Noah's Arc and the Flood?

[shunyadragon]

How does that account for all of the flood myths from other cultures?

I addressed some of the major ones many cite. What cultures and we will discuss them? Just as today there are local catastrophic floods all over the world throughout history, and they would be locally devastating to the local cultures; Tsunamis occur world wide related to earthquakes and volcanic activity.

 

[shunyadragon]

Except no one is 'questioning' me on some 'natural creational' processes! I would think adaptation is something that created creatures do, rather than some creation process.
Jesus never asked me to. Why would I care about every little Tom, Dick, and Harry of a god some people worship?


Then they are free to demonstrate that here.

I believe you have not presented any 'objective verifiable evidence' to distinguish simply what would see as natural laws and processes, from what you call 'natural creational processes.'

Still waiting . . .

As I am still waiting for any evidence that the natural processes and time are any different know for the past billions of years.

 

[dad]

I believe you have not presented any 'objective verifiable evidence' to distinguish simply what would see as natural laws and processes, from what you call 'natural creational processes.'

Maybe if you define what you think a creational process is we could look at that.

As I am still waiting for any evidence that the natural processes and time are any different know for the past billions of years.

You have not known anything for billions of years. Be honest. The old ages are in your head. As for time, who knows what that even is? Define it if you think you do. As for time in the far universe, well, forget about it. And finally, whatever processes exited on earth in Adam's day, you do not know. You believe. You assume. You wish real hard.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe if you define what you think a creational process is we could look at that.



You have not known anything for billions of years. Be honest. The old ages are in your head. As for time, who knows what that even is? Define it if you think you do. As for time in the far universe, well, forget about it. And finally, whatever processes exited on earth in Adam's day, you do not know. You believe. You assume. You wish real hard.

dad, we have clear evidence for the billions of years. It has been given to you many times. All that you could do was to deny it.

Are you ready to learn what is and what is not evidence? It seriously will not take all that long.

And as to "creational process" I do believe that was your claim. That puts the burden of proof upon you. I hope you have something besides a book of myths.

 

[dad]

dad, we have clear evidence for the billions of years.

None at all and you have no link to any.

And as to "creational process" I do believe that was your claim.

No. I was quoting the guy who posted.

That puts the burden of proof upon you. I hope you have something besides a book of myths.

That puts you out of touch as usual.

 

[Subduction Zone]

None at all and you have no link to any.

That is false dad, but since you do not understand the concept of evidence what good would a link do? But just for fun here is a link with evidence for over six million years in only one formation:

Green River Formation - Wikipedia

Unless you want to claim that your God is a liar again.

No. I was quoting the guy who posted.

And he was responding to your rather inane post.

That puts you out of touch as usual.

Backwards as usual dad.

 

[rational experiences]

If a male says in the past, hotter radiation existed.....it still exists today in the present, and is not coming from any past.

It is applied by the conditions of what science chooses right in this present time to use and apply.

As stated, the male scientist is from his own inception a liar.

Always was, just as taught, science does not exist by its own volition, it is male human chosen, who chose to use hotter radiation against the Natural self and natural evolution condition, and was attacked and was changed because of it.

Laws and defined natural laws, as were stated in the Christ conscious awareness of self was real...and it is also proven that they knew that the mind would become depraved and self destructive for they also knew that INCOMING UFO radiation mass would not stop until natural evolution in the cosmos would have it stopped.

What all the documentation as written for, a self purpose to challenge self in the moment and place where the SELF, the individual needed to be challenged.

For if you say, a whole community of information DNA, that was singularly documented as a ONE whole self...and separation is why the feed back to mind is a destructive language that advises you how to be destroyed, then it is proven that it did.

And to think separation means that wholeness and completeness will be destroyed, which was a warning to the self, as SELVES who by group enforced belief and the larger communication feed back overcame the natural aware spiritual conscious self.

Therefore throughout natural history only single self individuals who became spiritually notified were the storytellers and warning/prophecy realization.

