• 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.

Evidence for a global flood

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
39
London
✟37,512.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
maybe Jimmy Saggert and lets see, Jim and Tammy and...

i mean, that is what we see in the press, all them comings and, ah, goings.

"course, a fair minded person knows that only the characters get in the news and out there the millions of hard working honest preachers get ignored.

But back to the attempted slander of researchers...

You know, to some extent I cant help but take all this stuff a bit personally.

i have been around scientists all my life, from my dad on thru to today.
Most of my acquaintances are involved in research one way of another.

I pretty much have an idea about who they are, and what they do. Why even done a bit of it myself.

So then someone comes in with this really grotesque caricature that the pink prose one has, and i kind of bothers me. its so far off base that a person doesnt even know where to start, esp as it seems welded in place.

its like she saw something in the news about China, and oh now she knows what all of them Chinks is doing over there. That multiplied by a totally unjustified negative attitude toward others, and that she's got the inside track to reality

Seems like as good an example as any of how if people on the creo side didnt make up things to criticize they wont have anything at all to say.

The sheer selectivity of it is what's ridiculous. So far itt we've had allegations thrown at petroleum companies (not even their science corps) and pharmacology researchers.

So somehow from that, any peer-review articles, like say, those on evolution can be discarded because....well, just because.

If people want to show that a specific piece of evolutionary evidence is wrong because of claims of vested interests, then really, pointing to a few isolated cases in completely different fields, or back to Piltdown man or Nebraska man or whatever dusty old scandal-that-wasn't won't cut it.
 
Upvote 0

Inan3

Veteran Saint
Jul 22, 2007
3,376
88
West of the Mississippi
✟27,875.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Translation: I DON'T KNOW SO I'M GOING TO DODGE DUCK DIP DIVE AND DODGE!

This is why nobody takes you seriously. Real geology can answer that question and account for those factors. All you jokers can do is quote verse that doesn't really apply.


It is my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either. They are still trying to figure that out.

That could be why we don't take some of you all that seriously either. You call us jokers because we give you our idea but bow down to mere speculation yourself. Yes, I know you know what the layers are made of but you DON'T know what caused it. That's how it goes with many things. Not all, mind you, but many. I will still listen to others who might not be quite as enamored as you with Scienceville. I will say this again, for your sake now, as I have said in the past. I am NOT against any of the sciences geology, biology, physics, etc. but science is NOT my God. As a matter of fact sometimes the people behind some of these sciences actually use science as a tool to support THEIR UNBELIEF of my God. When that happens I know something is wrong in Scienceville. If it were all about just "good" science then they wouldn't have to bring God into it at all... but it's not... there is a much deeper force at work and you and most people have no idea that it is going on. Enough said!! I'm just here to get you to think "outside of the box" sometimes.
 
Upvote 0

Inan3

Veteran Saint
Jul 22, 2007
3,376
88
West of the Mississippi
✟27,875.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
maybe Jimmy Saggert and lets see, Jim and Tammy and...

i mean, that is what we see in the press, all them comings and, ah, goings.

"course, a fair minded person knows that only the characters get in the news and out there the millions of hard working honest preachers get ignored.

But back to the attempted slander of researchers...

You know, to some extent I cant help but take all this stuff a bit personally.

i have been around scientists all my life, from my dad on thru to today.
Most of my acquaintances are involved in research one way of another.

I pretty much have an idea about who they are, and what they do. Why even done a bit of it myself.

So then someone comes in with this really grotesque caricature that the pink prose one has, and i kind of bothers me. its so far off base that a person doesnt even know where to start, esp as it seems welded in place.

its like she saw something in the news about China, and oh now she knows what all of them Chinks is doing over there. That multiplied by a totally unjustified negative attitude toward others, and that she's got the inside track to reality

Seems like as good an example as any of how if people on the creo side didnt make up things to criticize they wont have anything at all to say.

I am not talking about individual researchers but then you have NO idea what I am talking about. And yet, you go on and on with your attack as if it were true and it is all made up in your mind. None of what you have said above pertains to me at all!!
 
