Which Experiment disproved the Flood?

[CTD]

What's funny: how confident the spammers are that they have no experiment. Suppose someone knows something they don't (isn't that just remotely possible?) and should find the experiment. Who would ever know with the thread all vandalized? Of course that's not a concern, now is it?

 

[Jade Margery]

Well hello there Mr. OP! I understand if you didn't see it at first, but I have a lovely proof against the flood over in this post. Even framed as an experiment for your pleasure. The information regarding ancient cultures was gleaned through my minor in anthropology, a subject that has always fascinated me. If you want further explanation or support (as I'm sure you will, likely unable to accept the facts as presented) I will be happy to provide some books that you could check out. Unfortunately I won't be able to summarize three years of classes through forum posts, so unless you'd care to read up on the subject or take such classes yourself you'll have to take my word for it.

 

[CTD]

Well hello there Mr. OP! I understand if you didn't see it at first, but I have a lovely proof against the flood over in this post. Even framed as an experiment for your pleasure. The information regarding ancient cultures was gleaned through my minor in anthropology, a subject that has always fascinated me. If you want further explanation or support (as I'm sure you will, likely unable to accept the facts as presented) I will be happy to provide some books that you could check out. Unfortunately I won't be able to summarize three years of classes through forum posts, so unless you'd care to read up on the subject or take such classes yourself you'll have to take my word for it.

Bluffing doesn't count. That should be self-evident. Your faux reasoning could stand some work as well.

 

[Thobewill]

Any time you are presented with evidence, you discount it immediately. Then you call everyone who has tried to answer your questions with answers that you don't like "spammers" and say that the thread has been "vandalized." And you call us hostile to you.

 

[CTD]

Any time you are presented with evidence, you discount it immediately. Then you call everyone who has tried to answer your questions with answers that you don't like ''spammers'' and say that the thread has been ''vandalized.'' And you call us hostile to you.

Nobody has eyes, nobody can see. But then how could they be viewing this thread? Huh - beats me! Yes, trashing up the thread with blatantly meaningless posts is making things better, showing all the evolove.

We both doubt there's any experiment been done which can logically compel one to conclude the flood never took place. Are you so averse to being wrong that you don't want such an experiment discussed if it should turn up?

 

[Phileas]

Bluffing doesn't count. That should be self-evident. Your faux reasoning could stand some work as well.

Reading through this thread I really have no idea what you're looking for. What is the point of the discussion if you've already reached a completely inflexible conclusion that leads you to reject all evidence to the contrary without thought. If you're expecting someone to go, "wow, you're right. Scientists have never produced an experiment involving a seperate planet, god, sinful sentient species and magic water, therefore the 200+ years of accumulated knowledge of geology, biology, anthropology, archaeology, etc, must be wrong", then you'll be waiting probably forever. You see if you are here to convince people you are right in your pet theory you have to present some form of evidence, not just poke pretend holes in established theories. What form of evidence? How about if flood theory is right it should be able to explain any stratigraphic column, any geological structure, any paleontology found in strata, in terms of a global flood on a few thousand year old planet. I wont hold my breath.

 

[Mikecpking]

Bluffing doesn't count. That should be self-evident. Your faux reasoning could stand some work as well.

As a fellow christian, we are told by God not to bear false witness. Could you substantiate your claim that the person who you were replying to was bluffing? Could you back up your claim that experiments should be discounted?

 

[CTD]

As a fellow christian, we are told by God not to bear false witness.

Hope you can keep that in mind.

Could you substantiate your claim that the person who you were replying to was bluffing? Could you back up your claim that experiments should be discounted?

Oops - forgot already. I have made no claim that experiments should be discounted.

Do you also keep in mind so well the scripture that says we're known by our fruits?

 

[CTD]

Reading through this thread I really have no idea what you're looking for.

That's okay. There are other threads for you to post in.

 

[Mikecpking]

Hope you can keep that in mind.

Oops - forgot already. I have made no claim that experiments should be discounted.

Do you also keep in mind so well the scripture that says we're known by our fruits?

Can you answer the question please?

 

[CTD]

While we're on the subject of experiments, which experiment disproved Santa Claus?

While we're on the subject of derailing, which thread is currently the highest priority target and why?

 

[MoonLancer]

Nobody has eyes, nobody can see. But then how could they be viewing this thread? Huh - beats me! Yes, trashing up the thread with blatantly meaningless posts is making things better, showing all the evolove.

We both doubt there's any experiment been done which can logically compel one to conclude the flood never took place. Are you so averse to being wrong that you don't want such an experiment discussed if it should turn up?

If there is no evidence for a global flood but there is evidence of other ideas which are at odds with the flood, that is all that's required.

For example, if one has evidence that the earth the 3rd planet from the sun then it is no longer at the center.

It was Christians who went searching for a flood and found a very old earth that has a history of natural events found in the rocks. There is no global flood found in these rocks, even with an admitted bias and presupposition.

The flood as you know it never happened. Reality will never be made to fit this idea.

 

[CTD]

Can you answer the question please?

I can and I shall answer the question: I could indeed substantiate my claim.

Now do you have anything to contribute, perhaps?

 

[Mikecpking]

I can and I shall answer the question: I could indeed substantiate my claim.

Now do you have anything to contribute, perhaps?

The ball is in your court. You are the one making the claims!

 

[CTD]

It was Christians who went searching for a flood and found a very old earth that has a history of natural events found in the rocks. There is no global flood found in these rocks, even with an admitted bias and presupposition.

The flood as you know it never happened. Reality will never be made to fit this idea.

So someone's written a distortion of history? Big deal! Screwball OEC-types, subscribing to onion coat, thinking the ''flood layer'' would be the outermost layer of the onion didn't find what they expected. Top layer of the onion's all eroded away. Wow - so that makes Lyell's nonsense factorama.

That's not an experiment, let alone anything remotely approaching valid reasoning.

 

[Mikecpking]

So someone's written a distortion of history? Big deal! Screwball OEC-types, subscribing to onion coat, thinking the ''flood layer'' would be the outermost layer of the onion didn't find what they expected. Top layer of the onion's all eroded away. Wow - so that makes Lyell's nonsense factorama.

That's not an experiment, let alone anything remotely approaching valid reasoning.

So are you stating all the strata of rocks laid down is because of the flood.

Please answer the previous question too.

 

[CTD]

So are you stating all the strata of rocks laid down is because of the flood.

So you are putting words in my mouth, and so soon? Didn't you just get done saying something about bearing false witness? I better review and see.

 

[Mikecpking]

So you are putting words in my mouth, and so soon? Didn't you just get done saying something about bearing false witness? I better review and see.

A simple 'no' would be the answer. How do you account for the geological formation we see today and what evidence would you expect to see for a world wide flood?

 

[CTD]

A simple 'no' would be the answer. How do you account for the geological formation we see today and what evidence would you expect to see for a world wide flood?

When's the last time I indicated I wanted to derail my own thread? When's the last time I indicated otherwise?

 

[AV1611VET]

Nobody's ever told me, so I thought I'd ask. One would think the experiment which proved all the stories from around the world to be untrue might've received a little notice. Anyhow, I'd like to know the logic involved, the dates, and the individuals who performed this should-be-famous experiment.

Good luck with this one, bro --

When I came here five years ago, they were claiming that there was no evidence for a global flood, so I told them to 'keep looking'.

After that, they switched their tactic from saying 'there is no evidence of a global flood', to saying 'evidence shows there was no global flood'.