Flood Arguments

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So basically, even if you were shown absolutely irrefutable proof you'd ignore it...umm...isnt...isnt that what a crazy person does?

I'm curious, Steezie. What is "absolute irrefutable proof" in the eyes of a scientist?

Is that what "scientists" demand of Christians, but then when Christians demand if of them, they say, "Proof is for alcohol and mathematics"?

That kind of "absolute irrefutable proof"?
 
Upvote 0
S

Steezie

Guest
I'm curious, Steezie. What is "absolute irrefutable proof" in the eyes of a scientist?

Is that what "scientists" demand of Christians, but then when Christians demand if of them, they say, "Proof is for alcohol and mathematics"?

That kind of "absolute irrefutable proof"?
If science could create an NFL quarterback in the laboratory from basic elements...what would you call that?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If science could create an NFL quarterback in the laboratory from basic elements...what would you call that?

"Science creating an NFL quarterback in a laboratory from basic elements."

Nothing more - nothing less.
 
Upvote 0

Vene

In memory of ChordatesLegacy
Oct 20, 2007
4,155
319
Michigan
✟13,465.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm curious, Steezie. What is "absolute irrefutable proof" in the eyes of a scientist?

Is that what "scientists" demand of Christians, but then when Christians demand if of them, they say, "Proof is for alcohol and mathematics"?

That kind of "absolute irrefutable proof"?
This is why I don't nitpick when I am asked for 'proof.' This is also why I don't ask for proof, but for evidence. Stop painting with such a broad brush AV.
 
Upvote 0

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟8,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I don't know/care --- did they?

Ok. I get it. It doesn't matter whether they did or not, because there isn't any evidence, no matter how convinving, that would persuade you that anything happened other than as required by your interpretation of the Bible... right?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Explain the unbroken history of civilizations, going back to the Neolithic Era. Let's start with the Mayas. Or perhaps Jericho, or the Paleo-Americans right after the last ice age. How about ancient Hunan?

Right.
 
Upvote 0

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟8,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm curious, Steezie. What is "absolute irrefutable proof" in the eyes of a scientist?

Is that what "scientists" demand of Christians, but then when Christians demand if of them, they say, "Proof is for alcohol and mathematics"?

That kind of "absolute irrefutable proof"?

You know perfectly well that the people hereabouts who are picky about the meaning of words like "proof" and "evidence" and "theory" and "hypothesis" are the same people who are careful how they use those words themselves.

Occasional mistakes (which I would expect to be retracted when challenged) aside, I don't think you'll find somebody demanding rigor in use of such terms from others who doesn't also demand it of themselves.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
This is why I don't nitpick when I am asked for 'proof.' This is also why I don't ask for proof, but for evidence. Stop painting with such a broad brush AV.

L O L --- you guys really crack me up.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ok. I get it. It doesn't matter whether they did or not, because there isn't any evidence, no matter how convinving, that would persuade you that anything happened other than as required by your interpretation of the Bible... right?

For the 5,000[sup]th[/sup] time --- as long as it doesn't contradict the Bible, I don't have a problem with it.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You know perfectly well that the people hereabouts who are picky about the meaning of words like "proof" and "evidence" and "theory" and "hypothesis" are the same people who are careful how they use those words themselves.

Occasional mistakes (which I would expect to be retracted when challenged) aside, I don't think you'll find somebody demanding rigor in use of such terms from others who doesn't also demand it of themselves.

Why don't we let Steezie answer, okay?

The phrase, "irrefutable absolute proof" does not sound like he's making a mistake to me. It sounds like he wants what I would call, "irrefutable absolute proof."
 
Upvote 0

EnCrypto

Active Member
Feb 23, 2008
32
4
✟7,673.00
Faith
Agnostic
For the 5,000[sup]th[/sup] time --- as long as it doesn't contradict the Bible, I don't have a problem with it.
No, as long as it doesn't contradict your interpretation of the Bible.

Hundreds of millions of Christians and Christian scholars and people who devote their entire lives to understanding the Bible disagree with you.

Not only do you persist in the face of science, but in the face of your own peers, peers who have read more than you ever will.
 
Upvote 0

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟8,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
For the 5,000[sup]th[/sup] time --- as long as it doesn't contradict the Bible, I don't have a problem with it.

That's the inverse of my statement, which was that you won't accept any evidence, no matter how convincing, that does contradict your particular interpretation of the Bible.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟8,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally Posted by BrainHertz
You know perfectly well that the people hereabouts who are picky about the meaning of words like "proof" and "evidence" and "theory" and "hypothesis" are the same people who are careful how they use those words themselves.

Occasional mistakes (which I would expect to be retracted when challenged) aside, I don't think you'll find somebody demanding rigor in use of such terms from others who doesn't also demand it of themselves.


Why don't we let Steezie answer, okay?

The phrase, "irrefutable absolute proof" does not sound like he's making a mistake to me. It sounds like he wants what I would call, "irrefutable absolute proof."

How does your statement here contradict my claim? Let me do this one more time:

1.) There are some people here who are picky about words like "proof", "evidence", "theory" and "hypothesis", both in what other people say and what they say themselves.

2.) There are also people who do not use them in such a strict way.

My claim is very specifically that these are not the same people.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No, as long as it doesn't contradict your interpretation of the Bible.

Hundreds of millions of Christians and Christian scholars and people who devote their entire lives to understanding the Bible disagree with you.

Not only do you persist in the face of science, but in the face of your own peers, peers who have read more than you ever will.

EnCrypto, aside from not knowing me very well, if at all, let me say this.

I interpret the King James Bible literally. And a literal interpretation of anything - be it the Bible, the newspaper, or the phonebook - means that there is only one way to interpret it - the right way. That's the nature of a literal interpretation - it can be independently verified by:
  1. a friendly second party
  2. a hostile second party
  3. a neutral second party
For instance, when I say there was a worldwide flood in Noah's day, what I really mean is: the Bible says there was a worldwide flood in Noah's day. Then, by applying our motto: The Bible says it - that settles it. --- it doesn't take a Rhodes scholar to figure out the only conclusion I can come to, is that there was a worldwide flood in Noah's day.

See what I'm saying?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
That's the inverse of my statement, which was that you won't accept any evidence, no matter how convincing, that does contradict your particular interpretation of the Bible.

Like I say --- please try as hard as you can to make it look impossible. Heap on all the evidence you can and make it so that anyone who claims it is a moron --- and the darker it gets, the brighter the Light shines.

[bible]Romans 3:4[/bible]
 
Upvote 0