Evidence for a global flood

[AV1611VET]

I'm sure you can make up a better excuse than that for not believing in Him.

It's a perfectly adequate reason.

I thought I said 'excuse'?

Hang up that Arab phone, please.

 

[Doveaman]

It's a perfectly adequate reason. Literally every argument and piece of evidence I've been presented with for God is inconclusive.

You should stop relying on the arguments of others and learn to read:

It's evidence for him if you suddenly decide to upend logic and reasoning and take the least improbable option, which is not something people do under normal circumstances, so why should Christianity be exempt

Like I said, learn to read.

 

[AV1611VET]

Marvellous! We all agree that you have no evidence for creatio ex nihilo.

Try agreeing (for once) that you have no evidence for creatio ex nihilo.

That is the crux of my Apple Challenge.

 

[AV1611VET]

You should stop relying on the arguments of others and learn to read:

I was gonna say, "Hang up the Arab phone and read what I said," but I thought I would ... let him off the hook [pun intended].

 

[Doveaman]

Assuming I give you this one, that's referring specifically to a handful of cases in one field out of thousands, in very broad terms.

For a process that is always touted to be so reliable I would say a handful is too much.

 

[Cabal]

I thought I said 'excuse'?

Hang up that Arab phone, please.

How about you stop making a category error, and mind your manners instead? It's a reason, regardless of what you want to paint it as. Address it, or your credibility can sink even lower again.

 

[Cabal]

For a process that is always touted to be so reliable I would say a handful is too much.

You call a handful cases out of one field too much? My, we are perfectionistic, aren't we? I notice you're still not that bothered by it that it hinders you from sponging off the benefits it brings, mind....

 

[Cabal]

You should stop relying on the arguments of others and learn to read

What, the words of others?

Read it - unconvincing.

Next.

 

[Cabal]

Is this what passes for going after the one that got away these days?

Jesus wept...

 

[Inan3]

Evidence please, or stop slandering a profession you have repeatedly demonstrated you know nothing about.

Just because one does not know all the science that there is does not mean they do not see the comings and goings of it in the press. Everything doesn't need to be proved in the laboratory to be evidence. Somethings are just a part of everyday life. Just read the news.

 

[Inan3]

What, the words of others?

Read it - unconvincing.

Next.

So now you know how we feel. So why do you complain about us not approving of what we read. Next. I think there's a word for that.

 

[Orogeny]

I'm sorry but I am not as impressed by the records and publications that are not so much peer-reviewed as you might think. Think about it who accepts or rejects these publications?

It always makes me laugh when people say things like this. First of all, peer review is alive and well, and I know this since I've got an item in peer review AS WE SPEAK. If I was trying to publish rubbish, it would get shot down in nothing flat. There is no profit (intellectually or financially) in publishing science that doesn't apply to the real world, and there is no profit in publishing models that don't work. The people who publish geologic articles are people who have dedicated their lives to understanding how geologic processes operate. That you think you've got a better handle on it is pretty ludicrous.

It is a controlled environment and from what I have seen of the scientific community they are not the upstanding wonderful society that everyone touts them to be. They are just as devious and manipulative and greedy as the rest of society. The only thing they have going for themselves is the power deals that go on behind the scenes.

What exactly have you seen of the scientific community other than the propaganda your fellow flood advocates have fed you? Have you tried to get a degree in a scientific discipline? Do research? Publish? Do you have any experience in this field AT ALL?

Nope. I don't see as you do. In fact, I think it is you who have your eyes closed and fingers in your ears. You fall for ANYTHING they say. THEY are YOUR gods not mine.

Since I'm actually involved in advancing our geologic knowledge, I'll go ahead and ignore this taunt. However, I'd appreciate it if you didn't violate forum rules by questioning my faith. It's not a particularly Christian thing to do.

I'll leave you with this: Many of the most profitable corporations on Earth rely on old-earth geology. I'm talking about ExxonMobile, Conoco Phillips, Chevron, Shell, BP, Marathon, Total, PetroBras and the remainder of the energy sector. Do you think they'd base their entire business plan on a discipline that doesn't work? And if they did, do you think they'd have the profit margins they do today? I defy you to find me one company, just ONE, that successfully applies flood geology to finding natural resources.

 

[Inan3]

How about you stop making a category error, and mind your manners instead? It's a reason, regardless of what you want to paint it as. Address it, or your credibility can sink even lower again.

