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.
For much much longer than that the best minds thought the earth was flat. And the earth was the center of the universe. And the atom was the smallest possible thing. Etc...etc...
With the exception of the atom, none of these were actual investigative science. There is a difference between commonly accepted beliefs that aren’t based on scientific investigation and scientific ideas . There are commonly held beliefs today that science knows is wrong . Alcohol kills brain cells, Napoleon was a short guy, a ducks quack doesn’t echo . All of these are thought to be true by a lot of people, but science knows they are all false . Science , for example, knew in about 230 BC that the earth was round , AND had successfully measured it to within 10% of what we know it actually is today.
On the other hand, scientific investigation shows the claim of a great worldwide flood to be false . That isn’t going to change .
Typically creationists don’t put much logical thought into stuff like this . Take the question about Mt Ararat possibly being much taller than it is now and been having eroded down. What this would mean in actuality is that the flood waters would have had to have been even higher than we would calculate as necessary today, which in turns means the volume of water necessary to cover a higher Mt Ararat would need to be exponentially greater than the necessary and impossible volume we calculate at current heights . And since the amount of water vapor in the air at current levels would be enough to kill every human, the amount of lung crushing water vapor would actually increase if mountains were higher in Noah’s time .
Once a guy in my Sunday School class proceeded to lecture the class about how NASA has calculated that the Sun was out of place in the sky relative to where it should be , and this showed that the abible was factual when it said the Sun stood still. I pointed out that the Sun stopping for a day in its route through the galaxy would not alter day and night on Earth more than a few minutes , if it was even noticeable . No one seemed to be able to figure out why this was . Sadly, science is not a big concern for evangelicals and fundamentalists .
Humans have only lived on earth for about 200,000 years. Mountains develop in terms of many millions of years. The mountains and land masses are pretty much the same s they were last week, 1000 years ago, 6000 years ago, and 200,000 years ago.
If Ararat has changed in height in the past 200,000 yers, it hasn't been over 100 feet.
There has never been a global flood, and you have still failed to support your claim that most scientists believe the world contains enough water to flood the globe.
God said there was, Jesus said there was, I said there was, you say there wasn't, what more is there to say? Fact is sir, time will tell as always.
And that is why I stated that tomorrow something could be found that would change all of it. I do see though that you didnt say whether you would be willing to admit the possibility that you may be wrong about your believes.
Show me real, actual proof and I would in a heartbeat.
Science progresses as new discoveries are made. We found out that there are smaller particles than atoms because we developed the technology to discover them. That isn't science contradicting itself. It is science advancing in its knowledge of the natural world.
Science, specifically geology, is not wrong about the fact that not only is there no evidence for a global flood but the evidence is solidly against there ever having been such a flood.
You won't even allow yourself to objectively consider the evidence because of your commitment to having to take the flood story as historical and literal because your personal faith demands it.
There is plenty of evidence for the flood if you're willing to consider it. But no, I will not take an unbeliever's opinion over that of God's Word.
Show me real, actual proof and I would in a heartbeat.
3 Things.
1st, What would YOU consider proof?
2nd, I ask the above because links have already been given to you and you wont accept them
3rd, You have already shown that you accept things without proof because they enforce what you already believe.
1st, What would YOU consider proof?
2nd, I ask the above because links have already been given to you and you wont accept them
3rd, You have already shown that you accept things without proof because they enforce what you already believe.
I can ask you the same. There is evidence...if you're willing to believe it. But you won't. If you can show me actual evidence that is compelling enough I will believe it.
I can ask you the same. There is evidence...if you're willing to believe it. But you won't. If you can show me actual evidence that is compelling enough I will believe it.
Its been shown on this very thread and you out right stated that you would not read it. Please, show me your proof that there was a GLOBAL flood, not a REGIONAL flood.
There is plenty of evidence for the flood if you're willing to consider it. But no, I will not take an unbeliever's opinion over that of God's Word.
No there isn't. There is no evidence for a global flood and I know the claims made by young earth flood geologists.
Many scientists are believers and do not believe there was ever a global flood, again, based on the evidence. 'Scientist' does not equate to 'unbeliever.'
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.