Radiation in evolution in the past was hot....yet today in the present it is still hot by conditions of its one natural presence, either hot radiation or cold radiation.....if you wanted to apply rational sense.

And when a male says, a long time ago a human was having sex...that sex act allowed a baby to live for 100 years...and if that baby who grew into an adult did not have sex...then their owned genetics did not get passed on.

Sexual intercourse is not natural law, natural history or reasoning of the ancient past, when all humans born in the past, life is about 100 years and they die.

Sex is not scientific so it was not included in a science statement...for it owned no place in a bio life to be included in a medical studied attack on the human natural life.

Maybe if the bible owned some completed whole description status about genetics and human sex, then today you might believe some information that you never even advised self in the life of a natural human being before.

If a male says to self....I had to tell/advise self why I re invented science, where I gained that scientific advice from in modern times...and told self that I gained that advice from the NOAH flood original Earth incident that had destroyed all natural life on Earth.

But had in the water body kept the microbial bio population that related to the smaller human being life cell, and life support....what it really stated in science.

 

[dad]

That is false dad, but since you do not understand the concept of evidence what good would a link do? But just for fun here is a link with evidence for over six million years in only one formation:

Green River Formation - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_River_Formation
Your link says a varve or pair of layers represents one year. All reasons this is thought to be true involve one belief. That belief is that our present nature represents nature in the past also. There is no support for that belief offered. Feel free to do so. Your link sure does not. Again you have no support and no links to any for your claimed nature in the past. All we see is an obsession with using the belief that there was one.

And he was responding to your rather inane post.

He used the word. Face it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your link says a varve or pair of layers represents one year. All reasons this is thought to be true involve one belief. That belief is that our present nature represents nature in the past also. There is no support for that belief offered. Feel free to do so. Your link sure does not. Again you have no support and no links to any for your claimed nature in the past. All we see is an obsession with using the belief that there was one.

Those concepts can be tested and verified. That is why they are evidence. Meanwhile you have nothing. You asked for it, you got it, a source that you cannot refute because you refuse to learn and all that you can do is deny. That is why Rule Number One exists. You can't demand evidence until you understand the concept. Though I will post some occasionally to show how poor your understand it.

Also if you want to claim a different nature past you need to find evidence for it. Evidence has been given to you on how there has been no change, but that evidence was not even needed since as I said you cannot support your rather foolish claim.

He used the word. Face it.

So what term did you use? And why can't you support any of your claims? Is it because all that you have is a book of myths and claims that your God lies?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Except no one is 'questioning' me on some 'natural creational' processes! I would think adaptation is something that created creatures do, rather than some creation process.
Jesus never asked me to. Why would I care about every little Tom, Dick, and Harry of a god some people worship?


Then they are free to demonstrate that here.

Oh my, someone was a bit less than honest. Complaining about an addition of an "al" does not mean that you did not make the claim. I guess you realized that you used an incredibly poor choice of words.

 

[shunyadragon]

Maybe if you define what you think a creational process is we could look at that.

Your the one that used the terms and said no one challenged it. I am challenging it, and you need to define it and provide the evidence.

You have not known anything for billions of years. Be honest. The old ages are in your head. As for time, who knows what that even is? Define it if you think you do. As for time in the far universe, well, forget about it. And finally, whatever processes exited on earth in Adam's day, you do not know. You believe. You assume. You wish real hard.

You need to honest, and provide the evidence for your claims. I have provided abundant evidence for uniform natural laws and natural processes over time. Where ids the evidence for your assertions based on a religious agenda.

Still waiting . . .

 

[shunyadragon]

Your link says a varve or pair of layers represents one year. All reasons this is thought to be true involve one belief. That belief is that our present nature represents nature in the past also. There is no support for that belief offered. Feel free to do so. Your link sure does not. Again you have no support and no links to any for your claimed nature in the past. All we see is an obsession with using the belief that there was one.


He used the word. Face it.

