Noah's flood real

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#2448 Feb 10, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Try going to work on Dec 25th, what nobody there......
How is it possible for me to be in a cult when follow no god or so called religious leader.
ps. learn to use the spell checker.
you still participate in the worship when you do the celebrations..

so unless you do not participate in halloween christmas valentines day etc...
cult definition
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

so if you participate in any holidays, you are worshipping the gods that they orginate from.
the ceremonies and practices remain the same.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2449 Feb 10, 2013
Tyson wrote:
<quoted text>Just getting in on this debate. So I have an obligation to respond to the original post. I'm not a scientist, however have a basic level of understanding of reason. Not sure how old you believe the Earth to be? Just looking at the math you proposed it would have taken Everest around 70,000 years to form. So either you believe the biblical flood took place a long time ago. Or, god distorted the face of the planet violently over a very short time in which science has proven otherwise. My other issue with the "flood". I will propose a question. What happens when you over water a plant? It Dies right? Now we have a planet with all its dry land dwelling life under water for 40 days and 40 night. Essentially killing all plant life. Plants we know provide all living things with oxygen. I haven't heard of any scientific evidence for all land dwelling plant life dying off at the same time due to a flood. However, if when the waters drained away as you argue, we would find no living plant life or very little that would not be able to produce sufficient oxygen to support the re-population of the planet.
Nice to get back to the point of the thread.

The Bible does claim a quick raising up of the land and dropping or lowering of the ocean floors. This would explain how the flood was able to cover the highest mountains, they were much smaller before God raised them up after the flood. Note: the claims found on top of Everest proof that it was under water.

Now the plant life.
Before the flood there might have been a type of ice canopy surrounding the earth creating a green house effect making all of earth flush with huge plant life. The flood would have killed these off and covered them in mud creating lots of coal and oil.

Now how could 500 million year old coal have man mad items inside of it?

"A fossilized human skull was found in coal that was sold in Germany (mid-1800s). A jawbone of a child was found in coal in Tuscany (1958). Two giant human molars were found in Montana (1926). A human leg was found by a West Virginia coal miner. It had changed into coal.�pp. 34-35.

A woman, in Illinois, reportedly found a gold chain in a chunk of coal which broke open (1891). A small steel cube was found in a block of coal in Austria (1885). An iron pot was found in coal in Oklahoma (1912). A woman found a child's spoon in coal (1937).�p. 35.

In 1944 Newton Anderson claimed to have found this bell inside a lump of coal that was mined near his house in West Virginia. When Newton dropped the lump it broke, revealing a bell encased inside.

What is a brass bell with an iron clapper doing in coal that is supposed to be hundreds of

millions of years old? According to Norm Scharbough's book Ammunition (which includes a compilation of many such "coal anecdotes") the bell was extensively analyzed at the University of Oklahoma and it was found to contain an unusual mixture of metals, different from any modern usage. Photo and text from Genesis Park.

Man-made objects in rock.

An iron nail was found in a Cretaceous block from the Mesozoic era (mid-1800s). A gold thread was found in stone in England (1844). An iron nail was found in quartz in California (1851). A silver vessel was found in solid rock in Massachusetts (1851).

The mold of a metal screw was found in a chunk of feldspar (1851). An intricately carved and inlaid metal bowl was found in solid rock (1852). An iron nail was found in rock in a Peruvian mine by Spanish conquistadores (1572).�pp. 35-36."

http://s8int.com/page8.html

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2450 Feb 10, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
His Dad.
Wrong.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2451 Feb 10, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if you use Pi with decimal points.
If you use the whole number of Pi "3"
Then you would have 30.
I know this is Impossible for you to grasp but that passage was written for a people that didn't use decimal points.
No, it isn't impossible for me to grasp. The people involved didn't even have a name for the ratio, so the whole argument is silly. As Night Serf pointed out, if you have a diameter that rounds to 10 cubits, the rounded circumference can be anything from 30 to 33 cubits.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2452 Feb 10, 2013
If you went trick or treat you're part of the occult? No.
Yellowknightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
you still participate in the worship when you do the celebrations..
so unless you do not participate in halloween christmas valentines day etc...
cult definition
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
so if you participate in any holidays, you are worshipping the gods that they orginate from.
the ceremonies and practices remain the same.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#2453 Feb 10, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if you use Pi with decimal points.
If you use the whole number of Pi "3"
Then you would have 30.
I know this is Impossible for you to grasp but that passage was written for a people that didn't use decimal points.
Your bible is wrong about Pi. It's wrong about everything. How can we expect accuracy from a cult that dismisses atheists as fools without even bothering to know them?
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2454 Feb 10, 2013
The bible says birds have four legs. What rounding error caused that?
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if you use Pi with decimal points.
If you use the whole number of Pi "3"
Then you would have 30.
I know this is Impossible for you to grasp but that passage was written for a people that didn't use decimal points.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2455 Feb 10, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>No, it isn't impossible for me to grasp. The people involved didn't even have a name for the ratio, so the whole argument is silly. As Night Serf pointed out, if you have a diameter that rounds to 10 cubits, the rounded circumference can be anything from 30 to 33 cubits.
No you are not following simple math rules. In this math problem you must use only whole number. That does not mean you round off the answer you round off all numbers before you work the equation.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2456 Feb 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Irrelevant: that's not what your bible said. Your bible says pi=3, not that pi rounds to 3.
Yup, you're dumb!

