Noahs Ark

[footprints]

Complete speculative drivel....and it doesn't even answer the question asked...

If we took speculation out of evolution, evolution wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

So what is your point?

 

[footprints]

Im sorry...

Maybe the dinosours had already died in the ice age and the humans came after?Wait a minute was there an ice age?

Umm think think tink...

Maybe there was not that many kinds of animals around at the time .And after Noah was the only human left on earth more animals evolved..(wait can we have evolving ?).

The lesson? I think Noah is a story of sacrifice and being ridculed and mocked and had "knowledge" from being warned and nobody else would take him serioulsy so he in good faith packed up his family and what animals he could bring and saved his family on a little raft.

He swam against the tides and did what he believed right and heeded warnings that no one else believed and he faired better.

Maybe he was the local weather man ..maybe he was in touch with God to get that extended 7 day forecast I dont know.

But it reminds me of modern times.WARNING EVACUATE Hurricane so and so to hit your area in 5 days!!!!

Most leave..But you see them.."Im not leaving my home! we will RIDE IT OUT!".Then when the hurricane hits the cardbooard signs that were hanging that said "I dare you HUGO or ANDREW" are smashed and flaoting around and the people are saying "HELP ..we need HELP".

Maybe the story of Noah is about using your brain.Heeding a warning.

But I dont know.

Love

Dallas

There are many answers, that is for sure.

 

[fantome profane]

The lesson? I think Noah is a story of sacrifice and being ridculed and mocked and had "knowledge" from being warned and nobody else would take him serioulsy so he in good faith packed up his family and what animals he could bring and saved his family on a little raft.

He swam against the tides and did what he believed right and heeded warnings that no one else believed and he faired better.

Maybe he was the local weather man ..maybe he was in touch with God to get that extended 7 day forecast I dont know.

But it reminds me of modern times.WARNING EVACUATE Hurricane so and so to hit your area in 5 days!!!!

Most leave..But you see them.."Im not leaving my home! we will RIDE IT OUT!".Then when the hurricane hits the cardbooard signs that were hanging that said "I dare you HUGO or ANDREW" are smashed and flaoting around and the people are saying "HELP ..we need HELP".

Maybe the story of Noah is about using your brain.Heeding a warning.

Excellent! You have shown how valuable these kind of stories can be to us, if only we would read them with our brains switched on.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

If we took speculation out of evolution, evolution wouldn't have a leg to stand on.


So what is your point?

What's your point....?????

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. We have an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of the ToE. On the other hand we have no evidence to support a WWF.


I say WWF because as you have recently seen with the last three creationist to post contend, as I have been saying to you all along, that there was a WWF and for some strange reason have come up with a date for said flood.

So I stand by my statement. Auto asked a question and you pretty much gave a non-answer......

 

[Autodidact]

And I'm sure you have such documents, duly dated Jan 15, 2370? Oh, don't forget the
BC or BCE. The methods to date artifacts from the past are not reliable. Therefore, the dates from these methods are also not reliable. Myths and fables begin with 'Once upon a time...' The Bible describes the global Deluge in considerable detail, and provides dates. Upon examination, the 'evidence' against a global flood does not hold up. Still, I can understand why some do not want to believe it happened. The implications are unthinkable to those who want to believe there is no God or who want to believe we are not accountable to Him.

They kept written records, rusra. They Egyptians kept written records of their dynasties, as did the Chinese. Both civilizations have written records that say: King A gave birth to King B who gave birth to King C going right through that period, without interruption. Not myths, not fables, recorded history. Isn't that odd? And all the time they were under water, and just failed to notice it.

 

[footprints]

What's your point....?????

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. We have an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of the ToE. On the other hand we have no evidence to support a WWF. In fact geologist have some

I say WWF because as you have recently seen with the last three creationist to post contend, as I have been saying to you all along, that there was a WWF and for some strange reason have come up with a date for said flood.

So I stand by my statement. Auto asked a question and you pretty much gave a non-answer......

Penguin you know as well as I do, if you change the speculation of this is evolution, to this is ID, you wouldn't have a theory of evolution you would have the theory of ID. All evidence to date can be applied to either theory. It is just the speculation which changes.

