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.
Both sides have much to learn from one another. And the beginning of understanding is to accept that one knows nothing about the other's viewpoint.
Sometimes, yes. But you're forgetting that many atheists are deconverts so we actually DO know a GREAT deal about the other's viewpoint, being as it was once OUR viewpoint. Theists tend to play the "you were never one of us" card in order to avoid that reality, if we claim any first-hand knowledge of their zeitgeist. And this is helped by the fact that someone was clever enough to insert a couple of unambiguous justifications for such an attitude, into scripture itself.
Oh please. There is so much evidence that disproves your Institute for Creation Research claims it's beyond ridiculous to try to pretend they have any validity at all.
But thanks for the laugh.
Who are you trying to convince with this nonsense? 5 year old children?
Your global flood only fits with the ancient Hebrew view of a flat earth resting on pillars over "the great deep". It had a firmament over it with windows in it that let through the waters above the dome. It is what the Bible describes - but is completely wrong. They didn't know any better at the time.
Here it is again:
Genesis 7:11 "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened
"Take dogs, for example—would Noah have taken two Alsatians, two cocker spaniels, two collies, two red setters, etc.? No, he would have needed just one pair of dogs, like the wolf kind, with much genetic variation, somewhat like mongrels today.
Well in addition, most of the modern breeds wouldn't have even existed back then. In fact if the earth had actually been only a couple thousand years old at that point, it's questionable whether dogs would have even been as widely and thoroughly domesticated as they are now.
But no matter how you slice it and dice it, there are far more species to account for than would have either been able to get to the ark or fit in it, AND survived the confinement AND been fed and cared for by such a small and inexperienced crew. My guess is they would have been busy just being inexperienced mariners, let alone inexperienced zoo keepers.
It means when you try to talk to atheists using THEIR language, you come off as unintelligible. When atheists try to belittle Christianity because science is their idol, it comes off as unintelligible to men and women of faith.
Neither side has the ability to find common language making this thread one of the most illiterate in terms of transferring knowledge between two separate groups of people.
Your desire to bring the sides together is admirable, but stating that atheists idolize science shows that you haven't come very much closer to understanding our thinking, or scientific thinking, yourself.
Oh please. There is so much evidence that disproves your Institute for Creation Research claims it's beyond ridiculous to try to pretend they have any validity at all.
But thanks for the laugh.
Who are you trying to convince with this nonsense? 5 year old children?
No, the scientists are proving their case to highly educated people there was a global flood. The facts speak for themselves unlike no facts for evolution which has to use cartoons to brainwash people into believing their unprovable ideas.
Since there are facts which prove Noah's flood and, according to you, facts which disprove a global flood, then there seems to be an impasse here.
Well in addition, most of the modern breeds wouldn't have even existed back then. In fact if the earth had actually been only a couple thousand years old at that point, it's questionable whether dogs would have even been as widely and thoroughly domesticated as they are now.
That's exactly my point taht not all the breeds we have today existed prior to the flood. The point is that it only took 4000 +- years to get all the varried breeds of dogs we have today.
Quote:
But no matter how you slice it and dice it, there are far more species to account for than would have either been able to get to the ark or fit in it, AND survived the confinement AND been fed and cared for by such a small and inexperienced crew. My guess is they would have been busy just being inexperienced mariners, let alone inexperienced zoo keepers.
Dear lurker, please take note that the above is written only as mordant's own say-so and should not be taken as any proof for his position.
No, the scientists are proving their case to highly educated people there was a global flood. The facts speak for themselves unlike no facts for evolution which has to use cartoons to brainwash people into believing their unprovable ideas.
Since there are facts which prove Noah's flood and, according to you, facts which disprove a global flood, then there seems to be an impasse here.
I hope that someday you come to see that you're using the same blinkered alternate reality here that you used to embrace to keep you from what you now regard as the "aha moment" that led you to reject your attachment to the notion of eternal damnation. That alone should give you pause, because you know first-hand how it is possible to utterly believe a bunch of stuff that turns out later to have no basis at all. And all it requires is a relatively minor shift of emphasis in your hermeneutics.
Since you've done it before, I suspect you could do it again and actually dip a second toe into the world of liberal Christian thought.
All you have done is to quote people who, only on their authority (supposed as it is) state this or that proves evolution. Since when did a man's word become scientific fact? Oh wait, it was when they started teaching the unprovable religion of evolution. It's all magic. Wave a magic wand and POOF! Evolution! What? life began MAYBE by a bolt of lightning? There is no reason why we are here? It just accidentally all happened? Single celled amoebas even created the giant red woods? Oh, major LOL!
You are amazing. You have not been able to refute a single serious point. You have ignored evidence (the one about birdwings proving that they were not designed from scratch) a thunderous example, and you posts above are simply 'Same to you, so there' and 'Whatever is needed to make Genesis work is what happened.
You quote authorities (that is, anyone who seems to support what you believe) and ignore evidence. You make truly outlandish claims and accuse Nye of doing it when he presented evidence.
I don't mind because it helps us to show how you are ruining your own case. But of course we have to explain why. Keep up the dreadfully poor work.
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.
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.
