Facts to disprove theory of evolution

[BCP1928]

You were there?

Or was there here?

(As uniformitarianism teaches.)

No, but plenty of other people were. Some of them wrote about what was going on then, and none of them mentioned getting wet.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, but plenty of other people were. Some of them wrote about what was going on then, and none of them mentioned getting wet.

Would you believe me, if tomorrow I wrote I was at the battle of Gettysburg, and no one got shot?

 

[BCP1928]

Would you believe me, if tomorrow I wrote I was at the battle of Gettysburg, and no one got shot?

No, because we have actual evidence that many people got shot, We also have actual evidence of relatively advanced civilizations which continuous uninterrupted existence through the supposed time of the flood.

 

[Astrid]

No, because we have actual evidence that many people got shot, We also have actual evidence of relatively advanced civilizations which continuous uninterrupted existence through the supposed time of the flood.

If there'd been a flood, that fact woul disprove evolution-
and a huge body of geology.

But then the theory never would have been developed
in the first place.

 

[AV1611VET]

We also have actual evidence of relatively advanced civilizations which continuous uninterrupted existence through the supposed time of the flood.

Only on paper.

 

[AV1611VET]

If there'd been a flood, that fact would disprove evolution - and a huge body of geology.

I've never heard this before, but if I start using it as proof that evolution is wrong, will you understand what I'm saying?

Put another way:

May I quote you on this?

 

[BCP1928]

Only on paper.

No, real archaeological evidence.

I've never heard this before, but if I start using it as proof that evolution is wrong, will you understand what I'm saying?

Put another way:

May I quote you on this?

You'd have to have actual evidence that the flood took place. Got any?

 

[dlamberth]

d

You'd have to have actual evidence that the flood took place. Got any?

Only on paper.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, real archaeological evidence.

You'd have to have actual evidence that the flood took place. Got any?

No.

All evidence* was removed in a divine clean-up, and replaced with divine documentation of what happened, when it happened, where it happened, why it happened, what order it happened in, how long it took to do it, who did it, and who the eyewitnesses were by name; including specific conversations and events just prior to, during, and after the Flood.

* There are two exceptions of evidence left behind, but I won't get into that here.

 

[AV1611VET]

Only on paper.

That paper is a confession, written by the One who orchestrated everything.

And insisting you act on it.

 

[dlamberth]

That paper is a confession, written by the One who orchestrated everything.

And insisting you act on it.

It's still only on paper.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's still only on paper.

Be thankful of that.

If there was any other kind of evidence God didn't clean up, I guarantee you we wouldn't be here discussing it.

 

[Apple Sky]

We also have actual evidence of relatively advanced civilizations which continuous uninterrupted existence through the supposed time of the flood.

I've very often thought that an advanced civilization lived before the flood, where can I find evidence for this ? Thanks

 

[Hans Blaster]

The writer is not claiming to be a reporter. You still have not answered the very basic question. What is factually incorrect about the article? And what gives you the right to declare "phony"? Because it does not agree with the evolutionist "theory"?

Because the "writers" random encounter is with just the "right" kind of person who tells just the right kind of story that fits his preconceived notion about the falseness of evolutionary biology. It's confirmation bias fan fiction.

 

[Ophiolite]

I've very often thought that an advanced civilization lived before the flood, where can I find evidence for this ? Thanks

So far, absolutely nowhere. This does not mean there might not be such evidence, but the extensive research by explorers, archaeologists, historians and anthropologists does not even provide a hint that such a civilisation may have existed. (Despite lurid attempts to misrepresent mundane data and dress it up in dramatic, but ill fitting clothes.) You're welcome.

 

[Apple Sky]

.

 

[Apple Sky]

So far, absolutely nowhere. This does not mean there might not be such evidence, but the extensive research by explorers, archaeologists, historians and anthropologists does not even provide a hint that such a civilisation may have existed. (Despite lurid attempts to misrepresent mundane data and dress it up in dramatic, but ill fitting clothes.) You're welcome

Well @BCP1928 said he has evidence of an advanced civilization, so I think I'll wait to see what he has to say. Thanks all the same.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Excellent question.

He didn't.

Since one of those two scenarios is wrong, I have to assume He didn't.

He did just what He said He did, in the order He did it, etc.

Yet one MUST be wrong if the Creation does not match the documentation.

Though of course... UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES CAN THE BIBLE EVER BE CONTRADICTED.

A scientific fact can be wrong.

And if a scientific fact can be wrong, a scientific fact can be right.

Yeah, okay, I'll grant you that.

By way of example, He made the earth before the sun.

It's scientists that put the sun before the earth.

Then they blame it on His documentation.

Because the study of God's creation shows that the documentation is incorrect. IF it's only taken as literally as possible and ignore the fact that allegory and poetic language exist at all.

 

[Ophiolite]

Well @BCP1928 said he has evidence of an advanced civilization, so I think I'll wait to see what he has to say. Thanks all the same.

I can see I need to apologise to @BCP1928 for jumping to a concussion. I confused his forum name with a similar named member who routinely talks nonsense and read into his comments about "advanced civilisations" the fantasies contstructed by the likes of Graham Hancock. On reflection it is clear he is speaking about the civilisations in the Indus valley, or China. Those are well established, plenty of evidence, no meaningful doubt. So, my apoligies.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Well @BCP1928 said he has evidence of an advanced civilization, so I think I'll wait to see what he has to say. Thanks all the same.

History of Egypt

Old Babylonian Empire

Shang Dynasty