Pot... Kettle... Black...

 

[Cabal]

So now you know how we feel. So why do you complain about us not approving of what we read. Next. I think there's a word for that.

I notice the irony of tacitly agreeing that the Bible is merely the words of others has sailed past. Well done. EVERYTHING is but the words of men - but one group is more dedicated to rigorous testing of their claims, and it isn't your side.

Your second point is not really relevant - I'm not even complaining of you not approving of what you read - in my opinion, you haven't read nearly enough and are only focusing on the few bad cases in order to dismiss science wholesale. There's also the matter of drawing completely the wrong conclusion from what you read as religionists and creationists often do, which is another matter entirely.

 

[Cabal]

Pot... Kettle... Black...

Are you going to address the point I made, seeing as AV hasn't? Or are you just going to be as evasive as he was?

And I think you'll find that most of your opponents here are perfectly willing to engage with the arguments of creationists - they're just not very convincing arguments.

 

[Cabal]

Just because one does not know all the science that there is does not mean they do not see the comings and goings of it in the press. Everything doesn't need to be proved in the laboratory to be evidence. Somethings are just a part of everyday life. Just read the news.

So you can't provide evidence then, short of a few bad apples?

 

[Orogeny]

"The waters receded. And the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens were closed." (Gen 8:1-2).
Totally irrelevant.

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.

 

[Inan3]

There is no profit (intellectually or financially) in publishing science that doesn't apply to the real world, and there is no profit in publishing models that don't work. The people who publish geologic articles are people who have dedicated their lives to understanding how geologic processes operate. That you think you've got a better handle on it is pretty ludicrous.

Since I'm actually involved in advancing our geologic knowledge, I'll go ahead and ignore this taunt. However, I'd appreciate it if you didn't violate forum rules by questioning my faith. It's not a particularly Christian thing to do.

He says, as he questions mine. What's that word again?

Jesus said to the Pharisees of that day. "You are of your father the devil!!" Do you suppose He questioned their faith? We are taught to question peoples faith and not to take everything they say as the truth. It's pretty obvious where people's faith and worship lie. It's in what they say and do.

What was your line above? "That you think you've got a better handle on it is pretty ludicrous" Yeah, that's how you said it. I guess in your world it's okay when the shoe is on the other foot.

I'll leave you with this: Many of the most profitable corporations on Earth rely on old-earth geology. I'm talking about ExxonMobile, Conoco Phillips, Chevron, Shell, BP, Marathon, Total, PetroBras and the remainder of the energy sector. Do you think they'd base their entire business plan on a discipline that doesn't work? And if they did, do you think they'd have the profit margins they do today? I defy you to find me one company, just ONE, that successfully applies flood geology to finding natural resources.

Ohhhhh, and THEY are all upstanding citizens who do not manipulate and LOBBY to control things for their own gain. Remember the Gulf of Mexico disaster??? How about our current gas and oil prices??? Oh, yeah these guys are looking out for you and me. Remember this lots and lots of money does not an upstanding citizen make.

You may think I am just a little cocky individual who doesn't know anything. Well, I know more than you might think. When I was young, I too, believed that it was all about doing it right. All I'm going to tell you is, NOW I know better. You will, too. Someday. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. This puppy is coming down. Not a doomsdayer... just know the truth.

Lobbying Spending Database | OpenSecrets

BTW I believe in "old-earth" geology.

 

[Hespera]

Just because one does not know all the science that there is does not mean they do not see the comings and goings of it in the press. Everything doesn't need to be proved in the laboratory to be evidence. Somethings are just a part of everyday life. Just read the news.


So you can't provide evidence then, short of a few bad apples?

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.

 

[Orogeny]

Ohhhhh, and THEY are all upstanding citizens who do not manipulate and LOBBY to control things for their own gain. Remember the Gulf of Mexico disaster??? How about our current gas and oil prices??? Oh, yeah these guys are looking out for you and me. Remember this lots and lots of money does not an upstanding citizen make.

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.

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.

You may think I am just a little cocky individual who doesn't know anything. Well, I know more than you might think. When I was young, I too, believed that it was all about doing it right. All I'm going to tell you is, NOW I know better. You will, too. Someday. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. This puppy is coming down. Not a doomsdayer... just know the truth.

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

Lobbying Spending Database | OpenSecrets

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.

BTW I believe in "old-earth" geology.

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?