The ice age and the flood

[CabVet]

There is when one wants it to be science. Your supposed present state season increments seem to be faith based. I asked for the evidence of them at the lowest parts of the ice cores. Guess you are cornered.

You shouldn't want it to be science. I will ask again, why seek for science's support when you have faith? Why the need to explain miracles? I don't see anybody trying to explain how Jesus walked on water, or how he resurrected the dead, why explain the flood? Or the fossil record? Or ice cores? Guess you are cornered.

 

[AV1611VET]

You shouldn't want it to be science. I will ask again, why seek for science's support when you have faith? Why the need to explain miracles? I don't see anybody trying to explain how Jesus walked on water, or how he resurrected the dead, why explain the flood? Or the fossil record? Or ice cores? Guess you are cornered.

-- You want everyone to be like me?

 

[CabVet]

-- You want everyone to be like me?

Yes, at least you are consistent! Most people change science when they don't like it, mostly using lies, misinterpretations or misinformation. If science doesn't support your claims, just come out and say it is wrong, but don't try to lie about it or misinterpret it to fit your beliefs.

Now, what really gets to my nerves is when people use bad "scientific" explanations for miracles and acts of God. Stuff like bringing water from Mars to cause the flood:

"Noah's Flood - Was This How God Caused It?"

Why do this? Why isn't an "act of God" enough? The search for an actual "scientific explanation" to me clearly indicates a lack of faith.

 

[AV1611VET]

Stuff like bringing water from Mars to cause the flood:

Who's that [] idiot [] on here that says God took to water to Neptune after the Flood? or that Noah lived in [what is now] New Jersey?

 

[CabVet]

Who's that [] idiot [] on here that says God took to water to Neptune after the Flood? or that Noah lived in [what is now] New Jersey?

Haha, and again I am fine with that if you use those in "miracle" context, which you often do. Embedded age, English in heaven, all of that, they are beliefs and require faith. Trying to claim that the laws of physics were different 6,000 years ago (and using pseudo-scientific explanations to do so) is very different from saying that God created the universe with embedded age.

 

[AV1611VET]

Haha, and again I am fine with that if you use those in "miracle" context, which you often do. Embedded age, English in heaven, all of that, they are beliefs and require faith. Trying to claim that the laws of physics were different 6,000 years ago (and using pseudo-scientific explanations to do so) is very different from saying that God created the universe with embedded age.

Okay, I see what you're saying now; and I agree with you.

I wish people would stop trying to support the Bible with science and let the Bible speak for Itself.

We get pwned when we do that and, in my opinion, rightfully so.

 

[dad]

I covered this elswhere. You can change the entire population in one generation. Let's say that God brought only two Great Danes on the Ark.

Guess what? The entire species of Dog is now just Great Danes. One generation. Evidently God picked a variety that had all the DNA required
to create all the variety that we see today.

I look around and I see other dogs. Maybe it is just me?

They cannot interbreed.
They are two species.

Who cares? Interbreeding in this state is not an issue unless you prove that this state existed at the flood.

For one, I don't accept any man's ideas on a date for the flood.
There are lots of "commonly accepted" religious ideas. There are some about
when a person should be baptized, what age they take communion, what they
wear during baptism, what kind of wine to use, what brand of communion
wafers to use, leavened or unleavened bread, whether church leaders should
be women, who should marry what people, etc. The "date" of the flood is
one of those issues. The scriptures make no serious effort to inform us on that.

Well, people had babies, and they were in most cases marked by how old the guy was when he had the oldest son. Your opinion doesn't weigh in real heavy here. Hope you can get over it.

Second, all those kinds of animals were on the Ark. So what is your beef?
Two of each "Kind" of animal were on the Ark and each "Kind" of animal
has experienced a certain amount of speciation or adaption or variance
or "evolution" since that time. What problem do you have with that?

The problem is getting all the species we now have in 4500 years. Get off the biscuit.

One group of researchers used artificial breeding techniques on foxes. They stopped
the investigation because they got so much variance by selecting animals
based on behavior that they stopped the program because the animals size
and color was changing too much. I think it was a Silver fox
program and they stopped being silver. That was after 3 or 4 generations.

You seem to be in denial. 4500 years is not enough time for present state evolving to produce all we have today from a boat full. You must face that.

 

[dad]

You shouldn't want it to be science. I will ask again, why seek for science's support when you have faith? Why the need to explain miracles?

Why the need to pretend that the present state laws existed when you have no idea that they did?

I don't see anybody trying to explain how Jesus walked on water, or how he resurrected the dead, why explain the flood? Or the fossil record? Or ice cores? Guess you are cornered.

Fossil record? Easy. Creation...fast evolving after that....no fossilization of man and many animals in the former state....then add in the post flood fossils...voila. Ice cores? Look at the OP. The floood? That was before the state change and continental separation I assume...presto.