Something that dad1 clearly don’t understand.

You understand what evidences and where they exist and where they don’t exist. dad1 is clearly incapable of it. Especially with him making claims that law of physics being different before the global flood.

And yes, he is repeatedly making one false claim after another.

I understand no evidences are available for your claimed past nature. I understand God proved His word a million ways in all ages.

 

[SkepticThinker]

In every every case it was shown you offered belief based material. Face it.



You have provided ZERO evidence for your claims and beliefs.You presented only godless religion in drag...dressed as science.

It is a selective method of filtering out truth and filtering in idiotic godless beliefs.

None does, ONLY your imposed beliefs onto evidences color it a certain godless way in your sight.
Your failure to accept history and Scripture records as evidence does not mean we all got here last week and can make stuff up. Your abject failure to realize that your claims of a same state past are bogus and unsupportable is all you display here.


Absurd and false canard, You have not proven genetics existed in early life on earth in the way it now does. You assume, Believe.

Satanic lies, to be precise.

Thanks for driving my point home for me.

Conversing with you is a total waste of time.

 

[gnostic]

I understand no evidences are available for your claimed past nature. I understand God proved His word a million ways in all ages.

Which is a very deluded thing to say.

You make baseless claims that the law of physics or law of nature were different before the flood and after the flood, but have no evidences that claims are true, let alone you have shown no evidences that a global flood ever happened.

It doesn't matter if you put the date at any instance in time between 2500 or 2200 BCE, because there are no devastating disruption of Egyptian or Sumerian-Akkadian civilisations at that period. There are no signs of global flood in the soils and rocks during that time, all over the world.

According to Genesis 10, there was no Egypt until AFTER Ham sired his son Mizram/Egypt. But Egyptian culture, including artworks, figurines, hieroglyphs and hieratic writings, pre-dating your 2500 BCE, by 5 to 6 centuries earlier.

Genesis 10, also said that Nimrod was the founder of many great cities in Assyria and Babylonia, including the city of Uruk, some of which translated to Erech.

But archaeologically, the 1st settlement in Uruk (Erech), exist as early as 5000 BCE, and was the largest city in the world, between 4000 and 3050 BCE. Evidences that temples to the sky-goddess Inanna in Eanna District of Uruk and heaven-god An in the Anu District, built between 3600 and 3200 BCE, highlighted the fact that the author of Genesis knew no nothing about Uruk's history. Also found are some inscriptions, written in cuneiform older than the later Sumerian civilisation, further demonstrate the historicity of Uruk, predated the Bronze Age Sumerian city-states of the 3rd millennium BCE.

You know nothing of history, and even less than nothing about science. You just like making things up that have no basis in the real world.

If you think have the evidences to back up your claims that science was different before the Flood, why have no one seen you present any?

People ask this of you, but you deflects their questions and ignores their requests for evidences, so really you haven't proven a single thing.

 

[dad1]

You make baseless claims that the law of physics or law of nature were different before the flood and after the flood, but have no evidences that claims are true, let alone you have shown no evidences that a global flood ever happened.

You make baseless claims that the law of physics or law of nature were the same before the flood and after the flood, but have no evidences that claims are true, let alone you have shown no evidences that a global flood never happened.

You are in no position to try and cast doubt on tried and proven Scripture or even historical records. Period.

It doesn't matter if you put the date at any instance in time between 2500 or 2200 BCE, because there are no devastating disruption of Egyptian or Sumerian-Akkadian civilisations at that period.

That period was likely about 70 million years ago in actual real time. Just because you adhere to religious dates with no value or support, does not make them real.

There are no signs of global flood in the soils and rocks during that time, all over the world.

That time is your invention. You assume a same state past and date using that belief. The dates you get are insanely wrong.

According to Genesis 10, there was no Egypt until AFTER Ham sired his son Mizram/Egypt. But Egyptian culture, including artworks, figurines, hieroglyphs and hieratic writings, pre-dating your 2500 BCE, by 5 to 6 centuries earlier.

Show us the basis for your dates!? Ha.

Genesis 10, also said that Nimrod was the founder of many great cities in Assyria and Babylonia, including the city of Uruk, some of which translated to Erech.

You really think we are going to play the game of guessing what cities in the modern era are those mentioned in Genesis??

But archaeologically, the 1st settlement in Uruk (Erech), exist as early as 5000 BCE,

Radioactive decay dates do not have any reality or merit that far back.

and was the largest city in the world, between 4000 and 3050 BCE. Evidences that temples to the sky-goddess Inanna in Eanna District of Uruk and heaven-god An in the Anu District, built between 3600 and 3200 BCE,

Why offer dream dates? Support them or do not even mention them.

highlighted the fact that the author of Genesis knew no nothing about Uruk's history.

Who cares if some also ran modern city was not listed in Genesis?

Also found are some inscriptions, written in cuneiform older than the later Sumerian civilisation, further demonstrate the historicity of Uruk, predated the Bronze Age Sumerian city-states of the 3rd millennium BCE.

Too bad you have no dates though eh?

If you think have the evidences to back up your claims that science was different before the Flood, why have no one seen you present any?

Modern science is too small and weak to be able to evidence the work of God in the former nature.

 

[dad1]

Thanks for driving my point home for me.

Conversing with you is a total waste of time.

All issues were answered in posts. We see you do not quote any of my replies and try to raise some issue.
Instead, we get this pretentious nonsense.

 

[Sapiens]

You are effectively just another solipsist so quoting you is rather a waste of time and bandwidth.

 

[gnostic]

You make baseless claims that the law of physics or law of nature were the same before the flood and after the flood, but have no evidences that claims are true, let alone you have shown no evidences that a global flood never happened.

