Verifiable evidence for creationism?

[Tiberius]

3x. The first time, the dove came back empty handed. Second time with an olive branch. The third time was the charm. It did not return meaning it found land. Noah sent a raven out the before the dove, i.e. after 40 days and 40 nights, but it did not return. The raven would not return if it found land, but it also would not return as it could feed on carrion in the water.

Show me a single instance of a raven feeding in water without going onto land.

 

[james bond]

Show me a single instance of a raven feeding in water without going onto land.

Ravens are intelligent and resourceful birds. They are acrobatic fliers on par with falcons and hawks. If there is no land, I would guess they land on the carrion to eat or flotsam in the water.

 

[Tiberius]

Ravens are intelligent and resourceful birds. They are acrobatic fliers on par with falcons and hawks. If there is no land, I would guess they land on the carrion to eat or flotsam in the water.

lol, that doesn't come close to it.

I'm talking about a raven who, when faced with a literally ENDLESS expanse of open ocean, will choose to remain at sea rather than return to the only place where they can land.

 

[gnostic]

Ravens are intelligent and resourceful birds. They are acrobatic fliers on par with falcons and hawks. If there is no land, I would guess they land on the carrion to eat or flotsam in the water.

Ignorance at its best.

 

[james bond]

lol, that doesn't come close to it.

I'm talking about a raven who, when faced with a literally ENDLESS expanse of open ocean, will choose to remain at sea rather than return to the only place where they can land.

If there is no land, then the raven may not return like the dove. The raven may have died at sea, but most likely it survived. The vid shows it can survive if there is no land. If there is no land, does it mean the raven will return as you assume? That's not an easy question to answer, but I don't think the raven has homing instincts.

 

[jonathan180iq]

....Guys, you're arguing about the validity of a raven landing and feeding on dead animal parts floating in a global-sized ocean, from a story written by people who didn't know that Western Europe existed... Forgive me for not taking any of these arguments too seriously.

 

[Tiberius]

If there is no land, then the raven may not return like the dove. The raven may have died at sea, but most likely it survived. The vid shows it can survive if there is no land. If there is no land, does it mean the raven will return as you assume? That's not an easy question to answer, but I don't think the raven has homing instincts.

It's not a matter of homing instincts.

It's a matter of the raven not being built for long voyages, and instead wanting to find a place to settle down and sleep for the night.

 

[james bond]

Evidence for Jesus? Any good songs that promote boring atheism?

 

[james bond]

It's not a matter of homing instincts.

It's a matter of the raven not being built for long voyages, and instead wanting to find a place to settle down and sleep for the night.

Of course it is if you want the raven to return. I figure Noah was smart and he had God advising him. It was planned to release the raven first if you ask me. If the dove did not return, then it probably died. Thus, he sent the raven out first to check. Had the raven returned, then he would not have sent out the dove. Make sense?

What evidence do you have that a raven cannot find a place in the ocean to rest?

 

[Milton Platt]

How about "Jesus Won't You Kick Me Through The Goalpost of Life"?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

What you’re saying is that one must already believe something, in order to find evidence for it. We must believe in god in order to see the evidence of this god’s existence. You’re just believing in the thing you want to believe in, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof. Which is fine for you, but it’s not verifiable evidence for creationism.

I remember having this exact reaction to being told the same thing- how can we receive proof if we already have to believe to get it?

But I understand what it means now, it's a little like thinking that you are awake in a dream, and then waking up and knowing you are awake- it's very difficult to explain the difference objectively. But the confirmation is far different from any internal thought process that might lead you to it. Just like waking from the dream, the new 'reality' is obviously external in source, not within your imagination- that's the real difference

And this only makes sense to me, that we have to find God for ourselves, wake ourselves up, in order for him to reveal himself to us- it has to be a personal first hand discovery for every individual- it wouldn't work any other way. i.e. I don't expect or even want anyone to take my word for this!

I agree this is not objective evidence for creationism, but I think much of that can be demonstrated regardless, scientifically

 

[jonathan180iq]

"Once you convince yourself, the Universe falls into place."

 

[Riders]

Evidence for Jesus? Any good songs that promote boring atheism?

AHHHH well thats evidence for Harri Krishna not Jesus, Its a Harri Krishna song and George Harrison was a Harri Krishna.

There are few actual agnostic Harri Krishnas and Hindus so if anything Id say the opposite is true. LOL but I love the song thanks for putting it up.

 

[Segev Moran]

Evidence for Jesus? Any good songs that promote boring atheism?

 

[gnostic]

Evidence for Jesus? Any good songs that promote boring atheism?

What on earth does this have anything to with finding verifiable evidences for creationism?

It is certainly not evidence for Jesus. The song isn't even about Jesus.

 

[gnostic]

I remember having this exact reaction to being told the same thing- how can we receive proof if we already have to believe to get it?

But I understand what it means now, it's a little like thinking that you are awake in a dream, and then waking up and knowing you are awake- it's very difficult to explain the difference objectively. But the confirmation is far different from any internal thought process that might lead you to it. Just like waking from the dream, the new 'reality' is obviously external in source, not within your imagination- that's the real difference

And this only makes sense to me, that we have to find God for ourselves, wake ourselves up, in order for him to reveal himself to us- it has to be a personal first hand discovery for every individual- it wouldn't work any other way. i.e. I don't expect or even want anyone to take my word for this!

I agree this is not objective evidence for creationism, but I think much of that can be demonstrated regardless, scientifically

Unless you are theoretical physicists, relying solely on mathematical solutions (proof) instead of evidences, then it not science.

If it is demonstrable, measurable, testable and observable, then you are approaching the realm of science.

Science required evidences for any statement to be scientifically true, not poof. Proofs are for mathematicians.

And creationism (and whatever God you believe in) has neither proofs, nor evidences. Your belief in god is only indicated by your faith; that's not evidence or proof.

Accepting what you believe in, is actually no different from your personal opinion, because that's all your faith really is - your opinion.

 

[gnostic]

AHHHH well thats evidence for Harri Krishna not Jesus, Its a Harri Krishna song and George Harrison was a Harri Krishna.

There are few actual agnostic Harri Krishnas and Hindus so if anything Id say the opposite is true. LOL but I love the song thanks for putting it up.

Thanks for frubal.

I remembered years ago, when they showed documentary on the Beatles, which showed them to be very enthusiastic with some gurus of Hare Krishna.

I think JB has lost the plot...if he doesn't know their (Beatles) background. The real question is...will JB admit his mistake???

 

[james bond]

AHHHH well thats evidence for Harri Krishna not Jesus, Its a Harri Krishna song and George Harrison was a Harri Krishna.

There are few actual agnostic Harri Krishnas and Hindus so if anything Id say the opposite is true. LOL but I love the song thanks for putting it up.

Yes, not directly, but he's recognizing Jesus at least.

 

[james bond]

You're taking it too literally. Lennon was a spiritual person like George, if not a Christian. He's not advocating atheism, but being against the traditional Christian ideas of heaven, hell and organized religion, and instead promoting world peace.

 

[Riders]

Yes, not directly, but he's recognizing Jesus at least.

How is it that George Harrison recognized Jesus? I'm assuming you mean through the Harri Krishna movement.