You are just getting peeved off because Auto is using your evidence. If the speculation of a Supernatural Deity is correct, than what I have written isn't speculation.

I do not believe a supernatural deity exists, then again I cannot prove one doesn't. Can you? I already know you can't, you just hold a belief pattern as I do.

 

[McBell]

If the speculation of a Supernatural Deity is correct, than what I have written isn't speculation.

ah, if only it actually worked like that in the real world....

 

[footprints]

ah, if only it actually worked like that in the real world....

That is how it is in the real world mestemia. We speculate, we test and forumulate, and we suggest outcomes from it.

What is the real world Mestemia? Your belief and speculation? Well it would be to you. Unfortunately other people do not abide by your beliefs and speculation. So now which one of you actually lives in the real world?

And if you believe you do, can you prove this? Or would it just be more speculation on your behalf?

 

[McBell]

That is how it is in the real world mestemia. We speculate, we test and forumulate, and we suggest outcomes from it.

What is the real world Mestemia? Your belief and speculation? Well it would be to you. Unfortunately other people do not abide by your beliefs and speculation. So now which one of you actually lives in the real world?

And if you believe you do, can you prove this? Or would it just be more speculation on your behalf?

a guess is that that, a guess.
If said guess turns out to be the right guess, it in no way makes your arigianl guess anything other than a guess.

So no, it does not work in the way you stated.

Now perhaps you mis-stated what you meant...

 

[rusra02]

Who needs dated documents? The simple continuity of ancient civilisations is enough. Don't you think that the complete extermination of, say, Egyptian civilisation, and its re-starting by presumed descendants of Noah, would have left just the teeniest archaeological blip? There has been a city on the site of Jericho since about 8000 BCE: why are there no traces of its inundation by floodwater?
The familiar burden of evidence error. No-one has to provide evidence against the flood; we need only point out the complete absence of evidence for it - evidence which, if the flood actually happened, should be abundant.

A little bit a googling... from Wikipedia reveals the weakness of arguments that ancient civilizations were untouched by the global Flood..

City on the site of Jericho since about 8,000 BCE - dates provided are given without explanation of how arrived at.

The written history of China begins with the Shang Dynasty (ca. 1700 BCE – ca. 1046 BCE). [my comment: Other dates are speculation]

Egypt. The civilization coalesced around 3150 BC[1] [Footnote below]
^ Only after 664 BC are dates secure. See Egyptian chronology for details. "Chronology". Digital Egypt for Universities, University College London. http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/chronology/index.html. Retrieved 2008-03-25.

[my comment: note that only dates later than 664 BCE can be considered reliable.]

 

[AxisMundi]

Penguin you know as well as I do, if you change the speculation of this is evolution, to this is ID, you wouldn't have a theory of evolution you would have the theory of ID. All evidence to date can be applied to either theory. It is just the speculation which changes.

You are just getting peeved off because Auto is using your evidence. If the speculation of a Supernatural Deity is correct, than what I have written isn't speculation.

I do not believe a supernatural deity exists, then again I cannot prove one doesn't. Can you? I already know you can't, you just hold a belief pattern as I do.

ID is an ancient Greek theosophical exercises recently dusted off by the religious right (which is neither) to use in their never ending attempts to get their religion back into public school curriculum, where it patently does not belong, by attempting to add some fake, and highly abbreviated, Scientific Method and Principle to their religion.

ID doesn't even stand up in court as anything other than the pseudoscience and religious doctrine that it is.

Evolutionary precepts simply cannot be used to prove that "intelligent designer" exists, AKA the Abrahamic demiurge Jehovah, since one must prove the existence of said creator first to prove ID.

And while science certainly cannot disprove any deity, it can certainly pick apart the only founding scriptures of said deity, and especially the myths that were written in the attempt to give that deity some sort of global spanning, all inclusive authority as the creator of everyone and everything. The latter is quite easy to do with simple sciences and simple reasoning as well.

One merely has to look at the archaeological and archival library of humanity to see that Jehovah is no demiurge, and is indeed one of the younger deities on the planet.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Penguin you know as well as I do, if you change the speculation of this is evolution, to this is ID, you wouldn't have a theory of evolution you would have the theory of ID. All evidence to date can be applied to either theory. It is just the speculation which changes.