Upvote 0

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
39
London
✟37,512.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
I am not talking about individual researchers but then you have NO idea what I am talking about. And yet, you go on and on with your attack as if it were true and it is all made up in your mind. None of what you have said above pertains to me at all!!

Still waiting for evidence to back up your assertions, Inan.

And in case it hadn't been made clear to you before, assertions are not evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
201
usa
✟8,860.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
][/b]I am not talking about individual researchers but then you have NO idea what I am talking about. And yet, you go on and on with your attack as if it were true and it is all made up in your mind. None of what you have said above pertains to me at all!!


No you are obviously swiping with far broader brush strokes than that.

the things you write about science makes it clear you have no idea
what you are talking about.


It is my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either


that would be because its engineering work not geology.
 
Upvote 0

Orogeny

Trilobite me!
Feb 25, 2010
1,599
54
✟24,590.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
It is my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either. They are still trying to figure that out.
Ah yes, but geology is trying to figure it out using the testable characteristics of the structure and surrounding geology, rather than reading a book that says nothing about it and then saying 'oh, i know what it is!'

That could be why we don't take some of you all that seriously either. You call us jokers because we give you our idea but bow down to mere speculation yourself.Yes, I know you know what the layers are made of but you DON'T know what caused it.
Your ideas are based on nothing. Ours are based on EVIDENCE. Understand the difference.

I will still listen to others who might not be quite as enamored as you with Scienceville. I will say this again, for your sake now, as I have said in the past. I am NOT against any of the sciences geology, biology, physics, etc. but science is NOT my God. As a matter of fact sometimes the people behind some of these sciences actually use science as a tool to support THEIR UNBELIEF of my God. When that happens I know something is wrong in Scienceville.
Science not specifically supporting your idea of God means that there's something wrong with science? Seriously?

If it were all about just "good" science then they wouldn't have to bring God into it at all... but it's not... there is a much deeper force at work and you and most people have no idea that it is going on.
Understand that nowhere in science is the concept of God addressed. It may be that certain scientists take personal interpretations away from the evidence provided by scientific observation, but you will NOT see God addressed in the theories or evidences provided by science. Understand that scientists=/=science. And I find it pretty telling that you, not a member of the scientific community, are telling me, a member of the scientific community, what goes on in the scientific community. If there were 'deeper forces' at work, I'd know before you did.

There aren't, btw.

Enough said!! I'm just here to get you to think "outside of the box" sometimes.
No offense, but I don't plan on thinking my way into your box any time soon.
 
Upvote 0

Doveaman

Re-Created, Not Evolved.
Mar 4, 2009
8,464
597
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Your ideas are based on nothing. Ours are based on EVIDENCE. Understand the difference.
There are facts as observed in nature, and facts as recorded in Scripture. Both can be used as EVIDENCE.
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟46,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There are facts as observed in nature, and facts as recorded in Scripture. Both can be used as EVIDENCE.
No, they can't. Facts recorded in the Bible are as unreliable as facts recorded in the Qu'ran, or the Vedic texts - that is, they need to be independently substantiated before we can trust them.
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
201
usa
✟8,860.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
There are facts as observed in nature, and facts as recorded in Scripture. Both can be used as EVIDENCE.

As long as they are facts.

Problem with a lot of them bible-facts is they are hearsay of unknown origin and dubious authenticity. Some can be verified; some cant.

Some can be falsified. Then they aint facts, but fable. They are evidence- of unreliability

You go into court entering as evidence facts that are falsified, you lose, and maybe find out about perjury to boot.

You sure would not win with your flood -story, based on evidence.

"This old books says it happened?

"this mountain of cross checked data proves it didnt."
 
Upvote 0

Inan3

Veteran Saint
Jul 22, 2007
3,376
88
West of the Mississippi
✟27,875.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Please explain to me what any of this has to do with the validity of the science they employ. Agreeing or disagreeing with their politics is not the discussion.

