Noah's Ark

[AV1611VET]

No, I'm saying a priest or preacher told them from childhood that they HAVE to believe the Bible is an accurate portrayal of what actually happened.

I'm 63 now ... what keeps me believing (and others) in a global flood?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is that so?Is that so?

Yes, it is. What part are you having a hard time understanding?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm 63 now ... what keeps me believing (and others) in a global flood?

Probably fear, for you at least. Creationists seem to be afraid to face up to any of the errors in the Bible. Perhaps they fear that their belief is just a house of cards. If one goes the whole belief system goes.

 

[AV1611VET]

What part are you having a hard time understanding?

Whether it's you or someone else doing the typing.

For the record, I believe it's you though.

And I feel very sorry for you, that you have to stoop to this style of posting.

 

[AV1611VET]

Probably fear, for you at least.

And here I thought you were going to say it's my caption.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And here I thought you were going to say it's my caption.

No, you asked "why", I gave you the probable answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Whether it's you or someone else doing the typing.

For the record, I believe it's you though.

And I feel very sorry for you, that you have to stoop to this style of posting.

Really? It is still far superior to your style of posting. When you keep flaming everyone you should not be surprised when you get just a fraction in return.

 

[Obliquinaut]

I'm not about to try and 'falsify' my beliefs at this late date; they work just fine.

-sigh- And here we have yet another technical detail that I will have to explain.

A falsifiable hypothesis does NOT mean it is necessarily "false", but rather that there is a way for it to be false (again, NOT THAT IT IS FALSE).

It's a subtle concept and one that is often confusing. But if you have a belief in something just imagine what it would look like if that belief were false. It's key in science and helps us learn how to test against an hypothesis. This is the essence of inferrential statistics and how we understand the world.

Regarding flood evidence, I believe there is an abundance of it that is just not accepted as such.

And that is the problem. You seem to know insufficient geology to actually make that designation. You have clearly relied on a few points that are technical but you show little facility with those concepts beyond just hand waving.

Probably because Noah's flood wouldn't leave such evidence.

So how do you know it even happened? If you say "the Bible says so" then I'm forced to point out the number of times the Bible speaks in direct contradiction to the actual physical evidence in geology. So you are left with a belief you hold by fiat.

Scientists have 'debunked' the flood without having constructing a proper model to study it. It's willful ignorance.

So you think that because the Flood left almost no evidence that the Scientists have failed to find this lack of evidence as dispositive of the Flood's occurence?

And that sounds like sound logic to you?

 

[Obliquinaut]

My response was directed at the technical details involved in the world's problems, not the flood details. Technology is applied to solve problems that are caused by faulty thinking. Therefore the technology may be fine but normally unnecessary if people's thought processes were right.

So far you have repeatedly discussed laminar flow and hydrodynamics specifically. Yet you fail to ever actually provide actual evidence that your handwaving is accurate (hence my repeated request for you to show us your math on the Reynolds number etc.)

Again, I ask, what reason do I have to believe that you actually can identify faulty technical details?

 

[Obliquinaut]

I'm 63 now ... what keeps me believing (and others) in a global flood?

Faith. I think it is quite clear that you lack basic geology training so I'm not surprised that your beliefs are easier to maintain. There were many who came hundreds of years before you who "lost faith" in the Noachian Flood story precisely because they looked at the geology.

(NOTE: This does not mean they had to lose their faith in God.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

-sigh- And here we have yet another technical detail that I will have to explain.

A falsifiable hypothesis does NOT mean it is necessarily "false", but rather that there is a way for it to be false (again, NOT THAT IT IS FALSE).

It's a subtle concept and one that is often confusing. But if you have a belief in something just imagine what it would look like if that belief were false. It's key in science and helps us learn how to test against an hypothesis. This is the essence of inferrential statistics and how we understand the world.

This is a key point that creationists cannot seem to understand. Scientists recognized that one has to be willing to put one's idea out there where others can take try to disprove it. By the very definition of scientific evidence one must first have a falsifiable, which means testable too, hypothesis. If one can't show an idea to be wrong if it is wrong then it is merely an ad hoc explanation at best and is not scientific and has no evidence for it.

 

[AV1611VET]

When you keep flaming everyone you should not be surprised when you get just a fraction in return.

Is that what you really think?

And I'm dead serious here.

Do you really think that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is that what you really think?

And I'm dead serious here.

Do you really think that?

Yes, you are constantly trying to flame people and then you get upset when you get just a fraction of it back.

 

[AV1611VET]

There were many who came hundreds of years before you who "lost faith" in the Noachian Flood story precisely because they looked at the geology.

Then their faith was in the age of rocks, not the Rock of A...

(NOTE: This does not mean they had to lose their faith in God.)

... nevermind.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, you are constantly trying to flame people and then you get upset when you get just a fraction of it back.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I'm 63 now ... what keeps me believing (and others) in a global flood?

THAT'S EASY !

****************** TRUTH ************************

Because we love

******************** TRUTH **********************

And YHWH GRANTED US TO KNOW.

 

[KWCrazy]

Not "seems". It WAS written down first. More then 1500 years earlier, in fact.

Provided we don't find something older. The Eridu Genesis was written before Gilgamesh, though we have only a fragment. That said, the Israelites were a nomadic people not known to be literate, and thus their stories would have been memorized and repeated orally. The Torah was not immediately rejected, so the Israelites obviously knew it was true.

You mean like when Jesus really did get born on the 25th of december?

That's not in any Bible that I've ever read.
Jesus was likely conceived in December but was born in September; the ninth month. We know this because Jesus was conceived in the sixth month of pregnancy for John the Baptist's mother, Elizabeth. A supernova which would explain the star in the east happened in early September, 6 BC. This indicated a minor error in the Gregorian calendar... either that or the astronomers are off 6 years.

No. I just don't let me preconceived beliefs get in the way of my understanding of the facts of reality.

You mean your version of reality.

What you just said here, is essentially that you merely believe that genesis is older then gilgamesh.

No. The event happened long before.
Moses lived from 1350 to 1250 BC. The flood was ancient history when he recorded how it happened. He was educated as an Egyptian. There is no reason to believe that he ever read Sumerian literature.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then their faith was in the age of rocks, not the Rock of A...... nevermind.

Here you are attacking religious the beliefs of other Christians.

 

[Obliquinaut]

Then their faith was in the age of rocks, not the Rock of A...... nevermind.

I am hopeful you are not questioning the faith of those who differ from you in belief in Literal Genesis.

I can see you are quite dismissive of anyone whose faith differs from yours (as you have only recently called others cultists) and yet here you are passing judgement on others even though your Lord and Savior suggests you not do that very thing! (It seems that the Bible isn't so literal after all, is it? )

You are a mystery wrapped in a riddle.

 

[HitchSlap]

I'm 63 now ... what keeps me believing (and others) in a global flood?

You're never too old to accept the facts.