Noah's flood real
KJV

United States

#2191 Jan 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Not even close.
"There are circumstances that provide opportunities for testing. Dinosaurs which are supposed have lived at least 60 million years ago, should not yield dates of thousands of years. Rocks known to have formed in historical times should not yield dates of millions of years."

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric...
KJV

United States

#2192 Jan 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, the flood they are talking about for the Black Sea was very large: the Black Sea is a pretty good sized body of water. let's face it. The original boat (if there was one) was probably closer to the story that appears in the epic of Gilgamesh: small and just enough for a few people and animals to survive. The elaboration into an ark and ALL animals was probably a later things.

As for the dinosaur grave yards: eddies and whirls produce effects in the soil that would be recorded. And are not. Theory falsified.
No, the soil does back it up.
Grave yard after grave yard are described a pack of dinosaurs trying to cross a swollen river. Or local flood had collected a bunch of dead dinosaurs in one spot. Science doesn't want to use the Noah flood so they reach around it.
Science dating methods are a joke to say the least.
KJV

United States

#2193 Jan 11, 2013
Science and their great dating methods!

Dinosaur Bone
(Illium bone of an Acrocanthosarus)
Radio carbon dated at 19,000 years old!

Wood embedded in "110 million year old limestone"
Radio carbon dated at 890 years old!

Carbonized stick embedded in "110 million year old limestone"
Radio carbon dated at 12,900 years old!

Mt. St. Helens
The new lava dome (dacite) from the at Mount St. Helens was formed in 1986. In 1997 five specimens were taken from this dome at five different locations and subjected to conventional Potassium-Argon dating. The results indicated ages of less than one half to almost three million years old, all from eleven year old rock.

We know when this dome formed. When we date rock of known age we test the claims and we see obvious failures. But, when we date rock of unknown age, we are assured that the results are accurate.

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric...
KJV

United States

#2194 Jan 11, 2013
"Scientists attempt to check the accuracy of carbon dating by comparing carbon dating data to data from other dating methods. Other methods scientists use include counting rock layers and tree rings. When scientists first began to compare carbon dating data to data from tree rings, they found carbon dating provided "too-young" estimates of artifact age. Scientists now realize that production of carbon-14 has not been constant over the years, but has changed as the radiation from the sun has fluctuated."

http://www.creationstudies.org/operationsalt/...
KJV

United States

#2195 Jan 11, 2013
"Background.
Although we’ve been taught that radiological dating methods are accurate, they have limitations. Radiological dating gives rather extreme age variation, and its interpretation requires many assumptions. Each year scientists keep adding more time to the age of the earth and to the rock layers to make geological evolution seem more “plausible.” A review of science books over the last 20 years shows on average (if you believe the textbooks), the earth is growing older by 28 million years each year. The truth is that new scientific discoveries and radiocarbon dating prove that evolution is a hoax.

Carbon Dating. Radiocarbon dating can only date an object that is about 30,000 or so years old. It has a half life or decay rate of 5,360 years, and after 5-7 half lives, it becomes too small to measure. This means that radiocarbon dating methods aren’t usable for dating older objects. We can only use radiocarbon dating to date items several thousand years old.
If earth is billions of years old (it isn’t), radioactive carbon (C14) should be absent from the early formed rock layers deep in the earth because it would have decayed to an un-measurable level. However, recent studies, such as the “Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth”(RATE) study have found C14 in measurable levels from diamonds carefully removed from more than a mile below the earth’s surface. They found radiocarbon when none could be present if the earth were millions of years old. This finding, by itself, conclusively proves the earth is relatively young, approximately 6,000 years old.

Rocks & Fossils. Rocks, minerals, and fossils cannot be dated accurately by any known scientific method, including radiometric techniques. When we read that a fossil is millions or billions of years old, these are merely beliefs or opinions and not based on science.
For example, a rock aged by two different scientists using the most advanced radiometric technique was reported to be 10,000 years old by one scientist. The other scientist aged the same rock at several billion years.