It was for me because I think that is what pulls the strings in Scienceville. You see I see it as a system not just a one on one base. When I say politics I'm not talking about a political party. I am say the system of how things work out there in the world. It works just the same no matter what field you go to. It's a system and it's a system against God.

ETA: Just as a side note, there wouldn't have been a GoM disaster if old earth geologic models didn't work. They used an old earth model to find that reservoir.

Tell me why they call it "old earth" model.

Any evidence for your 'truth', or just a fallible interpretation of the Bible?

My evidence is the Bible and it is not fallible. I know that sounds so unrealistic to your mind but when you see it all from the perspective of God it all relates and intertwines. I also recognize you aren't going to accept that stance but I still have to let you know what I am standing on and why. I don't think the Bible is just a bunch of dos and don'ts. It goes much deeper into the whole of Creation. Every science is covered, every religion, the financial system, education, it is all in God. Without God we don't have the full perspective. God must be first in the equation.

You posted this to show me what? That the energy sector is a minor spender in Washington? Not really sure how this helps your case.

No, just to show you that the whole thing is steeped in power and money and the drive and aim for both. Just because the figure in one is not as great as the other, don't think that they are not diversified and entwined with each other. It is all about the quest for power not so much for the search for data and truth about the origins of the earth. That has nothing to do with our lives. These guys don't really care. They use guys like you for your idealism and believe me when they are done with you they will throw you away. It's all about them and their objectives and that is money and power. Now in between you and them are all these other guys who are fighting to get some of that. They've gone through the idealism and most of the curiosity, now it's about, their families and their income and recognition (power and money on a smaller scale). In the end it is all vanity. Vanity of vanities. You can't take it with you and you leave it to someone who will probably not spend it the way you intended for it to be spent. Someone with different values and ideals. Someone just the opposite of you perhaps. Then after your loved ones are all gone you will be forgotten with the masses unless, of course, if you wrote a particularly good paper or book, you will be remembered for awhile but then along comes the new guys with better and bigger etc. etc. That's how it's all been and we all just go with the flow. I don't see it going that far anymore. It's about to all come to an end. God will always be there but Scienceville will not. Enjoy Scienceville but LIVE in God. That is your only hope of ETERNAL life. Your enjoyment of science and exploration need not end it is going on and you can go with it but not without God.

Science isn't about belief, it's about acceptance of evidence. And if you 'believe' in the science that the geologic community puts forth, then why are you so convinced that they are wrong?

I never said I'm convinced they are wrong. It's the system I question. Part of that system is what is accepted and what is rejected and why it is. Today's science is definitely a belief system. It is full of doctrine and rules and regulations that you must follow to be a part of it. If you believe in that system you are acceptable if not you are a "joker." You have been properly taught and you believe it. It's a job don't take it so seriously. It's just a job!!
 
Upvote 0

Inan3

Veteran Saint
Jul 22, 2007
3,376
88
West of the Mississippi
✟27,875.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No you are obviously swiping with far broader brush strokes than that.

the things you write about science makes it clear you have no idea
what you are talking about.


It is my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either

that would be because its engineering work not geology.


Hespera, you can write what you want, of course, that is your choice but I suggest you find out why I answer the way I do. Read what the poster said that I am answering and you will be able to maybe get it right once in a while. An example of what I am talking about is your comment about my reference to "real geology". As you can see there are quote marks around it, I was quoting the poster and using his own words. You therefore, by your last comment "that would be because its engineering work not geology" only slams him while you are trying to slam me.
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
201
usa
✟8,860.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
Hespera, you can write what you want, of course, that is your choice but I suggest you find out why I answer the way I do. Read what the poster said that I am answering and you will be able to maybe get it right once in a while. An example of what I am talking about is your comment about my reference to "real geology". As you can see there are quote marks around it, I was quoting the poster and using his own words. You therefore, by your last comment "that would be because its engineering work not geology" only slams him while you are trying to slam me.


If in this ruined labyrinth of a conversation i missed what "it" referred back to, in this sentence...".... my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either"

and you were not referring to the GoM well blowout, then i stands corrected.