Then stop speculating because none of this makes any sense. We have no way of testing the hypothesis of ID. No, this speculative notion of yours CAN NOT be applied either way. You can not apply the scientific method to that which, by definition, can not be tested.

Fortunately for me this thread, for the most part, is not about evolution or the existence of a god. This thread is strictly about the biblical deluge event. I don't need to show the validity of evolution. On the other hand I have shown how invalid the idea of a WWF is. No credible geologist I've come across in my research has sided with the notion of a WWF. The testable evidence is just not there for such an event. For you to constantly throw out your "IF" statements makes absolutely no sense. Try offering some evidence instead of guesses....

You are just getting peeved off because Auto is using your evidence. If the speculation of a Supernatural Deity is correct, than what I have written isn't speculation.

I feel privilaged if Auto decides to quote me or repeat that which I have posted. So I'm not "peeved" at all. No, what I'm peeved at is people such as yourself..essentially offering nothing debatable....or even relative to this thread.

I do not believe a supernatural deity exists, then again I cannot prove one doesn't. Can you? I already know you can't, you just hold a belief pattern as I do.

Yea, see....this is NOT the focus of this particular thread. What I have been able to show here is that the notion of a WWF is an unsubstantiated one.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

A little bit a googling... from Wikipedia reveals the weakness of arguments that ancient civilizations were untouched by the global Flood..

There's no weakness at all. "Especially" if we use the data you provided.

The civilization coalesced around 3150 BC [Footnote below]
^ Only after 664 BC are dates secure. See Egyptian chronology for details. "Chronology". Digital Egypt for Universities, University College London. http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/chronology/index.html. Retrieved 2008-03-25.

And this is what I mean. You as well as other creationist have given us a date for the supposed flood but your link showed that the Egyptian civilization was thriving. Artifacts from the period have survived and does not appear to have been discovered by unearthing them from beneath mounds of mud or flood debris. Take for instance (Papyri). The site you provided tells us where it was excavated and around what time and none of it suggest it was discovered under conditions such as water.

Abusir

As a matter of fact there appears to be a wealth of information and artifacts from that period that says that society did not realize they were under water.

Old Kingdom

This is ALL information in the form of evidence "YOU" provided and you are sorely mistaken as to a WWF. You have a problem trying to figure out where the geological data is to suggest a WWF and now why there is data against your assertion the Egyptian data provided earlier was weak.....

Did you even read the site you were trying use as evidence?

 

[footprints]

Then stop speculating because none of this makes any sense. We have no way of testing the hypothesis of ID. No, this speculative notion of yours CAN NOT be applied either way. You can not apply the scientific method to that which, by definition, can not be tested.

Instant denial, double standards applied, whatever it takes Penguin to keep your belief alive.

Fortunately for me this thread, for the most part, is not about evolution or the existence of a god. This thread is strictly about the biblical deluge event. I don't need to show the validity of evolution. On the other hand I have shown how invalid the ideal of a WWF is. No credible geologist I've come across in my research has sided with the notion of a WWF. The testable evidence is just not there for such an event. For you to constantly throw out your "IF" statements makes absolutely no sense. Try offering some evidence instead of guesses....

You dismissed speculation, yet you cling to speculation where the theory of evolution is concerned. Double standards.

I feel privilaged if Auto decides to quote me or repeat that which I have posted. So I'm not "peeved" at all. No, what I'm peeved at is people such as yourself..essentially offering nothing debatable....or even relative to this thread.

A child can copy, paste and quote.

I am sure the creationists you are debating say the same pertaining to your evidence, irrespective of who offers it.

Yea, see....this is NOT the focus of this particular thread. What I have been able to show here is that the notion of a WWF is an unsubstantiated one.

Only in your eyes.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Instant denial, double standards applied, whatever it takes Penguin to keep your belief alive.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. Care to explain?

You dismissed speculation, yet you cling to speculation where the theory of evolution is concerned. Double standards.

