Is fossil evidence that strong of a case for evolution?

[RickG]

I would assume scientists do.

They are the ones with the tools and self-calibrated equipment, tuned to deep time and all that other anti-Biblical stuff.

Yeah, right! The same exact type calibration that is used to determine your body chemistry at your doctors office. And just what is "self-calibrated"? Do you even have a clue why instruments have to be calibrated? And no, it is not to get the results desired. It is to bet accurate results.

Because they have the equipment, the software and the manpower to go poking around where they don't belong.

Whoops! Look out for the bible police.

Why is it, when an earthquake strikes, like the one in Haiti, or a tsunami that hit Indonesia, you don't hear of scientists being killed?

They're never around in the area, where you actually need them.

A 1993 eruption killed nine people, including six scientists who had descended into the volcano's crater to sample gases.

Source: Galeras - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They're busy predicting quakes in Timbuktu, while quakes are occuring everywhere else but Timbuktu.

Have you had your meds today. I mean really, you are on some kind of rant. The entire globe is monitored for seismic activity 24/7. Earthquakes cannot be predicted. They can only warn of excessive seismic activity that is increasing, thus probable danger. No one can say for sure when.

But let a quake occur where scientists predicted one -- by coincidence -- and it's all over the news how accurate they are.

Earthquakes cannot be predicted.

Creationists who buy into today's worldly science are certainly prone to marching to the beat of another drummer.

So, does this mean you are going to go live in a cave somewhere? Bye

 

[Naturalism]

Anyone with basic physics should know that stuff decays over time.

True, but 4000 years is relatively not all that long ago. Some remnants might be around were it an actual ark that existed.

I believe the Ark was dismantled and used as Noah's homestead.

Evidence?

But scientists keep "seeing things" when it comes to the Ark.

Creationists, not scientists, are the ones "seeing things" here there & other places that are not actually there in regards to the Ark, The Shroud, weeping statues, burnt bread, and so on.

They periodically pique the public's interest with "sightings" of the Ark, knowing full well how entropy works. The effect, of course, is just what Satan wants:

Go search for "Noah' Ark found" in Google or any popular search engine. Any guess on what the vast majority of the results hosting such stories are from?

You might want to let those other creationists know they are doing the work of Satan!

To dull the public's interest in things pertaining to the Bible.

Right, could you imagine if there actually was any evidence for the Ark though? I can see it now. All the creationists would be trumpeting it on every media outlet on a loop over and over and no doubt hacks like Ken Ham would erect museums onsite to milk more money out of the sheep.

 

[RickG]

True, but 4000 years is relatively not all that long ago. Some remnants might be around were it an actual ark that existed.

According to AV Noah lived and built the Ark in New Jersey.

 

[DerelictJunction]

According to AV Noah lived and built the Ark in New Jersey.

Well, it wasn't called New Jersey, then. Honestly, with the Flood scenarios of rapidly moving continents and huge upside-down waterfalls shooting out of the middle Atlantic, Noah could have lived on what is now the floor of the South China Sea for all we know.

Not really related to embedded age, but interesting to think about...for 2 minutes.

 

[RickG]

Well, it wasn't called New Jersey, then. Honestly, with the Flood scenarios of rapidly moving continents and huge upside-down waterfalls shooting out of the middle Atlantic, Noah could have lived on what is now the floor of the South China Sea for all we know.

Not really related to embedded age, but interesting to think about...for 2 minutes.

Well, he's the guy that says "creation science" can take a hike, while invoking flood geology to get NJ to the mtn.s of Ararat.

 

[Dizredux]

Well, he's the guy that says "creation science" can take a hike, while invoking flood geology to get NJ to the mtn.s of Ararat.

But no one can accuse him of not being creative in his thinking. He is definitely an original.


Dizredux

 

[AV1611VET]

But no one can accuse him of not being creative in his thinking. He is definitely an original.

I don't know where Rick got that NJ to Ararat thing, but for the record, I do believe Noah lived in what is now NJ, since the pitch pine tree is indigenous to the NJ area.

It is indigenous to the Mesopotamia region as well, but the Ark ended its journey there, not started it.

In addition, it also serves as a powerful argument that the Flood was global, not local.

QV please: 1

 

[RickG]

I don't know where Rick got that NJ to Ararat thing, but for the record, I do believe Noah lived in what is now NJ, since the pitch pine tree is indigenous to the NJ area.

It has been a while but you did mention plate tectonics which invokes flood geology.