If it is about the well, then i think you'd find he agrees with me that its an engineering question more than a geological one.
 
Upvote 0

Orogeny

Trilobite me!
Feb 25, 2010
1,599
54
✟24,590.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
In the future, could you please format your posts in a way that makes them easy to quote?

Inan3 said:
It was for me because I think that is what pulls the strings in Scienceville.
So you think the source of funding affects the outcome of research? Energy companies (and every other company that employs scientists) want their science to be as close as is possible to being correct, regardless of whether the result of that science is what they were expecting, or even what they wanted. Would it be of any benefit for a petroleum geologist to tell their company something that wasn't supported by reality? No! The company would act on the geologist's advice, see that he was wrong, and boot him out the door for costing them millions. Models that most closely fit reality are the ones that survive. Call it evolution.

You see I see it as a system not just a one on one base. When I say politics I'm not talking about a political party. I am say the system of how things work out there in the world. It works just the same no matter what field you go to. It's a system and it's a system against God.
This is just rubbish. How could science, which is mute on the subject of God, be against God?

Tell me why they call it "old earth" model.
I call it an old earth model because that is what the geologic model postulates, as well as to differentiate it from the 'flood geology' model, which generally postulates a young earth, or at least a recent flood.

My evidence is the Bible and it is not fallible.
But your interpretation of it is.

I know that sounds so unrealistic to your mind but when you see it all from the perspective of God it all relates and intertwines.
And you've got the good fortune to have the 'perspective of God'? Forgive me if I think that that sounds a bit blasphemous.

I also recognize you aren't going to accept that stance but I still have to let you know what I am standing on and why. I don't think the Bible is just a bunch of dos and don'ts. It goes much deeper into the whole of Creation.
Thank you.
Every science is covered, every religion, the financial system, education, it is all in God. Without God we don't have the full perspective. God must be first in the equation.
All of those things are not covered though. Where does the bible mention geology, biochemistry, or mechanical engineering? Where does it mention the stock market, state colleges, or Buddhism? Just because you want it to be there, and because you can pick out verses that you think cover these things doesn't mean the bible actually addresses them.

No, just to show you that the whole thing is steeped in power and money and the drive and aim for both.
And Christianity is not? Is that why the church spent and spends so much time earning and maintaining its tax-exempt status? My dear, nearly everything that humans do is about money and power.

Just because the figure in one is not as great as the other, don't think that they are not diversified and entwined with each other. It is all about the quest for power not so much for the search for data and truth about the origins of the earth.
Whether not the express purpose of geologic research is a better understanding of Earth's processes, that goal is a wonderful side effect.

That has nothing to do with our lives. These guys don't really care.
I strongly disagree on both counts. If you care not about how the only planet we have to live on functions, that is your shortfall. I for one will remain infinitely curious.

They use guys like you for your idealism and believe me when they are done with you they will throw you away. It's all about them and their objectives and that is money and power.
I'm no idealist. I understand how both academia and industry work, and they're not nearly as scary as you think. You're more than welcome to be afraid of ambition, but please excuse me if I am not.

Now in between you and them are all these other guys who are fighting to get some of that. They've gone through the idealism and most of the curiosity, now it's about, their families and their income and recognition (power and money on a smaller scale).
Building a comfortable life for yourself and your family is unjustifiable? Is this the point you're trying to make, because it sure sounds like it.

In the end it is all vanity. Vanity of vanities. You can't take it with you and you leave it to someone who will probably not spend it the way you intended for it to be spent. Someone with different values and ideals. Someone just the opposite of you perhaps. Then after your loved ones are all gone you will be forgotten with the masses unless, of course, if you wrote a particularly good paper or book, you will be remembered for awhile but then along comes the new guys with better and bigger etc. etc. That's how it's all been and we all just go with the flow. I don't see it going that far anymore. It's about to all come to an end.
Wow. What a rant. It can't be fun to be so negative, to hold so little stock in humanity.

God will always be there but Scienceville will not. Enjoy Scienceville but LIVE in God.
Your 'Scienceville' caricature is a waste. We always caricaturize our enemies. Please don't make the mistake of thinking science is yours. After all, it's the only reason you're here.