You're incorrect here. The ToE is not the focus of this debate. ToE is not solely about speculation. ToE meets the scientific requirements for being called a theory. The biblical deluge does not. Especially how creationist present it.

 

[footprints]

I have no idea what you're talking about here. Care to explain?

Simply put, you have a belief and will do anything to keep it.

You're incorrect here. The ToE is not the focus of this debate. ToE is not solely about speculation. ToE meets the scientific requirements for being called a theory. The biblical deluge does not. Especially how creationist present it.

I think what you mean to say, is in your opinion I am incorrect.

 

[footprints]

ID is an ancient Greek theosophical exercises recently dusted off by the religious right (which is neither) to use in their never ending attempts to get their religion back into public school curriculum, where it patently does not belong, by attempting to add some fake, and highly abbreviated, Scientific Method and Principle to their religion.

ID doesn't even stand up in court as anything other than the pseudoscience and religious doctrine that it is.

Evolutionary precepts simply cannot be used to prove that "intelligent designer" exists, AKA the Abrahamic demiurge Jehovah, since one must prove the existence of said creator first to prove ID.

And while science certainly cannot disprove any deity, it can certainly pick apart the only founding scriptures of said deity, and especially the myths that were written in the attempt to give that deity some sort of global spanning, all inclusive authority as the creator of everyone and everything. The latter is quite easy to do with simple sciences and simple reasoning as well.

One merely has to look at the archaeological and archival library of humanity to see that Jehovah is no demiurge, and is indeed one of the younger deities on the planet.

Court rulings can always be overturned.

Anybody can pick apart anything they want to and use sound reasoning and logic in the process.

 

[McBell]

I think what you mean to say, is in your opinion I am incorrect.

No.
He is correct in saying that you are flat out wrong.

Though, he was being polite about it.

 

[johnhanks]

A little bit a googling... from Wikipedia reveals the weakness of arguments that ancient civilizations were untouched by the global Flood..

City on the site of Jericho since about 8,000 BCE - dates provided are given without explanation of how arrived at.

The written history of China begins with the Shang Dynasty (ca. 1700 BCE – ca. 1046 BCE). [my comment: Other dates are speculation]

Egypt. The civilization coalesced around 3150 BC[1] [Footnote below]
^ Only after 664 BC are dates secure. See Egyptian chronology for details. "Chronology". Digital Egypt for Universities, University College London. http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/chronology/index.html. Retrieved 2008-03-25.

[my comment: note that only dates later than 664 BCE can be considered reliable.]

Penguin has capably disposed of your Egypt arguments. As to Jericho, you may learn something here:

While trenching downward through the site [Kathleen Kenyan] uncovered the first walled city along with a number of houses and courtyards that had been constructed over 10,000 years ago, during the Neolithic. Kenyan was able to learn something about the city's early inhabitants from a tomb located near the deepest layers of the city. Inside the tomb were a number of skulls covered with clay. The skulls were dated at about the seventh millenium BC and were beautifully decorated with paint. Upon further excavation Kenyan maintained that the walls of Jericho had been repaired and rebuilt at least seventeen times. ... The most recent of these walls (already dated to around 1400 BC by Garstang) was dated by Kenyan at 2300BC.

This site will update you on pre-Shang China. Your comment that 'other dates are speculation' is no doubt one you will continue to parrot, but you must face the fact that all modern scholarship is set squarely against you.

 

[johnhanks]

The written history of China begins with the Shang Dynasty (ca. 1700 BCE – ca. 1046 BCE). [my comment: Other dates are speculation]

Now, let's play devil's advocate for a moment and pretend, with you, that there really is no evidence for continuous occupation of China before 1700 BCE. That would mean, according to your story, that in just 700 years the eight survivors of the flood had given rise to enough descendants to spread themselves out across the whole of Asia, populate China and found a literate dynasty from scratch; not only that, but on the way they had completely forgotten the language and culture they'd left behind and developed a new and totally unrelated spoken and written language (several, in fact).

Of course, only a small fraction of Noah's descendants could have gone this way and ended up Chinese: a good proportion had to be elsewhere, busily populating Africa and Mesoamerica.

Are you really telling us this is a scenario you take seriously?