Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What we have discussed is that there is evidence for the flood. You attempts at falsification were through irrelevant means which you then confirmed as irrelevant in the end.There are no data showing a global flood event and there is a huge mass of data falsifying it as we have discussed on other threads.
Of course you have it backwards. You have presented no actual evidence for a global flood because there is none and there is nothing irrelevant about the many falsifications of the myth of a global flood that I have presented.What we have discussed is that there is evidence for the flood. You attempts at falsification were through irrelevant means which you then confirmed as irrelevant in the end.
That's inaccurate. One example was given multiple times.Of course you have it backwards. You have presented no actual evidence for a global flood
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57389180The global flood is falsified by geology, paleonotology, biodiversity, genetic diversity, biogeography and archeology and probably other branches of science as well. It was falsified more than 150 years ago and huge masses of data accumulated since then have only reinforced that falsification.
The Adamic root race. Other Flood of Noah SurvivorsThe idea that all the peoples and animals
There are in fact portions of the earth with the lasting impression of that event.The YEC claim that the earth's geology
Evidence for the flood is not primarily found in the geological column.and paleontology is mostly the result of the this same flood
Irrelevant and unrelated to the flood.on an earth that is less than 10,000 years old
You're a Young Man Darwinist. Calm down.is also totally absurd to anyone who knows anything about either geology, paleontology or astronomical sciences or even basic physics and has the least bit of capability to think logically about the subject.
I wouldn't matter if it was the whole list.As I said this is only a partial list
Falsifications of the Worldwide Flood
No, I had you say that it was irrelevant.You are forced to say they are irrelevant because there is no way for you to refute any of them let alone all of them.
Silly Hovindians!That's inaccurate. One example was given multiple times.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57388850
Evidence for the flood isn't primarily found in the geological column. The pyramids of Giza, Yucatan and other momuments erected already testify to that event.http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57389209
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-16/#post57389411
Actually many cultures show this, as seen in aforementioned monuments built around the world based on a similar outline.http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57389180
Actually they reaffirm the flood. In geology you can find references to "when the earth was divided", paleontology is irrelevant for now, biogeography to a certain extent through the dispersion of similar Pyramid cultures practically worlds apart in the Yucatan and Giza, biodiversity is irrelevant, archeology through the discovery of the aforementioned structures plus more. I don't find any refutation there.The Adamic root race. Other Flood of Noah Survivors
There are in fact portions of the earth with the lasting impression of that event.
Evidence for the flood is not primarily found in the geological column.
Irrelevant and unrelated to the flood.
You're a Young Man Darwinist. Calm down.
I wouldn't matter if it was the whole list.
No, I had you say that it was irrelevant.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-17/#post57389872
It wasn't exactly a global fire, that is not everything burned, it was 65 million years ago not 4,500 years ago and it did reduce biodiversity. There was a major extinction event at the time.
That's inaccurate. One example was given multiple times.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57388850
Evidence for the flood isn't primarily found in the geological column.
This unsupported claim is absurd. How do these monuments "testify to a global flood".The pyramids of Giza, Yucatan and other momuments erected already testify to that event.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57389209
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-16/#post57389411
Actually many cultures show this, as seen in aforementioned monuments built around the world based on a similar outline.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-15/#post57389180
Actually they reaffirm the flood. In geology you can find references to "when the earth was divided",
Why?paleontology is irrelevant for now,
As I explained before the pyramids have nothing to do with the falsification of the flood by biogeography. A falsification neither you nor any other creationist can refute.biogeography to a certain extent through the dispersion of similar Pyramid cultures practically worlds apart in the Yucatan and Giza,
Another attempt to dismiss a falsification you can't refute.biodiversity is irrelevant,
As I pointed out before Archeology shows that cultures have been developing all over the world for 10s of thousands of years with no evidence of interuption by a global flood.archeology through the discovery of the aforementioned structures plus more.
Only because you refuse to look.I don't find any refutation there.
This nonsense is only evidence of the fact that creationists can come up with a virtually endless supply of nonsense (Added in Edit: though I suppose you could consider it evidence that even a literal interpretation of the Bible could allow for the flood to be only local. There is no falsification of a local flood. If you want to claim the flood was a very localized event we will have no problem but I don't think that is what you want to claim. )The Adamic root race. Other Flood of Noah Survivors
Only in the imagination of some creationists.There are in fact portions of the earth with the lasting impression of that event.
There is NO evidence of a global flood in the geologic column.Evidence for the flood is not primarily found in the geological column.