That is your only hope of ETERNAL life. Your enjoyment of science and exploration need not end it is going on and you can go with it but not without God.
Please do not try to force your version of God upon me.

I never said I'm convinced they are wrong. It's the system I question.
You do so without understanding the system.

Part of that system is what is accepted and what is rejected and why it is. Today's science is definitely a belief system. It is full of doctrine and rules and regulations that you must follow to be a part of it.
Care to elaborate on what these 'doctrines and rules and regulations' are?

If you believe in that system you are acceptable if not you are a "joker." You have been properly taught and you believe it. It's a job don't take it so seriously. It's just a job!!
It's not a job, it's a method of understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Orogeny

Trilobite me!
Feb 25, 2010
1,599
54
✟24,590.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
If in this ruined labyrinth of a conversation i missed what "it" referred back to, in this sentence...".... my understanding that "real geology" doesn't quite know what caused it either"

and you were not referring to the GoM well blowout, then i stands corrected.
We were discussing the Richat structure at that point.
If it is about the well, then i think you'd find he agrees with me that its an engineering question more than a geological one.
I absolutely agree with you. The geologists did a marvelous job. If they had not, there wouldn't be an oil spill to discuss.
 
Upvote 0

Doveaman

Re-Created, Not Evolved.
Mar 4, 2009
8,464
597
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No, they can't. Facts recorded in the Bible are as unreliable as facts recorded in the Qu'ran, or the Vedic texts - that is, they need to be independently substantiated before we can trust them.
Well, Jesus certainly quoted the facts as evidence to verify truths.

“It is written: ‘Man shall not live by bread...’”

“It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God...’”

“It is written: ‘I will send my messenger...’”

It is written, therefore it is true.
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
201
usa
✟8,860.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
Well, Jesus certainly quoted the facts as evidence to verify truths.

“It is written: ‘Man shall not live by bread...’”

“It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God...’”

“It is written: ‘I will send my messenger...’”

It is written, therefore it is true.


ok settled. Pi really is 3
 
Upvote 0

chris4243

Advocate of Truth
Mar 6, 2011
2,230
57
✟2,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
To have this much water on earth is a necessary condition for the flood.

I think that you need to show that to have that much water requires the Flood, not the other way around. Incidentally: it doesn't. This can even be seen in our own solar system.
 
Upvote 0

chris4243

Advocate of Truth
Mar 6, 2011
2,230
57
✟2,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Indeed. The people who claim God is a meddler constantly messing with our affairs, have no excuse.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,728
15,191
Seattle
✟1,182,503.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
No, just to show you that the whole thing is steeped in power and money and the drive and aim for both. Just because the figure in one is not as great as the other, don't think that they are not diversified and entwined with each other. It is all about the quest for power not so much for the search for data and truth about the origins of the earth. That has nothing to do with our lives. These guys don't really care. They use guys like you for your idealism and believe me when they are done with you they will throw you away. It's all about them and their objectives and that is money and power. Now in between you and them are all these other guys who are fighting to get some of that. They've gone through the idealism and most of the curiosity, now it's about, their families and their income and recognition (power and money on a smaller scale). In the end it is all vanity. Vanity of vanities. You can't take it with you and you leave it to someone who will probably not spend it the way you intended for it to be spent. Someone with different values and ideals. Someone just the opposite of you perhaps. Then after your loved ones are all gone you will be forgotten with the masses unless, of course, if you wrote a particularly good paper or book, you will be remembered for awhile but then along comes the new guys with better and bigger etc. etc. That's how it's all been and we all just go with the flow. I don't see it going that far anymore. It's about to all come to an end. God will always be there but Scienceville will not. Enjoy Scienceville but LIVE in God. That is your only hope of ETERNAL life. Your enjoyment of science and exploration need not end it is going on and you can go with it but not without God.


So, let me see if I have this straight. Your contention is that people become scientists in order to gain power? Exactly what power is it you think they are gaining?
 
Upvote 0