Living Snails. Another absurdity is that living snails were aged at 27,000 years old by radiometric dating methods. Errors of 1000% or more are common, but the public has been duped into believing radiometric dating is a highly accurate technique and proves an old age of the earth. On the contrary, radiometric dating proves the earth is young.

Helium. Another indicator is helium. Nuclear decay creates helium, which is easily lost to the air. The large amount of helium that can still be found in rock layers today indicates the earth is between 4,000 and 10,000 years old, not billions of years old."

http://www.creationproof.com/id25.html

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#2197 Jan 11, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"No one denies the floods we observe through evidence."
You just have the dates wrong.
Nope. There was no Biblical flood. Once again, the Biblical flood was borrowed from the Mesopotamian one through cultural diffusion.

It's a myth, pure and simple. Hence, no evidence for it. Hence, only people lacking in scientific education and who are religious still believe it. Like the really ignorant who actually believe, against all reason and evidence, that the Earth is only 6000 years old, because of an ignorant, outdated Catholic doctrine that even the Catholics have officially put to rest.

It honestly doesn't get any more ironic than that for you creationist protestants who absurdly believe in archaic Catholic doctrine.

But, hey KJV, thanks for the entertainment ;)

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#2198 Jan 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the flood they are talking about for the Black Sea was very large: the Black Sea is a pretty good sized body of water. let's face it. The original boat (if there was one) was probably closer to the story that appears in the epic of Gilgamesh: small and just enough for a few people and animals to survive. The elaboration into an ark and ALL animals was probably a later things.
As for the dinosaur grave yards: eddies and whirls produce effects in the soil that would be recorded. And are not. Theory falsified.
Nah. No boat. Noah's flood comes from the Sumerian flood stories, mainly because Ur flooded a lot. So they had flood gods and flood myths.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#2199 Jan 11, 2013
KJV wrote:
Sure, floods happen. Did you read the stories? Most of them are local floods. There are other problems - Frazer is an oft quoted source, but he got his information from explorers, so it's all heresy. And Frazer knew he was writing for the European audience and was pretty loose with his writing. I honestly don't expect you to know this, though.

So...which flood is true? The stories don't match. They don't agree with the Biblical story. They aren't all the same story, but reveal that lots of peoples throughout history were dependent on water and recognized that water itself is a dangerous and unpredictable thing. They also show that water can be used to wipe the slate clean - when the child asks "what came before us?" the ignorant can say "oh, a big flood, then us. So we're first."

Many of them explain how the first people arose - that contradicts the Biblical flood. It's cute that you're trying to forcefit them all into your story, though.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#2200 Jan 11, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It's ok, John. I went back in time and killed Abraham's whiny son. And his wife. Then I told Abraham "see what happens when you piss off Hiding!"
He ... uh ... this is embarrassing, really. He didn't understand English and thought I was some kind of avenging angel. Not sure why that didn't make it into the Bible.
Anyways, next week I'm going to kill Krebous. I think I can narrow down the New Testament to Jesus if I kill off his sidekick before they meet. You know it drives me nuts when all these Christians quote Krebous, that self-righteous sexist bastard!
So, yeah, if by next week you don't remember a Krebous, I was successful. Just make sure you come back to this post to remind you that you should remember Krebous.
Thanks for the laugh.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#2201 Jan 11, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Nah. No boat. Noah's flood comes from the Sumerian flood stories, mainly because Ur flooded a lot. So they had flood gods and flood myths.
You damned witch! Blasphemer! How dare you imply that the authors of the buybull plagiarized their works. So what Horus had a virgin birth? So what Mises is similar to Moses and he too, opened up the seas. So what the stories of the births of King Sargon the Great and Moses are similar. The buybull is the truth, no matter how many stories it may seem like it copied from.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#2202 Jan 11, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I know he is looking for the ark under the assumption that it was a local flood.
Why would you need an ark for a local flood? 2+2=3?
It don't add up. Sorry the flood must have been as the Bible stated it.
Along with the lifting of the lands and the dropping of the ocean floors.
Dinosaurs grave yards are as expected in the collection of dead animals it the eddies and whirlpool.
So your god created the dinosaurs so that they could all drown in a flood?