I am glad you think that 65 years old is young. I wouldn't call myself a Darwinist and the flood is easily falsified without any reference to Darwin or evolution.Irrelevant and unrelated to the flood.
You're a Young Man Darwinist. Calm down.
It is clear that you don't dare let yourself actually think about any of the many Falsification of the Global Flood that have so often been discussed on this board. You are forced to say they are irrelevant because you can't refute them.I wouldn't matter if it was the whole list.
What I said was irrelevant is the occurance of widespread forest fires that apparently took place after the Chicxulub impact 65 million years ago and your claim that this is some related to the global flood myth. I also said.No, I had you say that it was irrelevant.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7546736-17/#post57389872
It wasn't exactly a global fire, that is not everything burned, it was 65 million years ago not 4,500 years ago and it did reduce biodiversity. There was a major extinction event at the time.
That is all evolutionists do is argue against each other. There would be no theory of evolution without that process. What amuses me is the evolutionists that have to make it clear that they are not creationists. Because the arguement they present for evolution supports creationism so much.I know that if you or they knew ANYTHING about evolution you would not argue against it.
Why does EVERY university in every country IN THE WORLD teach evolution as a fact? what do they know that the people who are teaching you creationism don't?
Of course there are religious universities out there teaching all kinds of rubbish, I could even set up the UFSM that tells students the FSM is the one true God, it might have university in the title but it would be anything but a university.
I am talking about UNIVERSITIES not myth schools and diploma mills.
I once heard a theology degree likened to a degree in 'Books by Charles Dickens'.
The reason universities teach evolution as a fact is of course because all the evidence points to evolution being a fact.The reason the universities teach evolution as a fact is of course because as far as science is concerned it is a fact.
As someone who teaches in a university I should point out that evolution is not taught as fact (or at least it shouldn't be). The facts that overwhelmingly point to common descent are taught so it is fair to say that common descent is taught as a scientific fact and evolution is taught as the theory that explains the fact of common descent. As already pointed there are some fundamentalist schools that teach creationism so perhaps you should have said nearly all university, including most universities with religious affiliations teach evolutionary theory.Why does EVERY university in every country IN THE WORLD teach evolution as a fact? what do they know that the people who are teaching you creationism don't?
Creationists please remember this, if the people teaching you are creationists they only know as much about science and evolution as you do which is nothing, I say that with confidence because I know that if you or they knew ANYTHING about evolution you would not argue against it, the only way anyone would know about evolution and still argue against it would be if they had been indoctrinated in creationism before they were educated.
The reason universities teach evolution as a fact is of course because all the evidence points to evolution being a fact.
You are entitled to believe what you want about anything but if you want other people to believe as you do it always helps [unless those other people are as thick as planks] to provide evidence that what you want them to believe is true.
Religions and the belief in Gods have nothing to do with truth, religions and Gods are based on emotions, fear and nothing else, if you ever stopped believing in your God your God would disappear, how real is that?
As you wish.I've yet to see any scientist prove that the world is, in fact, objective and repeatable. If not, they have no basis to reject as truth the subjective evidence that people usually claim as proof for God, and no reason to expect the people who believe in God to restrict themselves to only objective and repeatable evidence.
I've yet to see any scientist show that science has anything to do with truth either. Especially since science rejects subjective, non-repeatable data as false data without justifying that restriction.
Science is a search for "objective, repeatable truth" or perhaps "useful truth", but like everyone else there is no way to claim it is the absolute truth. This is necessarily such because the only thing that can be shown to be true is a tautology, but that is not very useful so we presume various other axioms on top of what is known to be true.
That is all evolutionists do is argue against each other. There would be no theory of evolution without that process. What amuses me is the evolutionists that have to make it clear that they are not creationists. Because the arguement they present for evolution supports creationism so much.
You have stated this wrong. There is NO evidence for a global flood in the geologic column.
This was already given, dispersion.This unsupported claim is absurd. How do these monuments "testify to a global flood".
There are only so many ways you can build really large structures from stone but if you look at them closely you will some pretty significant differences between structures in South America and those in Egypt for example and they are in no way evidence for a global flood.
The time will come for that.Why?
No the Great Pyramid does not falsify the flood.As I explained before the pyramids have nothing to do with the falsification of the flood
You refuted it for me. I specifically asked you about biogeography. You'll get it.biogeography. A falsification neither you nor any other creationist can refute.
Another attempt to dismiss a falsification you can't refute.
