There was a word for sphere. As I also said it was too late to find the article I was talking about last night. I am not a lying creatard. I have no need to lie. And here is the article:<quoted text>Wow, have you even graduated high-school yet? Of course I'm not claiming that at all. I'm claiming that there wasn't a word for sphere which you have yet to produce one in use at the time of the stories and that the people the stories were originally told did not need a word for sphere in order to understand what was being said. This entire flat earth thing is made up and doesn't exist and never has.
Actually you do have a small point here. It was very late when I wrote that and did forget the word "scientific". Of course since we are having a debate about science I meant "scientific evidence" and I usually do use that phrase.<quoted text>And your point is completely incorrect. You cannot be intellectually honest and say lets compare something of science and something not of science then declare the not of science to be not true because the science is not there. Science is contrived to support itself all the time, it's a if it works, don't mess with it. Even science itself is limited to saying this is only one of many possible ways if it finds something could have happened. What science does with evolution is gives us a useful model that we can build other things from. It does not mean evolution was the only way possible or that it was in fact what happened. Saying so would continue your legacy of unscientific thought.
Also, you should learn what evidence actually is. There are several types and you would be fallacious in claiming there is absolutely no evidence. There might not be any scientific evidence, but that does not mean it is not true or that there is no evidence at all.
Also since science describes the real world scientific evidence is usually the best kind. Since we seem to agree that you believe there is no scientific evidence for creation, and of course if you know the meaning of the term you know the ones at fault for this are the creationists, the question still stands. Why believe in creationism?
You may have edited it out, but I know more than once I stated that in context the verse describes a flat circular Earth and not a spherical one. We already know that you failed geometry but did you fail English too? Do you know of the meaning "in context"?<quoted text>Actually you do not seem to know what a concordance is or at least you are not acting like it. Please tell me where any of them translate it into flat at all? Circular is the meaning given and flat is all you injecting whatever you want it to be into it. Of course you have to do that in order to maintain your lie otherwise the truth seems more appealing.