The pair of varves (light and dark) represents one year, because that is how varves are lain down seasonally as recorded today, and confirmed by radiometric data. As referenced before uniform natural processes are documented by simply counting the rings on ancient tree, Where is the evidence that it was any different in the past?

Still waiting.

Face it you are governed by a religious agenda and not the facts

 

[Native]

Milton Platt said: ↑
How does that account for all of the flood myths from other cultures?

I addressed some of the major ones many cite. What cultures and we will discuss them? Just as today there are local catastrophic floods all over the world throughout history, and they would be locally devastating to the local cultures; Tsunamis occur world wide related to earthquakes and volcanic activity.

If so, do you also believe all these events to be a divine revenge from "God" as said about the biblical Flood which assumingly "covered everything on the Earth even over high mountain tops"?

 

[dad]

Those concepts can be tested and verified. That is why they are evidence. Meanwhile you have nothing. You asked for it, you got it, a source that you cannot refute because you refuse to learn and all that you can do is deny. That is why Rule Number One exists. You can't demand evidence until you understand the concept. Though I will post some occasionally to show how poor your understand it.

Also if you want to claim a different nature past you need to find evidence for it. Evidence has been given to you on how there has been no change, but that evidence was not even needed since as I said you cannot support your rather foolish claim.

No one has tested or verified forces and laws on the earth that used to exist long ago. Your ongoing fail to offer anything but rhetoric demonstrates this inability. Be honest.

 

[dad]

Oh my, someone was a bit less than honest. Complaining about an addition of an "al" does not mean that you did not make the claim. I guess you realized that you used an incredibly poor choice of words.

Maybe you can hire a blather interpreter if this is all you are going to post.

 

[dad]

Your the one that used the terms and said no one challenged it. I am challenging it, and you need to define it and provide the evidence.

In post 443 actually, you said this.

"I believe you have not presented any 'objective verifiable evidence' to distinguish simply what would see as natural laws and processes, from what you call 'natural creational processes.'"

I believe in actual creation, not processes.

I have provided abundant evidence for uniform natural laws and natural processes over time..

Actually you have offered belief-based explanations involving how the present nature dunnit. You obsess over how it really seems like/looks like to you that if the current nature had always existed, it woulda coulda shoulda been able to do it. NOTHING about proof that there was a same nature.

Work on that.

 

[dad]

The pair of varves (light and dark) represents one year, because that is how varves are lain down seasonally as recorded today

Bingo. BECAUSE that is how they are laid down today. In other words you invoke a same nature in the past and how it looks to you as if that could have been responsible. Then you offer dates based on the belief it was.

and confirmed by radiometric data.

To have radioactive decay at all, we would need the forces and laws we now have to exist. You cannot claim the same state existed unless you first support it. Interpreting all things by the belief there was a same nature does not prove there was one.

As referenced before uniform natural processes are documented by simply counting the rings on ancient tree, Where is the evidence that it was any different in the past?

In Noah's day trees grew in weeks. Obviously rings would not represent yearly cycles at that time. The only time that a yearly cycle would exist is once this present nature kicked in. (came to exist). Once again you use your one-trick pony belief on all things.

Face it you are governed by a religious agenda and not the facts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No one has tested or verified forces and laws on the earth that used to exist long ago. Your ongoing fail to offer anything but rhetoric demonstrates this inability. Be honest.

Sure they have. Just because you have no clue does not mean that everyone is ignorant in the sciences.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe you can hire a blather interpreter if this is all you are going to post.

dad, why would I want an interpreter for your posts?

You really should not keep bearing false witness against your neighbor. When you are ready to learn, I am ready to help you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In Noah's day trees grew in weeks. Obviously rings would not represent yearly cycles at that time. The only time that a yearly cycle would exist is once this present nature kicked in. (came to exist). Once again you use your one-trick pony belief on all things.

LOL!! And dad calls his God a liar while making a few doozies himself.

The stories you make up to defend your myths.