You are in no position to try and cast doubt on tried and proven Scripture or even historical records. Period.

That period was likely about 70 million years ago in actual real time. Just because you adhere to religious dates with no value or support, does not make them real.
That time is your invention. You assume a same state past and date using that belief. The dates you get are insanely wrong.

Show us the basis for your dates!? Ha.

You really think we are going to play the game of guessing what cities in the modern era are those mentioned in Genesis??
Radioactive decay dates do not have any reality or merit that far back.
Why offer dream dates? Support them or do not even mention them.
Who cares if some also ran modern city was not listed in Genesis?
Too bad you have no dates though eh?

Modern science is too small and weak to be able to evidence the work of God in the former nature.

You are joking, aren't you? Seriously?

The only person who is making dates up is you. You are also making up this weird view on science and history, which crossed over on the absurdity.

I had asked you, point-blank, when the Flood and Tower of Babel occurred in post 819:

When do you think the Flood and the Tower of Babel occur?

In post 826, you replied with:

Usually I see the flood dated something like about 4500 years ago, more or less.

Which mean "about 2500 BCE", you would agree? Yes?

In your "more or less" of 4500 years, all Masoretic Text source-based translations of the Old Testament into English, like the King James Version (KJV), NRSV, NASB, etc, then it would be the "less", if you include 1 Kings 6:1, Exodus 12:40-41 and the Genesis timeline. I have calculated the time to be about 2340 BCE. Your original answer (4500 years) and the calculated dates of Old Testament is about 160 years difference, no biggie.

But now you are saying "70 million years" as the "actual real time". That's a really major flaw in thinking. It is totally irrational.

That period was likely about 70 million years ago in actual real time. Just because you adhere to religious dates with no value or support, does not make them real..

Sorry, dad1, but if anyone is making up dates, it is you. There were no civilisations, 70 million years ago, because there were no humans.

70 million years ago, the Cretaceous period, there were only dinosaurs, primitive reptiles, primitive birds and primitive mammals, but no humans, let alone Noah building the Ark.

There are no human remains or human fossils 70 million years ago.

There are massive differences between 5000 years and 70 million years. No science or history will indicate that humans and dinosaurs were contemporary.

Can you prove that the Flood occurred 70 million years ago, and that there were humans then????

The bible's Flood may be myth, but you are just plain lying, making up dates that never occurred in human history.

 

[dad1]

You are joking, aren't you? Seriously?

The only person who is making dates up is you.

Here is the math for you. You cannot add anything to the same state past unless you prove there was one first. Without the same laws you have no radioactivity for dates.You are also making up this weird view on science and history, which crossed over on the absurdity.

I had asked you, point-blank, when the Flood and Tower of Babel occurred in post 819:



Which mean "about 2500 BCE", you would agree? Yes?

In science time that is likely about 70 million years ago. 2500 bc = 70 million years in science time.

In your "more or less" of 4500 years, all Masoretic Text source-based translations of the Old Testament into English, like the King James Version (KJV), NRSV, NASB, etc, then it would be the "less", if you include 1 Kings 6:1, Exodus 12:40-41 and the Genesis timeline. I have calculated the time to be about 2340 BCE. Your original answer (4500 years) and the calculated dates of Old Testament is about 160 years difference, no biggie.

Right, I allow some difference for possible interpretive error.

But now you are saying "70 million years" as the "actual real time". That's a really major flaw in thinking. It is totally irrational.

False. The way you determine millions of years is by looking at isotopes and assuming they all got here by radioactive decay as they are now produced, basically. You must prove there was a same state past first, or you cannot have any decay in the far past.

Sorry, dad1, but if anyone is making up dates, it is you. There were no civilisations, 70 million years ago, because there were no humans.

There were men from week one actually.

70 million years ago, the Cretaceous period, there were only dinosaurs, primitive reptiles, primitive birds and primitive mammals, but no humans, let alone Noah building the Ark.

Nope, Man and most animals could not likely leave fossilized remains in the former state. How would you know if they were here or not!?

There are massive differences between 5000 years and 70 million years. No science or history will indicate that humans and dinosaurs were contemporary.

Or not. So?

Can you prove that the Flood occurred 70 million years ago, and that there were humans then????

There were humans since the beginning. The 70 million years is invented and belief based fantasy.

 

[dad1]

You are effectively just another solipsist so quoting you is rather a waste of time and bandwidth.

In other words I do not believe in your unsupportable made up past.

 

[gnostic]

In science time that is likely about 70 million years ago. 2500 bc = 70 million years in science time.

"70 million years" is "70 million years".

"4500 years" is "4500 years".

Year as a measure of time is cycle of one period to take for the earth orbited around the sun, unless you belonged to a culture that measurement by the lunar calendar.

But even if you were to use lunar calendar, 4500 years still doesn't equal to 70 million years.

No scientists think 4500 years equals to 70 million years. That's just you bring totally irrational.

If you seriously think 4500 years equal to 70 million "science" years, then please cite a single source where a single scientist agree with this silly nonsense yours

 

[Willamena]

Some modern man like footprints have been found. This could easily be pre flood man prints. Man would have evolved since the flood, so changes in heel or feet could be expected. Yet science fantasizes only about some supposed ancestor to man. Besides showing their stories were wrong, it shows they have a very limited pool to draw water from intellectually.

Fossil footprints challenge established theories of human evolution

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170831134221.htm

Yeah.

Not.

 

[Sapiens]

In other words I do not believe in your unsupportable made up past.

Based on your performance here I rather doubt that anyone is particularly concerned with being able to bask in the warmth of your beliefs. Solipsism doesn't cut it and is indefensible.