“The strength of science is”

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#80498 Apr 17, 2013
Poos ur daddy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not slapping you....I'm high-fiving your face....
You got that right. I have been high-fiving his face the entire evening. He seems to like it because it hasn't been beneath his dignity to keep asking for more.
seriously

Houston, MO

#80499 Apr 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>So now you are claiming that I am you. This is hilarious. I don't like to make light of mental illness, but I bet they don't even have a proper classification for you in the DSM.
You are so kind to give me the gift that keeps on giving. You are my warthog. Figure that last line out genius. I'll explain it to you in very simple terms easily understood by someone of your frail mentality tomorrow.
Yes we all know you have a mental illness. No where in that comment did I say you were me. That is your paranoid personality that thinks that is what it says when all I simply said was "you must be talking about yourself." LMAO Go take your meds and go to bed
seriously

Houston, MO

#80500 Apr 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Give him a bit of time. He is frantically try to Google an answer.
If you look back 3-4 minutes before you posted this I already answered. MAN YOU ARE SLOW! LMAO
seriously

Houston, MO

#80501 Apr 17, 2013
<<<< slapping Dan around trying to get him to wake up and get caught up with the conversation since he has fallen behind. LMAO
seriously

Houston, MO

#80502 Apr 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Give him a bit of time. He is frantically try to Google an answer.
If you look back 3-4 minutes before you posted this I already answered. MAN YOU ARE SLOW! I don't have to Google for I have my own thoughts unlike you relying on Google and Wikipedia for anything you have to say. Poor little Dan has fallen behind and can't get caught back up. Next time Dan I will type slower, bigger and in color if it will help you keep up. LMAO

“The Grim Reaper Is Fictional ”

Since: Mar 13

But We Will All Meet Him

#80503 Apr 17, 2013
Wait for it,,,,, wait for it,,,,, KABAAAAAAM!!!!!!!!!! I call that a win for Harvey or wait maybe Norton!!!! LMFAO bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahaha

“The strength of science is”

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#80504 Apr 17, 2013
seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
The Ark was a rest on a mountain. Common sense would tell anyone just because mountain tops appeared does not mean the lower earth is not flooded and livable. He was waiting on the lower earth that has trees and growth to be free of flood waters, which most all animals need to survive. Next Question?
You don't get the next question until you answer the present question. You haven't done that any reasonable satisfaction. That "next question" subterfuge may work with the boys at local bar, but with those of us in the educated crowd, it glares as the obvious dodge that it is.

It says the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. Then it states that about three months later the mountain tops were visible. Then the raven was sent forth and did not return. Are you following so far? I am trying not to make this too complicated for you. Noah then sent forth a dove which was second in the sequence following the raven which was first. You see that means the dove was sent out at a time after the raven was sent out. This dove returned because it could find no place to land. That means that everything was still under the water according to the words as they are read. Here is the text.

9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

Now if the raven didn't come back and the mountain tops were quoted as visible before the raven was sent out, then how is it that this subsequent verse (that means the verse that follows the one I am referring to) says that waters were on the face of the whole earth. The logical and reasonable conclusion is that the waters rebounded and covered everything back up. In any event your initial answer about God never flooding the earth again is still wrong.

Not doing to well on these simple things are you.

If I sound like I don't have any respect for you at all, it is only because I don't.

“The strength of science is”

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#80505 Apr 17, 2013
seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
If you look back 3-4 minutes before you posted this I already answered. MAN YOU ARE SLOW! I don't have to Google for I have my own thoughts unlike you relying on Google and Wikipedia for anything you have to say. Poor little Dan has fallen behind and can't get caught back up. Next time Dan I will type slower, bigger and in color if it will help you keep up. LMAO
Wow, you are desperate to find any thing to ridicule me about now aren't you. Even to the point of making something out of nothing.

Yes ladies and gentlemen, I couldn't have kicked his ass without the support of seriously. His complete stupidity was instrumental to my success. It is people like him that make my work seem effortless. Well, in all fairness, it was effortless.

“this is a dark ride”

Since: Aug 10

Earth

#80506 Apr 17, 2013
seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
The Ark was a rest on a mountain. Common sense would tell anyone just because mountain tops appeared does not mean the lower earth is not flooded and livable. He was waiting on the lower earth that has trees and growth to be free of flood waters, which most all animals need to survive. Next Question?
Yup yup how fast do trees and plants grow under a gazillion tons of water?

“The strength of science is”

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#80507 Apr 17, 2013
seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok Dan, Oh I mean Poos. Thanks for clearing that up. LMAO
I love the smell of desperation in the breeze.
seriously

Houston, MO

#80508 Apr 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You don't get the next question until you answer the present question. You haven't done that any reasonable satisfaction. That "next question" subterfuge may work with the boys at local bar, but with those of us in the educated crowd, it glares as the obvious dodge that it is.
It says the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. Then it states that about three months later the mountain tops were visible. Then the raven was sent forth and did not return. Are you following so far? I am trying not to make this too complicated for you. Noah then sent forth a dove which was second in the sequence following the raven which was first. You see that means the dove was sent out at a time after the raven was sent out. This dove returned because it could find no place to land. That means that everything was still under the water according to the words as they are read. Here is the text.
9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.
Now if the raven didn't come back and the mountain tops were quoted as visible before the raven was sent out, then how is it that this subsequent verse (that means the verse that follows the one I am referring to) says that waters were on the face of the whole earth. The logical and reasonable conclusion is that the waters rebounded and covered everything back up. In any event your initial answer about God never flooding the earth again is still wrong.
Not doing to well on these simple things are you.
If I sound like I don't have any respect for you at all, it is only because I don't.
It is and was answered very simply. Mountains can not sustain much life for 90% of the worlds species need the lower earth of grassland and forests to survive. So even though the mountain tops were visible there was not enough of earth uncovered from the flood waters to sustain life. Thus they waited until the lower earth was flood free, thus letting the trees bloom, which then the dove grabs a leaf and took it back letting Noah know that the lower earth was flood free and ready to support life again. What about that is hard to understand? DUH!!!!! LMAO
seriously

Houston, MO

#80509 Apr 17, 2013
Poos ur daddy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup yup how fast do trees and plants grow under a gazillion tons of water?
You ever went scuba diving? I doubt that you have or you would know there is a vast majority of plants that live under the ocean waters. You should go sometime it is amazing.

