My Integrity Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Since one poster here likes to bring up integrity a lot, I thought I would issue a challenge based on it.

Here's my challenge:

If you were offered one million dollars to find evidence of Noah's flood, would you:

A) Take it and go look somewhere?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur?

 

[dlamberth]

Since one poster here likes to bring up integrity a lot, I thought I would issue a challenge based on it.

Here's my challenge:

If you were offered one million dollars to find evidence of Noah's flood, would you:

A) Take it and go look somewhere?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur?

I'd take the easy money. The work of people trying to find evidence of Noah's flood, unsuccessfully by the way, has already been done. The Biblical story of Noah's flood as well as a 6000 year old earth was the basic belief and stating point of many geologist in the early days of geology science. I can use the Ice Age floods here in the Pacific Northwest as an example. Back in the day many believed that the Ice Age floods were evidence of a Global Noah's flood. And they went out to prove it. But it turned out to be something else all together.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd take the easy money.

And sacrifice your integrity?

Money talks, doesn't it?

 

[AlexB23]

Since one poster here likes to bring up integrity a lot, I thought I would issue a challenge based on it.

Here's my challenge:

If you were offered one million dollars to find evidence of Noah's flood, would you:

A) Take it and go look somewhere?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur?

I would take it, and then use ground radar on Mt. Ararat. If I fail, then, I would give some of the money to other scientists who might do better, donate some, and keep some for my wages of effort.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Is the money contingent on actually finding something?

 

[Nithavela]

Since one poster here likes to bring up integrity a lot, I thought I would issue a challenge based on it.

Here's my challenge:

If you were offered one million dollars to find evidence of Noah's flood, would you:

A) Take it and go look somewhere?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur?

For a million dollars, I'd find some evidence.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Is the money contingent on actually finding something?

That is a very good and important question.

@AV1611VET if I do take the money, use it, and find not a single shred of evidence for Noah's Ark, would that mean my integrity is shot or not?

 

[ozso]

For a million dollars, I'd find some evidence.

I think I saw a nail from Noah's ark for sale on ebay. You could start with that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is the money contingent on actually finding something?

Yes.

Evidence of Noah's flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is a very good and important question.

@AV1611VET if I do take the money,

Your integrity is shot right there.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Your integrity is shot right there.

But things cost money. Equipment, travel permits, travel itself, aid. Things cost, especially if it's field work. And what if in doing so, I do indeed find evidence of Noah's Flood or even the Ark itself? Would you still say my integrity is shot? Or is that only contingent on me finding anything that actually supports your views?

 

[AV1611VET]

But things cost money. Equipment, travel permits, travel itself, aid.

Then take the money, if your integrity is for sale.

Things cost, especially if it's field work.

Then take the money, if your integrity is for sale.

And what if in doing so, I do indeed find evidence of Noah's Flood or even the Ark itself?

Good for you.

Would you still say my integrity is shot?

Sacrificed.

Or is that only contingent on me finding anything that actually supports your views?

Whether you find anything or not, you shot your integrity when you took the money.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Then take the money, if your integrity is for sale.

Why?

Sacrificed.

Why?

Whether you find anything or not, you shot your integrity when you took the money.

Why?

 

[Nithavela]

Your integrity is shot right there.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That is a very good and important question.

@AV1611VET if I do take the money, use it, and find not a single shred of evidence for Noah's Ark, would that mean my integrity is shot or not?

It would not automatically mean anything. The question of how you looked for it, and why, and the assumptions you make ahead of looking —the bias with which you begin the project— feeds into the question of integrity.

The IbanezerScrooge said:
Is the money contingent on actually finding something?

Yes.

Evidence of Noah's flood.

However, contrary to this answer by @AV1611VET , according to his OP, the money was contingent only on [implied] agreement, and not contingent on actually finding anything. His OP asks if one has the integrity to actually (and with integrity) look, upon receiving the money.

He may, however believe that there IS evidence to be found, if it is searched for with integrity, and that ideally, then, the money, though given ahead of time, is contingent on [at least some of} that evidence being found.

 

[Lost4words]

I would refer everyone back to my family tree as it goes all the way back to when 2 Corgis were selected to go on the Ark! Simples!

 

[dlamberth]

He may, however believe that there IS evidence to be found, if it is searched for with integrity, and that ideally, then, the money, though given ahead of time, is contingent on [at least some of} that evidence being found.

My contention is that the search he seems to be basing integrity on has already been done. Which makes me wonder about the integrity of not accepting that work simply because it does not align with his beliefs.

 

[Mark Quayle]

My contention is that the search he seems to be basing integrity on has already been done. Which makes me wonder about the integrity of not accepting that work simply because it does not align with his beliefs.

For myself, I can't say that there is or is not evidence to be found. But I can say for sure that not all avenues have been explored, as is the case in any scientific endeavor.

Also, I grant, and to some degree admire, that @AV1611VET holds to his principles in the face of repeated and reasonable-appearing evidences to the contrary. I don't, for example, accept the claims made that there is no evidence, as though the search was complete. I don't accept (partly from my ignorance of good evidence, I suppose, but also from what appears to me to be the lack of good evidence) that Darwinian theory of evolution is valid; nor, even if it is valid, that though I don't have proof of this fact besides, the two —long years of evolution and a 6000 year-old earth and its residents, are incompatible notions.

When I believe something, I'm not in a hurry to be convinced otherwise. They need to show me, if they want me to see it their way. "I know someone who can completely change his opinion in mid-paragraph, without losing any of his vehemence."

 

[essentialsaltes]

Since you later made it clear the money is "contingent" on finding "Evidence of Noah's flood"

Absolutely not. I have better things to do than wasting time and money on a fool's errand. Send a fool for that.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Since you later made it clear the money is "contingent" on finding "Evidence of Noah's flood"

Absolutely not. I have better things to do than wasting time and money on a fool's errand. Send a fool for that.

My fear would be that I would, overcome by excess funds, deny my conscience access to its usual judgement, and spend the too available money on what produces comfort rather than on what produces evidence. I.e. not so much integrity, after all.