As pointed out before, the cultures in various constituents were interrupted.As I pointed out before Archeology shows that cultures have been developing all over the world for 10s of thousands of years with no evidence of interuption
First you would need to explain why a local meteor strike is referred to as a global fire. Then you'll get it.This nonsense is only evidence of the fact that creationists can come up with a virtually endless supply of nonsense (Added in Edit: though I suppose you could consider it evidence that even a literal interpretation of the Bible could allow for the flood to be only local. There is no falsification of a local flood. If you want to claim the flood was a very localized event we will have no problem but I don't think that is what you want to claim. )
This wasn't a reference to your age.I am glad you think that 65 years old is young. I wouldn't call myself a Darwinist
It's quite clear by now how much this means to you.and the flood is easily falsified without any reference to Darwin or evolution.
No, you said biogeography and biodiversity were irrelevant in light of global fires for the reasons given.What I said was irrelevant is the occurance of widespread forest fires that apparently took place after the Chicxulub impact 65 million years ago and your claim that this is some related to the global flood myth. I also said.
You gave no evidence you just made an unsupported assertion.The deaths resulting from a cataclysmic event, even if only one organism dies, will inevitably allow that organism or organisms to be deposited into the earth. It doesn't matter whether it is distinctive or not. The fact is evidence for the flood is not primarily found in the geological column.
This was already given, dispersion.
Introduced to whom? In your myth the 8 ark surviors are the only people in the entire world after the flood. (Unless you want to go back to a local flood model)Actually the purposes are the same and the means or the technology required also stem from a common root. These are articles of technology which would have been foriegn to indigenous populatuins as advancements in Egypt and the like were progressing at a faster rate than around he world, both spiritually and mentally. Noah is described as a "perfect" man or from that stock. The culture shock brought on by such a race being introduced in alternate sectors would result from the higher faculties which they possessed.
Scientists have a pretty good idea of how the pyramids were built and the Egyptian pyramids were quite different from those built by the Aztecs and the Mayas.Their trails are marked by the seemingly daunting task of moving and cutting rock which would be impossible or near impossible to move or cut even using today's technology.
This is just nonsense.It doesn't stop at the Pyramid and a measure of discernment needs to be employed. The activities revealed on Puma Punku also testify to to that event. As a result of such a shock or influx, some have attributed this soley to aliens forgetting about that "perfect race". That it is evidence for the flood event, is fact, provided that one knows what he is looking at.
So you are going to attempt to explain paleontology at some point. I can hardly wait.The time will come for that.
I didn't say it did but Egyptian civilization had been developing for thousands of years before the first dynasty was formed and the building of the pyramids, starting with the step pyramid of Dosier built in the third dynasty around 2600 BC predates the date most creationist give for the flood. If there was a flood at that time it must have been local because the Egyptians did not experience it. They just kept on keeping on building pyramids and other monuments.No the Great Pyramid does not falsify the flood.
I did not. You clearly don't understand the biogeography argument if you think I did. Read first few posts on the Biogeography Thread.You refuted it for me. I specifically asked you about biogeography. You'll get it.
You have claimed it but there is no evidence of this supposed interruption.As pointed out before, the cultures in various constituents were interrupted.
I have explained this several times. Tectite falls from the meteor strike may have ignited fires all around the globe 65 million years ago. That does not mean that everything burned or that all surface life was destroyed.First you would need to explain why a local meteor strike is referred to as a global fire. Then you'll get it.
This is false and you know it. I said the fact that there may have been forest fires all over the world 65 million years ago and that there was a mass extinction event 65 million years ago is irrelevant to agruments about a global flood less than 5000 years ago.No, you said biogeography and biodiversity were irrelevant in light of global fires for the reasons given.
Try and imagine what their training must have been like to allow them to do that while keeping a straight face and still live with themselves? how are they able to fool themselves about so much?What is vaguely entertaining is to see how a creationist such as yourself has zero to say that is real, anything you can say against evolution or so-called "evolutionists" is falsehood, something you just make up.
Try and imagine what their training must have been like to allow them to do that while keeping a straight face and still live with themselves? how are they able to fool themselves about so much?
I say straight faced but I don't think I have ever actually met a creationist, perhaps when Americans are away from America they don't readily say that they are religious especially creationist, after all who would understand?
"are you saying that you believe that the WHOLE Bible is true, Adam and Eve, the flood? who told you that and what would make you believe them?".