Thanks for confirming it.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2457 Feb 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Question: "Why don't you f**k off?"
You do know that a question mark at the end of a sentence means that it's a question, right? See just like that!

You don't have to type the word question before the sentence.
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2458 Feb 10, 2013
That?
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that a question mark at the end of a sentence means that it's a question, right? See just like that!
You don't have to type the word question before the sentence.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2459 Feb 10, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong.
Sorry I'm bad,it's his son.

Duh

I must have told that one a hundred times myself then I trip up on it!

I once saw a man wind up like a major league pitcher and the throw smoking fast ball, the ball traveled a great distance and then right in front of my eyes the ball stopped in midair and hovered then returned to the mans hand with out touching the ground.

Totally the truth!

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2460 Feb 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>That?
?
Thinking

Cullompton, UK

#2461 Feb 10, 2013
Exactly.
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
?

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#2462 Feb 10, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No you are not following simple math rules. In this math problem you must use only whole number. That does not mean you round off the answer you round off all numbers before you work the equation.
No, Polymath is right. If the diameter rounds to 10, then its value is between 9.5 and 10.49, which means that the value of the diameter is between 29.85 and 32.96, which would round to 30, 31, 32, or 33 depending on the non-rounded value of the diameter. Remember, we're talking about an actual physical object, not an abstract paper problem.

The really weird aspect of this little interchange is that I've persuaded Polymath to agree with you, i.e. if the actual value of the diameter is rounded to 10, then 30 is one of the possible rounded values of the circumference. But you are so attached to being in disagreement with him that you still have to argue that he's wrong. That's cognitive dissonance on steroids, my friend.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2463 Feb 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly.
Bingo!

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2464 Feb 10, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>No, Polymath is right. If the diameter rounds to 10, then its value is between 9.5 and 10.49, which means that the value of the diameter is between 29.85 and 32.96, which would round to 30, 31, 32, or 33 depending on the non-rounded value of the diameter. Remember, we're talking about an actual physical object, not an abstract paper problem.

The really weird aspect of this little interchange is that I've persuaded Polymath to agree with you, i.e. if the actual value of the diameter is rounded to 10, then 30 is one of the possible rounded values of the circumference. But you are so attached to being in disagreement with him that you still have to argue that he's wrong. That's cognitive dissonance on steroids, my friend.
I am simply stating the bible problem is this: 10*(Pi rounded to a whole number)=30.

Not: 10*Pi=(31.4 rounded to whole number)

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#2465 Feb 10, 2013
Yellowknightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
um you can study the bible translated in modern english instead old 15 century english.
How I learned about the bible was when i was offered a bible study with some christians , they were Jehovahs witnesses.
its a free home bible study, you dont have to go their lil meetings or be one of them .
they study go exactly by the bible .
I also went to the baptist church but with them its mostly just talking instead of researching the scriptures. They had a lot of things to say but its really up to you though
i only studied the bbl with J.Ws because i learned a lot amd it was free lol
Those JWs are fluent in 15th century English, right? And you are taking their word for it? Hey guess what, all buybull study is free, every sect will teach you their own translation of it, FREE OF CHARGE.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#2466 Feb 10, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
I am simply stating the bible problem is this: 10*(Pi rounded to a whole number)=30.
Not: 10*Pi=(31.4 rounded to whole number)
No, the Bible says nothing about whole numbers in particular or math problems in general--that is your assumption. The Bible simply gives the dimensions of a circular pool. We don't know whether the Hebrews of the time used fractions or not--or at least I don't. Nor do we know whether the pool in question was a true circle.

But from the descriptions and dimensions, we can infer that the writer knew very little about mathematics and was more than a little imprecise about measurement--the equivalent of a modern "good enough for government work" attitude, perhaps.

Whatever the reason, the passage is flawed.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#2467 Feb 10, 2013
Yes JWs are a cult Leah. They line up perfectly with just about every real definition of a cult.
Yellowknightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
you still participate in the worship when you do the celebrations..
so unless you do not participate in halloween christmas valentines day etc...
cult definition
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
so if you participate in any holidays, you are worshipping the gods that they orginate from.
the ceremonies and practices remain the same.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 10 min Flurtz3940 21,884
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Brian_G 23,701
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 4 hr Richardfs 5,730
bigger fish to fry (Jul '11) 5 hr IB DaMann 3
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 hr IB DaMann 258,050
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 21 hr IB DaMann 94
What are the best arguments against religion? 23 hr Richardfs 8
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Fri scientia potentia... 48,864
More from around the web