I see.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#2203 Jan 11, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
So your god created the dinosaurs so that they could all drown in a flood?
I see.
Don't doubt the extent of Yahweh's cruelty or stupidity.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#2204 Jan 11, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
So your god created the dinosaurs so that they could all drown in a flood?
I see.
That makes perfect sense.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#2205 Jan 12, 2013
So there was dinosaurs 4000 years ago stomping around?

What an idiot I bet home schooled right?
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the soil does back it up.
Grave yard after grave yard are described a pack of dinosaurs trying to cross a swollen river. Or local flood had collected a bunch of dead dinosaurs in one spot. Science doesn't want to use the Noah flood so they reach around it.
Science dating methods are a joke to say the least.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#2206 Jan 12, 2013
Could you imagine the stolen material lawsuits that would happen were the bible cobbled together today? Lol :)
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text> You damned witch! Blasphemer! How dare you imply that the authors of the buybull plagiarized their works. So what Horus had a virgin birth? So what Mises is similar to Moses and he too, opened up the seas. So what the stories of the births of King Sargon the Great and Moses are similar. The buybull is the truth, no matter how many stories it may seem like it copied from.
KJV

United States

#2209 Jan 12, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>Nope. There was no Biblical flood. Once again, the Biblical flood was borrowed from the Mesopotamian one through cultural diffusion.

It's a myth, pure and simple. Hence, no evidence for it. Hence, only people lacking in scientific education and who are religious still believe it. Like the really ignorant who actually believe, against all reason and evidence, that the Earth is only 6000 years old, because of an ignorant, outdated Catholic doctrine that even the Catholics have officially put to rest.

It honestly doesn't get any more ironic than that for you creationist protestants who absurdly believe in archaic Catholic doctrine.

But, hey KJV, thanks for the entertainment ;)
"Biblical flood was borrowed from the the Mesopotamian one"

So because the Mesopotamian wrote about a world wide flood it could not be that same flood that is talked about in the Bible?

Is that what you're saying?
KJV

United States

#2210 Jan 12, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>Sure, floods happen. Did you read the stories? Most of them are local floods. There are other problems - Frazer is an oft quoted source, but he got his information from explorers, so it's all heresy. And Frazer knew he was writing for the European audience and was pretty loose with his writing. I honestly don't expect you to know this, though.

So...which flood is true? The stories don't match. They don't agree with the Biblical story. They aren't all the same story, but reveal that lots of peoples throughout history were dependent on water and recognized that water itself is a dangerous and unpredictable thing. They also show that water can be used to wipe the slate clean - when the child asks "what came before us?" the ignorant can say "oh, a big flood, then us. So we're first."

Many of them explain how the first people arose - that contradicts the Biblical flood. It's cute that you're trying to forcefit them all into your story, though.
The point my dear is the flood has its writing around the would. And no the story's are not all a match. One hell of a lot of cultures talk about a world wide flood flood and an ark filled with animals. 2+2=3 for you still?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#2211 Jan 12, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Biblical flood was borrowed from the the Mesopotamian one"
So because the Mesopotamian wrote about a world wide flood it could not be that same flood that is talked about in the Bible?
Is that what you're saying?
The Sumerian flood was written quite a few hundred years before the Bible was conceived of. It was written specifically because the cities of Mesopotamia existed on flood plains and flooded every year. Their livelihood was utterly dependent on flooding, and their myths reflect this. In fact, their cities were engineered for floods, to be flooded.

The flood of the Bible is taken from the Sumerian mythos. Neither are real events; both are myths. The difference, of course, is that the Mesopotamians actually experienced yearly floods and the early Jews did not. So the Jewish interpretation is a bit different - more fantastical, makes impossible claims.

That's the part you fail to realize because of your poor education with regards to science. You simply assume that the world is as your religion tells you and you don't bother investigating what geological, astronomical, biological...and on and on...science demonstrates.

It's not really your fault. You were brought up that way and are fully indoctrinated into it. Mind you, other people have been and, having been introduced to the facts, changed. So there's something else going on with you. Something more emotional, perhaps, or more spiritual, that drives you to ignore the findings of science and favor the misleading, dishonest and intellectually lazy lies you have been taught.

