KerrMetric
Well-Known Member
- Oct 2, 2005
- 5,171
- 226
- 64
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
oldwiseguy said:
Ah, so your definition of detail is a hand waving level of detail.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
oldwiseguy said:No. I meant like the flood story in Genesis.
Dannager said:You don't do a whole lot of reading, do you? Because that is a rather foolish statement to make.
So? It's allegory all the same. We were just showing that allegories can have plenty of detail. What was your point?oldwiseguy said:All that is fine, and I agree. But I'm talking about the flood account of the bible.
oldwiseguy said:You don't understand. I said the F L O O D S T O R Y, not a science fiction novel.
Lion of God said:There certainly was a lot of plagerizing of an allogorical flood story considering there are so many different sources other than the bible. You'd think these myth-makers would have had something better to do than write stories to confuse us literalist christians a few thousand years in the future.
Quoted and lime'd for truth.Willtor said:Plagiarism is a new concept. This is yet another modern lens being applied to something ancient. People say that Matthew and Luke plagiarized from Mark, too. It doesn't make it so. Nor do I think anybody was trying to confuse anybody else. You have to understand, myth was a useful vehicle for making statements.
Plagiarism is only useful to a society in which ownership is applied to ideas. This was not true in ancient societies. The closest they really got to any notion of somebody's ideas were that of a particular school of thought started by a particular person (e.g. Platonists).
Lion of God said:There certainly was a lot of plagerizing of an allogorical flood story considering there are so many different sources other than the bible. You'd think these myth-makers would have had something better to do than write stories to confuse us literalist christians a few thousand years in the future.
Magma. The geologic record includes roughly 8 x 1024 grams of lava flows and igneous intrusions. Assuming (conservatively) a specific heat of 0.15, this magma would release 5.4 x 1027 joules while cooling 1100 degrees C. In addition, the heat of crystallization as the magma solidifies would release a great deal more heat
RightWingGirl said:If there were a lot of water dissolved in the magma....
KerrMetric said:Are you sure you meant this?
Willtor said:Well, I said he was a geologist, not a mathematician. All that aside, I agree with him. Even if I allow for all of your calculations (and I have no idea where you got your numbers), and even if I agree that long-lived animals could diverge so quickly (I don't; you can ask me about the reasons for this, if you like), and even if I agreed that 269 boxcars would be sufficient for the food alone (on very meager rations, to be sure), and even if I thought that space could be used that efficiently (there is no engineering project in existence, to date, that does), and even if I allowed that a ship of those dimensions in the shape required to allow that kind of efficiency could float on a large body of water (it couldn't), there are still weaknesses: 1. There were 7 (possibly 7 pairs) of each clean animal. 2. What about dinosaurs? 2a. Did they still exist? 2b. If not, how did they all die before the flood? 3. How did the animals distribute themselves across the (now) divided globe in that time frame?
RightWingGirl said:KerrMetric, what, in your opinion, is the single most compelling evidence against YEC?
PaladinValer said:Incidentally, using the exact dimentions the Bible literally gives for Noah's ark, it is mathematically impossible to fit all the pairs of both clean and unclean animals in the ark.
And, mind you, according to the YECs interpretation, Noah would have to fit all other life in there too, since a Deluge like that would destroy pretty much all fresh water as well as land plants and fungi.
Sorry, but it doesn't compute.
IF science and Evolution are so important to eachother then why were almost all of the great scientists YEC?KerrMetric said:The concordancy of evidence from many disciplines that do not rely upon the same factual evidence. They all point to an Old Earth. Add in the astronomical evidence and it spells an Old Universe.
For all these things to point old but reality is young defies belief and means basically the entire edifice of physics is wrong which would lead to observational and experimental chaos.
It's not like there are 3 or 4 of these things but dozens upon dozens. Add in the fact that the YEC community seem as dumb as fence posts when it comes to science doesn't help their case either.
You mean the great scientists who were dead before the modern synthesis of the theory of evolution was developed? I'm afraid those don't count.RightWingGirl said:IF science and Evolution are so important to eachother then why were almost all of the great scientists YEC?
RightWingGirl said:IF science and Evolution are so important to eachother then why were almost all of the great scientists YEC?
Could you please give me the best proof for Evolution then?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?