“this is a dark ride”

Since: Aug 10

Earth

#80510 Apr 17, 2013
DFS ..... seriously thanks...

I get it! I wasn't lowering the bar enough ....
seriously

Houston, MO

#80511 Apr 17, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Wow, you are desperate to find any thing to ridicule me about now aren't you. Even to the point of making something out of nothing.
Yes ladies and gentlemen, I couldn't have kicked his ass without the support of seriously. His complete stupidity was instrumental to my success. It is people like him that make my work seem effortless. Well, in all fairness, it was effortless.
Wasn't ridiculing you. Just pointing out you are slow and behind. Trying to help you get caught up. LMAO

“this is a dark ride”

Since: Aug 10

Earth

#80512 Apr 17, 2013
It doesn't say God sprinkled the earth with Miracle Grow...
seriously

Houston, MO

#80513 Apr 17, 2013
Well you all it is time for me to get out of this hotel room and head down to the casino here at the tri-state casino (that would be the Downstream South-west of Joplin for it's hotel is in Missouri, the parking lot in Kansas and the casino in Oklahoma, thus called the tri-state casino). Anyways all the get rich quick gamblers and losers have all went broke and have left. Time for some real and fun gambling. Cheers!!!!!!!!!!

“this is a dark ride”

Since: Aug 10

Earth

#80514 Apr 17, 2013
seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
You ever went scuba diving? I doubt that you have or you would know there is a vast majority of plants that live under the ocean waters. You should go sometime it is amazing.
Mount Ararat is 16,854 feet above sea level, a long distance above were seaweed would survive. How deep do scuba divers go? How long do doves fly? Save your sarcasm for chumps..you're slinging bogus explanations to deny the sequence of events is illogical to anything short of a miracle. Sure God COULD do it .....but I see no mention of it.
seriously

Houston, MO

#80515 Apr 17, 2013
Poos ur daddy wrote:
<quoted text>
Mount Ararat is 16,854 feet above sea level, a long distance above were seaweed would survive. How deep do scuba divers go? How long do doves fly? Save your sarcasm for chumps..you're slinging bogus explanations to deny the sequence of events is illogical to anything short of a miracle. Sure God COULD do it .....but I see no mention of it.
DUH you are truly stupid. You asked something about what trees and plants grow under a gazillion tons of water?

SO I answered with "You ever went scuba diving? I doubt that you have or you would know there is a vast majority of plants that live under the ocean waters. You should go sometime it is amazing."

At no time did I or anyone say there was seaweed on the mountains. This was such a stupid post I had to answer it. LMFAO
Guest

Jackson, MO

#80516 Apr 18, 2013
Mommy!

“The strength of science is”

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#80517 Apr 18, 2013
Poos ur daddy wrote:
<quoted text>
Mount Ararat is 16,854 feet above sea level, a long distance above were seaweed would survive. How deep do scuba divers go? How long do doves fly? Save your sarcasm for chumps..you're slinging bogus explanations to deny the sequence of events is illogical to anything short of a miracle. Sure God COULD do it .....but I see no mention of it.
Poos it is clear from your question that you were asking what plants including trees could survive under all that water for so long and the answers is likely none. The pressure alone would be enough to destroy most flowering plants and that doesn't take into consideration the total lack of sunlight at the bottom of this global ocean. Even if you consider marine plants of which there really is not that great a diversity, they would have been destroyed by silt and I wouldn't expect marine plants to be exposed and available for birds to land on anyway. A further fact I think you have been trying guide others too is that birds don't need to land in a tree to land. Anyone that has ever seen pigeons could tell you that, but here others have missed it. All the answers by others have been off point or outright wrong.

According to the text the land was exposed, then it wasn't and then it was. A very good example of another point where the Bible contradicts itself.

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.

St. Louis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 21 min WARRIOR 19,475
We Are All Darren Wilson 21 min Sam Toliver 3
Reaction to the Ferguson Grand Jury's Decision 26 min Charming Charley 27
How can police be ,police 2 hr Facts 6
Ferguson Police Are Being Relieved Of Their Dut... 4 hr guest 4,639
NO INDICTMENT - Grand jury clears Ferguson officer 6 hr Supremeliberal 6
What must change 6 hr Tired 1
St. Louis Dating
Find my Match

St. Louis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

St. Louis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in St. Louis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:43 am PST

NBC Sports 3:43AM
Jeff Fisher unhappy with officiating in Rams' loss
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
NFL Week 13 Picks: Predicting the Winner of All 16 Matchups
Bleacher Report 8:00 AM
NFL Predictions Week 13: Early Odds, Picks and Projections for Upcoming Schedule
Bleacher Report11:53 AM
How 49ers Offense Can Overcome Stacked Defensive Boxes
NFL11:58 AM
Chiefs could regret loss to previously winless Raiders