Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-09-2013, 02:12 PM
 
17,966 posts, read 15,972,754 times
Reputation: 1010

Advertisements

How can Noah's Ark being even remotely plausible?

It was built large enough, actually way more than large enough to hold the animals and food for them and the family on the ark. That makes it plausible.The ark was written about as an historic event by first-hand eye-witnesses.The dimensions are perfect for what it was designed for both in stability and usability.

Well respected historians for thousands of years have written about the ark.

 
Old 04-09-2013, 02:13 PM
 
17,966 posts, read 15,972,754 times
Reputation: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Respected by who? Creationists perhaps? They are accepted by no credible scholar of archaeology or paleontology, and many have questioned the motives of those who argue for their validity.
READ the FREAKING ARTICLE. Quit with the stupidity. Prove to me the scholars at Ohio State that examined the artifacts are respected only by Creationists. That is the most stupid of statements to date! Prove to us that all the professionals in the article are only respected by creationists. Prove your statements or quit with the childish statements!
 
Old 04-09-2013, 02:35 PM
 
14,294 posts, read 13,192,076 times
Reputation: 17797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
I wondered the same thing.
I don't understand why he plays with you since you cannot seem to understand.
 
Old 04-09-2013, 02:37 PM
 
63,817 posts, read 40,099,995 times
Reputation: 7876
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
But... do tell us all, Eusebius: right here, right now, in cold hard print:
Do you REALLY, ACTUALLY & HONESTLY believe this tripe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
READ the FREAKING ARTICLE. Quit with the stupidity. Prove to me the scholars at Ohio State that examined the artifacts are respected only by Creationists. That is the most stupid of statements to date! Prove to us that all the professionals in the article are only respected by creationists. Prove your statements or quit with the childish statements!
As utterly incomprehensible as it may be, rifle . . . I think we have to accept that he DOES believe it. The human mind is a funny instrument and we still cannot account for all its many anomalous outcomes.
 
Old 04-09-2013, 02:45 PM
 
17,966 posts, read 15,972,754 times
Reputation: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
As utterly incomprehensible as it may be, rifle . . . I think we have to accept that he DOES believe it. The human mind is a funny instrument and we still cannot account for all its many anomalous outcomes.
Yes, incomprehensible I am surrounded by all the great men in the article who avowed the articles to be genuinely thousands of years old.
 
Old 04-09-2013, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,861,012 times
Reputation: 2881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
How can Noah's Ark being even remotely plausible?

It was built large enough, actually way more than large enough to hold the animals and food for them and the family on the ark. That makes it plausible.The ark was written about as an historic event by first-hand eye-witnesses.The dimensions are perfect for what it was designed for both in stability and usability.

Well respected historians for thousands of years have written about the ark.
Aaaaaahahahahahaha!!
 
Old 04-09-2013, 04:28 PM
 
794 posts, read 1,409,608 times
Reputation: 759
Quote:
Well respected historians for thousands of years have written about the ark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Aaaaaahahahahahaha!!
Are you dissing Pliny again? He was well respected! Or do you mean Apollonius Rhodicus? Lesser known, but he did write about the flood and Deucalion and all.

Last edited by Wild Colonial Girl; 04-09-2013 at 04:39 PM..
 
Old 04-09-2013, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,544 posts, read 37,145,710 times
Reputation: 14001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
READ the FREAKING ARTICLE. Quit with the stupidity. Prove to me the scholars at Ohio State that examined the artifacts are respected only by Creationists. That is the most stupid of statements to date! Prove to us that all the professionals in the article are only respected by creationists. Prove your statements or quit with the childish statements!
Whoa, chill out...This statement (They are accepted by no credible scholar of archaeology or paleontology, and many have questioned the motives of those who argue for their validity.) is not mine and it is a fact... Any (credible) scholar of archaeology or paleontology would be laughed out of his position if they accepted this nonsense as real....It is a well known hoax, and why you insist on believing it after all the evidence given you, shows that you prefer to remain ignorant of that fact...Willful ignorance is a lot worse than just not knowing something.

Last edited by sanspeur; 04-09-2013 at 04:51 PM..
 
Old 04-09-2013, 04:36 PM
 
794 posts, read 1,409,608 times
Reputation: 759
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz View Post
But...but...the earth is only 6,000 years old. When else could they have lived?
3,000 years ago, of course. You have to allow time for The Fall.

But, if every generation which ever lived is in the bible, why no mention of dinosaurs? I don't mean recounting myths as far off scary stories in Job, but the freaking velociraptor which just took your goat, or the brontosaurus which crushed your hut. There were a lot of dinosaurs, and they were everywhere, especially if you compress their hundreds of millions of years into a couple of thousand.
 
Old 04-09-2013, 05:34 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 12,919,537 times
Reputation: 3767
Re: Eusebius' mindless persistence:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Whoa, chill out...
It is a well known hoax, and why you insist on believing it after all the evidence given you, shows that you prefer to remain ignorant of that fact...Willful ignorance is a lot worse than just not knowing something.
You betcha, sanspeur. Our pet poster here continues to trot out, time and again, all the well-known but previously positively debunked key elements of Cretionism (oh sorry, my spelling error.. should have been Creationism, not cretinism... Then again...):

1) A whole lotta water, most recently formed up by an apparently continuously flaming atmopheric hydrogen flambeau (and the necessary Oxygen component, which hasn't yet been exlained...)

2) The subsequent removal and disposal of this new source of previously non-existent water, unlike the equally nuttzo underground micropore sources of water that others have tried, but failed, to successfully promote.

3) The absolute impossibility of getting a survivable and reproductibly credible population number of each species on board that imaginary but also poorly designed Ark,

4) The necessary species of animals, bacteria, plants and marine organisms, all of whom would die off due to the sewage-type post-fludd water quality that would result from the killing of all terrestrial vegetation and animal life forms...

5) The effects of all that humidity, pre-, during- and post-fludd, on the world's sensitive ecology and it's subsequent suitability to re-populate all of the non-evolving species with a mere 6000 - 2500 yr (= only 3500 yrs! Really? that short, huh?) time line..

6) In fact, the earth's ecology in general is a literal technological unknown by this scientifically illiterate poster.

Hmmm... So let's see: we've summarily disposed of all of the following readily obvious sillinesses:

† water source and disposal,

† post-fludd water and land quality,

† no remaining vegetation for the disembarked vegetarian species,

† no surviving nor adequate Ark-saved species of prey for the carnivorous species, plus

† getting them all back to their ruined home ecology... no evidence whatsoever of co-existing giant lizards and hominids,

† the likely existence of life on other planets (see: robotic find of water and seemingly life-like fossilized forms on Mars..), unmentioned in the very limited scope of the supposedly complete bible,

† the obviously incomplete [i.e.: it's still forming stars, etc....] universe, (despite what the astronomically ignorant bible tells us...)

and so on ad infinitum.

Don't bother arguing, Eusebius. We'll just shoot yah down again! It's too easy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:18 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top