Did the Flood Really Happen?

Page 10 of 13 [ 196 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Did the flood actually happened?

Yes, it was global	16%	[ 9 ]
Yes, it was not global	18%	[ 10 ]
Yes, and it killed all the dinasours	2%	[ 1 ]
Yes, and the flood story falsifies evolution	0%	[ 0 ]
No, it's just a rip-off of older mythology	18%	[ 10 ]
Yes, and it's a rip-off of older mythology	4%	[ 2 ]
No, the world is younger than that	2%	[ 1 ]
No, the world is older than that	13%	[ 7 ]
No, it was something else	0%	[ 0 ]
The rainbow is the irrefutable proof that a flood happened	5%	[ 3 ]
I don't care	11%	[ 6 ]
I do care	0%	[ 0 ]
What's the question again?	0%	[ 0 ]
All of the above	0%	[ 0 ]
See the results	13%	[ 7 ]

Total votes : 56

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

28 Jun 2010, 8:20 pm

greenblue wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Thought out by who? By Orwell or by those Orwell agrees with? I rather think for myself than blindly go with any crowd.

No one here is actually saying, "Evolution is truth because Orwell says so or Creationism is wrong because Orwell says so" however, Orwell is a biologist, so he knows better about the subject than anyone who isn't a biologist, and that's reasonable.

Right, evolution is true because it is backed up by the data, not because I say it's true. As a biologist, I am better-equipped to examine that data and come to meaningful conclusions than most people out there, so if I disagree with someone who knows little to no biology it is usually safest to assume I am correct. Of course, there are plenty of better biologists out there than me, and if I disagree with what they say then the default assumption should be that I am mistaken.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

DeaconBlues
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,661
Location: Earth, mostly

28 Jun 2010, 10:52 pm

DeaconBlues wrote:

He required Noah to take aboard his Ark (measuring 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet tall, with three internal decks as well as the main deck) (Gen 6:15) one breeding pair of each land-dwelling or flying animal in the world (Gen 6:19-20) (nowhere near enough for breeding purposes - they'd be eliminated by the hazards of inbreeding soon enough) - although the very next chapter claims that it was supposed to be seven pair of every "clean" animal, two pair of every "unclean" animal, and seven pair of each breed of bird (Gen 7:2-3) (hey, didn't someone say the Bible is never self-contradictory?).

By way of comparison, the famed cruise liner Queen Elizabeth II, by no means the largest craft on the ocean, measures 963 ft long, 105 ft wide, and 171 ft high...

_________________
Sodium is a metal that reacts explosively when exposed to water. Chlorine is a gas that'll kill you dead in moments. Together they make my fries taste good.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Jun 2010, 1:08 am

Orwell wrote:

greenblue wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Thought out by who? By Orwell or by those Orwell agrees with? I rather think for myself than blindly go with any crowd.

Right, so if I had a PhD in Biology, then my words would mean more to you or would you have another criteria or otherwise have another excuse?

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

29 Jun 2010, 2:25 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Right, so if I had a PhD in Biology, then my words would mean more to you or would you have another criteria or otherwise have another excuse?

Pick any biology PhD at random. If they say something counter to what I think, my first instinct is to wonder what I may have misunderstood, and to seek clarification, either from them or from another reputable source. If they do not match other reputable sources, then I try to figure out why this is so, and depending on how familiar with (and interested in) that particular sub-branch of biology I am, I might go to the literature to see what research has been done recently pertaining to the particular issue. I am very hesitant to reject the opinions of people who obviously know better than I do, and I try not to do so except when I have very good reason to do so. For instance, I am working on a project now where I am re-working through the genetic data for the paleognathes. Part of the motivation for this is that my supervisor has a colleague (a Harvard ornithologist) who does not believe that the ratites are a polyphyletic group (which implies that flightlessness evolved more than once). However, I've gone through the data, and the genetic relationships are pretty clear: the ornithologist is wrong.

To answer your question plainly: all else being equal, then yes, a priori the words of a biology PhD mean more than those of a layman.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

29 Jun 2010, 4:25 am

Wombat wrote:

Noah let the animals off the ark. How the polar bears, penguins and kangaroos got home is beyond me.

Anyway after 40 days underwater there wouldn't be any grass so what did the deer eat?

More to the point what did the lions, tigers and wolves eat?

It would take years for the two deer, moose, springboks, goats to build up a decent size herd but the lions, tigers etc are going to need to feed every couple of days.

So the carnivores would have eaten the prey in the first few weeks and then starved to death.

And yet people BELIEVE this nonsense?