It is indigenous to the Mesopotamia region as well, but the Ark ended its journey there, not started it.

A completely different geology. Even with plate tectonics you have the wrong continents. And just ignore the fact that Mt. Ararat is a stratovolcano.

In addition, it also serves as a powerful argument that the Flood was global, not local.

Only if you invoke the 11 Ky Lake Agassiz outburst event.

 

[AV1611VET]

It has been a while but you did mention plate tectonics which invokes flood geology.

I don't know what context I mentioned plate tectonics, but I suspect you have me mixed up with someone else.

Even with plate tectonics you have the wrong continents.

Earth was one giant continent at the time, called Eden.

 

[Naturalism]

I don't know what context I mentioned plate tectonics, but I suspect you have me mixed up with someone else.

Earth was one giant continent at the time, called Eden.

I see. So are you saying there was no oceans, lakes or bodies of water?

 

[AV1611VET]

I see. So are you saying there was no oceans, lakes or bodies of water?

I believe you guys call it "Pangaea".

The ocean was called "Panthalassa".

 

[Naturalism]

I believe you guys call it "Pangaea".

The ocean was called "Panthalassa".

Ok. I understand you may have likely stated a response to my question elsewhere a few times already.

How do you view the events of noah and the flood, specifically where it's describing all types of life on the ark? I mean how could so many fit on such a boat, not to mention all the food & water they would require and lets not forget that 8 people would have been overseeing that and the disposal of their waste. I don't find any of that even remotely plausible given even a small Zoo with far less animals involves a lot more than 8 people.

 

[AV1611VET]

I mean how could so many fit on such a boat,

The Ark (not "boat") could have been a TARDIS booth.

not to mention all the food & water they would require

God could have fed them like He fed the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17).

and lets not forget that 8 people would have been overseeing that

Not necessarily.

and the disposal of their waste.

That one, I have no explanation for.

I don't find any of that even remotely plausible given even a small Zoo with far less animals involves a lot more than 8 people.

You do realizie that there was [probably] a 9th Man on the Ark, do you not?

 

[Naturalism]

The Ark (not "boat") could have been a TARDIS booth.

By that rationale it could have been a thimble. The passages don't hint, suggest or allow for any such inference of it being a TARDIS.

God could have fed them like He fed the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17).

The passages don't hint, suggest or allow for any such inference.

Not necessarily.

So, what, not all 8 but just Noah taking care of them all?

You do realizie that there was [probably] a 9th Man on the Ark, do you not?

Who's the 9th person? The bible states 8 in total.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who's the 9th person?

Are you familiar with the story of Daniel's three friends, thrown into the furnace?

If so, that should answer your question.

If not ...

Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Short answer: Jesus Christ.

 

[EternalDragon]

Ok. I understand you may have likely stated a response to my question elsewhere a few times already.

How do you view the events of noah and the flood, specifically where it's describing all types of life on the ark? I mean how could so many fit on such a boat, not to mention all the food & water they would require and lets not forget that 8 people would have been overseeing that and the disposal of their waste. I don't find any of that even remotely plausible given even a small Zoo with far less animals involves a lot more than 8 people.

There were not as many species back then as today. Most of the animals would have been smaller, younger ones and would have hibernated during the trip.

 

[selfinflikted]

By that rationale it could have been a thimble. The passages don't hint, suggest or allow for any such inference of it being a TARDIS.

You know, that's an excellent point, actually. I'm surprised myself or no one else has seen this. What was the point of building the ark so big, if the physical space wasn't needed?

 

[Naturalism]

There were not as many species back then as today. Most of the animals would have been smaller, younger ones and would have hibernated during the trip.

So you're saying we got all the biodiversity we have now in 4000 years? Really, so that is acceptable but the idea of this same sort of descent with modification occurring over many millions of years is less plausible?

 

[Queller]

There were not as many species back then as today.

Evidence?

Most of the animals would have been smaller, younger ones

The Bible quite clearly states "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female."

That is very clearly animals able to mate, not young.

and would have hibernated during the trip.

Evidence?

 

[RickG]

I don't know what context I mentioned plate tectonics, but I suspect you have me mixed up with someone else.

Me thinks not. You can't get from New Jersey to Mt. Ararat without plate tectonics, and that doesn't even work.

Earth was one giant continent at the time, called Eden.

Fifteen in all over the past 3.6 Ga. Why did you pick Pangaea over all the others?

So look at the map below and tell me how New Jersey became the Mountains of Ararat?