I honestly see this as a failing of faith on your part. Yes, your faith drives you to ignore the vast evidence the various sciences have accumulated over the past 160 years (to the point where not a single one backs up the Bible's claims - or any religion's, for that matter).

I see it as a failing of faith precisely because you are unable to accept reality and know God. Rather, you require a small God. You need your God to fit into your tiny, intellectually lazy reality. Something you can grasp. Something easy - that removes all curiosity and exploration of reality from you.

Religion has poisoned your faith, sir. It is hurting you, refuses to allow you to explore what we, as a species, know.

Science has moved so far beyond the ancient Catholic doctrine that is the premise of your belief in a flood, it's unbelievable. It's like you're telling me that influenza is caused by sin and not a virus. It's like you're claiming that prayer alone can cure people of cancer. Shockingly naive!

So...no. We don't take your claims seriously. That you believe such nonsense is worrisome, yes, but that's it.

And you're fortunate that we don't take you seriously. We use evolution to guide our medical theories, our biological knowledge and you enjoy the fruits of those labors. We use evolution to produce our new medical technologies and you benefit, despite that you fail to understand how these work.

You don't have a voice in science. We really don't care what you believe. I'm going to continue working on my research using the best tools and methods available despite the absurd claims you make and I will see results that are, quite frankly, incomprehensible to someone of your extremely limited knowledge base. And my contribution will help you in the end even though all you are trying to do is destroy science.

So the next time you go to the doctor's office, remember not to tell them "Hey, I'm a creationist, so I want the medicine from 1945 because I 'know' that the pathogens cannot have evolved" because that will just end up hurting you.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#2212 Jan 12, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
The point my dear is the flood has its writing around the would. And no the story's are not all a match. One hell of a lot of cultures talk about a world wide flood flood and an ark filled with animals. 2+2=3 for you still?
Few talk about a world wide flood. Fewer still at time the Christian's claim. And...what...three mention an ark, and those are the Abrahamic religions?

Did you not read them? A number of them claimed that was how the world began - out of the flood, people emerged. Well...that puts to rest Noah's story! Most of them were local floods - the girl hid in the tree to be safe... Now she should trust turtles, etc. Now the gods know that humans are ok. Sorry about the flood killing everything and good luck now that it has receded!

And the majority of cultures on the planet lack a flood myth. The number you quoted is what...40? 50? That's less than 1% of the world's cultures, most of which do not have a flood myth, let alone a world wide flood myth, let alone one with a boat full of animals.

So you're cherry picking your data and making stuff up to boot. Well done! I expect no less from you, a creationist.

Let's add some science to this, shall we?

- if all animals were reduced to 2 breeding pairs, their genetic variety would be destroyed and that would be measurable in every single species.

It's not. So you fail here.

The cheetah is your sole exception - it died down to about 8 breeding individuals around 5 to 7000 years ago. That's measurable. We know it. No other mammalian species follows this example. Ergo...you're wrong. Your religion is wrong. You have been lied to and, because of your lack of scientific education, you believe the lie.
KJV

United States

#2213 Jan 12, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>So your god created the dinosaurs so that they could all drown in a flood?

I see.
You show again that you do not Know the word of the Bible.

"Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. Then God said to Noah,“The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.(Genesis 6:11-13)(NASB)"

all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.

1) all flesh including the dinosaurs
2) on earth. Not in the sea

All land animals and man had become corrupt.

All did not die in the flood. Two of each kind were save upon the ark. That is not to say that they were not hunted to extinction by man,or failed to make a go of it after the earth had changed so much. Mans life span was shortened after the flood by God to 120 years.
The earth was no more the rich plush land it was before the water from above that acted as a shield against harmful rays from the Sun came raining down for 40 days and nights.

Yes the animals of the land were put to death by God the same as man.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 32 min Igor Trip 51,475
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 43 min Richardfs 22,111
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 50 min Kissez1138 190
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr Arne Darvin 24,655
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 4 hr par five 11,404
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 10 hr Eagle 12 1,653
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 11 hr Eagle 12 5,792
More from around the web