Indeed, I really am at a loss to understand the level of ignorance willful, or otherwise, required to be able to believe this garbage. Maybe some of the aspie elitists who walk the other corridors of this site should take a peak at some of these ridiculous beliefs and then they will realize that an ASD does not grant the person unparalleled logic and intelligence. For pities sake YECS wake up and stop being so bloody idiotic and ignorant, you talk about 'proof' and a conspiracy of science to ignore the truth, when the fact is you are too caught up in your pathetic delusional beliefs to admit the complete and utter lack of scientific credibility to your claims. To allow for the truth of contemporary scientific findings means admitting that your whole belief system is built upon a lie, and that, you simply cannot abide. Such dishonesty would be simply sad, and just a little pathetic if it were not for the damage you do to young minds. Believe what you will, continue to delude yourselves, but for crying out loud stop passing this nonsense, quasi scientific findings and outright lies onto impressionable kids. They are growing up in a world that is ruled by natural laws which is presently undergoing massive changes caused in no small part by human activity, the last thing these kids need are a bunch of deluded liars telling them that natural laws do not exist, and the planet is ultimately controlled by a super being. YECS and their ilk disgust me

_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

29 Jun 2010, 5:14 am

DentArthurDent wrote:

Wombat wrote:

Why are you eternally surprised and upset by this odd silliness. You wouldn't expect an oyster to understand Shakespeare or a snail to read the NY Times. There is no capacity there for sensible straight thinking. Let it go.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Jun 2010, 6:40 am

The Worm, the Rot at the center of Fundie Creationism is the belief that the Bible is the True, Inerrant Word of the Creator and Lord of the Universe. It is the literal True, Factual Word of God.

It is non of these things. It is a book of tales written mostly by pre-scientific late Bronze Age dudes.

If the Creator of the Universe speaks to us, then His language is the Fact of Nature. It is the physical cosmos that manifests the Will of the Creator, if there be a Creator. The Creator does not speak to us in terms of childish fairly tales. The Standard Model of Fields and Particles is closer to being the Word of God than the Bible.

ruveyn

Aimless
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Apr 2009
Age: 69
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,187

29 Jun 2010, 6:43 am

ruveyn wrote:

I agree.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Jun 2010, 7:09 am

ruveyn wrote:

That goes back to Bacon though. Why not both Natural Revelation as well as Historical Revelation? By default historical revelation would go through many ages of human history, even from the beginning of human history, as such the passage through "bronze age barbarians" or whatever you wish to call your own ancestors is by necessity, not due to it being from a bronze age society. The laws regarding sanitation weren't even able to be appreciated until the last 200 years when the Germ theory of disease was formulated and then finally accepted after much begrudging from those who had practiced blood letting due to their education regarding the Four Humors theory of disease.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Jun 2010, 7:22 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

What you call Historical Revelation is the non-empirical babbling of Priests, Prophets, Mullahs, Popes and assorted crazy people.

ruveyn

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Jun 2010, 7:23 am

ruveyn wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

What you call Historical Revelation is the non-empirical babbling of Priests, Prophets, Mullahs, Popes and assorted crazy people.

ruveyn

Have anymore elephants to hurl?

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

29 Jun 2010, 8:29 am

we are hurling elephants because it is utterly pointless trying to reason with one such as yourself. You consistently spew forth rotten pseudo science and lies to back up your belief in the ignorant writings of an ancient era. God cannot be disproven but this in know way gives credence to his existence, believers in god I simply roll my eyes at, YECS on the other hand are downright foolish, when they promote their brainless beliefs in the public arena they deserve utter derision

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Jun 2010, 9:01 am

DentArthurDent wrote:

Quom censes contradictor tui stultus est, tunc sicut stultus tu sonas quoque.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

29 Jun 2010, 10:05 am

DentArthurDent wrote:

Are you any better Dent? You're a Marxist who believes in homeopathy. Also, I really doubt you know the biology any better than keet anyways.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

29 Jun 2010, 10:25 am

Orwell wrote:

Are you any better Dent? You're a Marxist who believes in homeopathy. Also, I really doubt you know the biology any better than keet anyways.

You mean you don't believe in the claims of Trofim Lysenko????

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

29 Jun 2010, 3:39 pm

Wait.... perhaps Creationism is true after all.

Hint:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Natural Revelation

Quote:

What is natural revelation?

by Matt Slick

Natural revelation is the revelation of God in nature. Rom. 1:20 says, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." Nature can tell us certain things about God. Since nature is ordered, we can conclude that God is ordered as well. Since the universe is well-balanced we can see that God is wise. Furthermore, we can see reflections of the Trinity in creation. For example, time is past, present, and future. Space is height, width, and depth. Matter is solid, liquid, and gas. So, we can see a trinity of trinities and it is reasonable to conclude that the created order reflects the Creator himself who is a Trinity.

Maybe scientific consensus and the Orwell crowd, but scripture, are irrelevant to reality after all.

I mean, if I reject consensus and Orwell and embrace natural revelation, that means that I am able to think for myself, right?

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

Page 10 of 13 [ 196 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Jump to:

Did the Flood Really Happen? Post Reply New Topic

Did the Flood Really Happen?