When we look back at the brain washing techniques used by the Russians we realise they knew absolutely nothing about the subject, admittedly they were trying to do it on a much shorted time scale than creationists but the creationist way has been shown to be much more effective than the Russians could ever have imagined.
That's incorrect. Read the quote again.You gave no evidence you just made an unsupported assertion.
This was detailed in the last post even with a link provided.Introduced to whom? In your myth the 8 ark surviors are the only people in the entire world after the flood.
What local flood model? You still can't explain why you call a local meteor strike a global fire? When you do, you will find the irrelevance in attempting to call the flood a "local" flood.(Unless you want to go back to a local flood model)
This is merely one out of dozens "ideas" about how the GP was built none of which adequately explains it nor the various other mega-structures lke those at Puma Punku,. Methods which all stem from the same cultural root. The ramp theory is inadequate and doesn't even begin to explain how the blocks were placed.Scientists have a pretty good idea of how the pyramids were built and the Egyptian pyramids were quite different from those built by the Aztecs and the Mayas.
How were the Pyramids built
As expected, Here you go, take a crash course.This is just nonsense.
For what reason?So you are going to attempt to explain paleontology at some point.
The dating of the Great Pyramid is inaccurate and multiple factors are not taken into consideration. Erosion is just one.I didn't say it did but Egyptian civilization had been developing for thousands of years before the first dynasty was formed and the building of the pyramids, starting with the step pyramid of Dosier built in the third dynasty around 2600 BC predates the date most creationist give for the flood. If there was a flood at that time it must have been local because the Egyptians did not experience it. They just kept on keeping on building pyramids and other monuments.
I understand the biogeography argument. I will ask you this though, if there was a global fire, why doesn't biogeography falsify that event? Answer that and you'll find the irrelevance in attempting to apply it to the global flood.I did not. You clearly don't understand the biogeography argument if you think I did. Read first few posts on the Biogeography Thread.
Actually this was repeatably given where the various cultures did experience an influx due to the integration of that "perfect race" based on the flood event.You have claimed it but there is no evidence of this supposed interruption.
And in doing so, agreeing that biogeography plays no role in explaining the problems associated with the population of various geographic areas. In other words, it is irrelevant, just like in your attempt at falsifying the flood event.I have explained this several times. Tectite falls from the meteor strike may have ignited fires all around the globe 65 million years ago. That does not mean that everything burned or that all surface life was destroyed.
It is not in mapping the global fire to the global flood we find the similarity but in the relevance of biogeography and biodiversity in falsifying either global event.This is false and you know it. I said the fact that there may have been forest fires all over the world 65 million years ago and that there was a mass extinction event 65 million years ago is irrelevant to agruments about a global flood less than 5000 years ago.
If we do not discuss theories and hypotheses, there is no scientific progress. Therefore, yes, you are correct.That is all evolutionists do is argue against each other. There would be no theory of evolution without that process.
How does the evidence for evolution support creationism? Or better yet, what evidence would not support creationism, in your opinion?What amuses me is the evolutionists that have to make it clear that they are not creationists. Because the arguement they present for evolution supports creationism so much.
I don't know what more you want to "prove" that the world is objective and repeatable. All our science and the technology based on that science demonstrate this. Scientists don't expect everyone to restict themselves to only objective and repeatable evidence, unless it deals with the physical world. This does not include God.I've yet to see any scientist prove that the world is, in fact, objective and repeatable. If not, they have no basis to reject as truth the subjective evidence that people usually claim as proof for God, and no reason to expect the people who believe in God to restrict themselves to only objective and repeatable evidence.
Science is not a tool for determining "truth" in the absolute sense. Science rejects subjective, non-repeatable data as useless to science (i.e. to the study of the physical world), not necessarily as false.I've yet to see any scientist show that science has anything to do with truth either. Especially since science rejects subjective, non-repeatable data as false data without justifying that restriction.
That is why we do not claim knowledge of "absolute truth." We leave that to creationists.Science is a search for "objective, repeatable truth" or perhaps "useful truth", but like everyone else there is no way to claim it is the absolute truth. This is necessarily such because the only thing that can be shown to be true is a tautology, but that is not very useful so we presume various other axioms on top of what is known to be true.
I have explained many times that the Chicxulub strike started fires all around the world because of hot material from the ejecta plume. A model of the hot ejecta fall the places fires probably started (wherever the ejecta fall was over land) is below from Here.You still can't explain why you call a local meteor strike a global fire?
Snip
It is not in mapping the global fire to the global flood we find the similarity but in the relevance of biogeography and biodiversity in falsifying either global event.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?