Noah's Arc and the Flood?

[gnostic]

Does what you listed next to religion, have any meaning?
I like to know from what perspective people are arguing from; otherwise I would just be arguing with trolls, etc, know what I mean?

You are the one who brought up soft fossil, syncretic.

The bible teaches nothing about geology, remains and fossils. Religion is not a study of fossils of plants and animals, thus it (religion) isn't palaeontology.

If you are going to talk about fossil, then you would need knowledge of geology and palaeontology.

What does the bible say about fossils?

I found no references in the bible?

And what does the bible say about rocks and minerals? Can the verses distinguish between sedimentary rocks and igneous rocks? Can the bible teach us about how these rocks and minerals form? Can it teach us the different properties of each known minerals?

The only troll I see here, is you, syncretic.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes? Would you rather I didn't describe the fossil hardness at all? Does that bother you? What would be the reason for not describing the fossils?

Why describe soft fossils that do not exist? Literally all fossils of sea animals are either hard Calcium Carbonate remains (shells, bones, skeletal remains such as coral) and impressions of animals and sea plant remains long disappeared, in limestone and shale deposited in shallow seas, and in sandstone (beaches).

 

[shunyadragon]

Your premise is a hodge podge of suppositions and contradictory argument.

Dishonest generalization and misrepresentation, please quote and describe contradictions.

 

[shawn001]

If your gonna say fossils at 25 thousand feet on Everest are there from flooding, that is a serious lie. Not only to how they actually formed and got there, but if you believe in Noah's Flood as a fact and not an allegory then Noah's boat would be above 25,000 ft and everyone would need oxygen containers or suffocate.

On every continent, for the last 10,000 years, you can point to civilizations everywhere on the planet that were NOT affected by any floods. South America, China, Europe, Asia etc..

You also have a real problem with Noah and his friends and family and DNA populating the Earth after said flood, called population bottleneck.

 

[Desert Snake]

Dishonest generalization and misrepresentation, please quote and describe contradictions.

Your premise/argument, its up to you to prove it.

 

[Desert Snake]

On every continent, for the last 10,000 years, you can point to civilizations everywhere on the planet that were NOT affected by any floods. South America, China, Europe, Asia etc..

You don't seem to understand how argumentation works. Trying to prove me wrong, is not proving the premise op argument, correct.

 

[Desert Snake]

@shawn001


Do you agree with the thread premise/argument, or not?

 

[shawn001]

You don't seem to understand how argumentation works. Trying to prove me wrong, is not proving the premise op argument, correct.

I have already shared my view on the OP as well as fossils on Everest.

 

[Desert Snake]

I have already shared my view on the OP as well as fossils on Everest.

Do you agree with the op, or not?

Simple question.

 

[shawn001]

The basic premise of the OP, yes.

 

[Desert Snake]

The basic premise of the OP, yes.

Basic premise?

That is vague, could mean anything, and not how argumentation works.

Do you agree with the thread premise, or not?

 

[shawn001]

If you have been reading my posts it's not vague at all. But yes I do, back to the Sumerians.

Definition of argumentation

1. 
   1: the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion
   

Definition of ARGUMENTATION

Yes it is how it works.

 

[shawn001]

There is a place on Earth where it hasn't rained more than two inches at once in 25 million years and that is truly amazing by itself.

 

[shunyadragon]

Your premise/argument, its up to you to prove it.

Dishonest generalization and misrepresentation, please quote and describe contradictions.

 

[shunyadragon]

View attachment 18159


Not having contradictions doesn't make an argument correct, lol. You haven't proven anything, aren't familiar with the flood narrative/ neither is @shawn001 ,already told you that, and you didn't believe me or something, lol

Your theory is your theory, it isn't up to me to disprove your premise, you have to prove it.

You stated there were contradiction . . .

Still waiting . . .

It is not my theory, it is the science of evolution of 99% of all scientists in Biology, Geology, Chemistry, Physics and Genetics of the world for one hundred years and more. It is the same science that makes jets fly, and computers function properly.

Again . . .

Science nor I do not prove anything.

The elephant in the room here is ancient mythology is not a basis of science, and the documented of the failure to back up your assertions,

 

[gnostic]

Nothing in the Bible states to ignore physical science

That's not what I wrote.

I am stating that there are no science or scientific knowledge whatsoever in the bible.

Science is a tool to acquire knowledge (observed EXPLANATION), test the explanation to see if it is true or false, and how to make use of that knowledge (application).

 

[sooda]

Flood stories are from all over, the sea fossils I have found at higher elevation, indicate a flood. The standard explanation is that the land folded up from underneath; great theory, but then why arent those fossils found at lower altitude, in the same region. If they are found, they should be in far more quantity. If the water level was higher, then that refutes the argument that the sea level couldnt have gotten that high.

Marine fossils are found at all elevations.

The reason for marine fossils on mountain tops is plate tectonics.

 

[sooda]

The higher altitude indicates either a flood, or higher sea level.


If no flood, then higher sea level, which refutes the argument that the sea level couldnt reach that elevation.

Have you never heard of plate tectonics.. How do you think mountain ranges are formed?

 

[shunyadragon]

Your premise/argument, its up to you to prove it.

There is no such thing as proof in science just objective verifiable evidence that falsifies hypothesis, and cited competent references. So far yoy have not cited anything with objective verifiable evidence that supports your assertions..

You don't seem to understand how argumentation works. Trying to prove me wrong, is not proving the premise op argument, correct.

It is you that does not understand argumentation. It is up to you to support your argument in logic and objective verifiable evidence to support a hypothesis. If you are using logic you must present your argument you need to present premises that can support your conclusions. You have not presented acceptable premises nor objective verifiable evidence.

 

[Native]

The elephant in the room here is ancient mythology is not a basis of science, and the documented of the failure to back up your assertions,

It depends IMO on your definition of "mythology".

From - Myth - Wikipedia
"Folklorist Alan Dundes defines myth as a sacred narrative that explains how the world and humanity evolved into their present form. Dundes classified a sacred narrative as "a story that serves to define the fundamental worldview of a culture by explaining aspects of the natural world and delineating the psychological and social practices and ideals of a society".

An extract from - Creation myth - Wikipedia
"“A creation myth (or cosmogonic myth) is a symbolic narrative of how the world began and how people first came to inhabit it. While in popular usage the term myth often refers to false or fanciful stories, members of cultures often ascribe varying degrees of truth to their creation myths. In the society in which it is told, a creation myth is usually regarded as conveying profound truths, metaphorically, symbolically and sometimes in a historical or literal sense. They are commonly, although not always, considered cosmogonical myths—that is, they describe the ordering of the cosmos from a state of chaos or amorphousness”.

The topic in this thread "Noah's Arc and the Flood" can only be understood if you are familiar with the mythical language and it´s meanings.

The very outlook of the Milky Way is often mentioned mythologically as a "river running in the Sky", observable all around the Earth".

This river/flood is completely misunderstood today. From being a "River/Flood running OVER the Earth in the Sky", it is biblically skewed to become a "Flood of a divine revenge running ON and covering the Earth".

That is: The mythical telling of this celestial *river* is in fact a scientific observation made by our ancestors all over the World, hence the multiple telling of this myth.