Evolution vs. Creation

[woodtick57]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
so the earth covered with water by no ways implies a flood...right.lol

Not in the time of humans, no. we have world wide evidence of a 6-7 mile wide rock that hit the Earth 65 million years ago. humans have been here maybe 500,000 yrs.

not one shred of evidence of a world wide flood in that time.

your cult lied to you...again...

[woodtick57]

CBOW wrote:

<quoted text>
Really? I suppose "politeness" is in the eye of the beholder. Keep "beholding" yourself, it's all YOU can rely on.

Ok there politeness boy...care to go over trhe wonderful things your spit at me on other threads? sheesh! talk about vile...

[Subduction Zone]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
so the earth covered with water by no ways implies a flood...right.lol

Water covering the Earth 2.5 billion years ago is not evidence of a Noah's Ark type flood. If you reject the claim that this occurred 2.5 billion years ago then you have to reject the claim that the Earth was covered with water using that evidence.

[woodtick57]

CBOW wrote:

<quoted text>
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>70% of the earths surface is still covered with the evidence of upwelling salty water.
upwelling from where? from wooddick57. Your problem is that you are posting to too many threads, you can't even follow your own questions anymore. You need a job to keep you occupied.

it is not upwelling from anywhere.

[woodtick57]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
Why is this not a BIG story?
I'm often amazed at our lack of knowledge about history. Ordinary people are hungry for this information, yet the organizations responsible to disseminate these facts seem to have an agenda to keep us in the dark. This is especially true when it comes to our ancient human history.
I won't hold you in suspense with this article: The Ark of Noah has been found. It's real. I'll describe the evidence in some detail and end with the historical and religious implications.
How it was discovered
In 1959, Turkish army captain Llhan Durupinar discovered an unusual shape while examining aerial photographs of his country. The smooth shape, larger than a football field, stood out from the rough and rocky terrain at an altitude of 6,300 feet near the Turkish border with Iran.
Capt. Durupinar was familiar with the biblical accounts of the Ark and its association with Mount Ararat in Turkey, but he was reluctant to jump to any conclusions. The region was very remote, yet it was inhabited with small villages. No previous reports of an object this odd had been made before. So he forwarded the photographic negative to a famous aerial photography expert named Dr. Brandenburger, at Ohio State University.
Brandenburger was responsible for discovering the Cuban missile bases during the Kennedy era from reconnaissance photos, and after carefully studying the photo, he concluded: "I have no doubt at all, that this object is a ship. In my entire career, I have never seen an object like this on a stereo photo."
http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html

yet when people went to find this 'ark' it was just a rock...

reality is fun!

[01Justsayin]

Bind the strongman

[bronck burger]

HEY FOLKS you all know that WE HUMAN'S came from the CABBAGE PLANT.

[FREE SERVANT]

bohart wrote:

<quoted text>
Good point, thousands of years ago the great pyramid was built and no one has come up with a decent idea of how they did it.A mechainical engineer did a study for Graham Hancock in the 1980's about whether the United states could build the great pyramid of Giza today. It was doubtful, all the rock quarries in the U.S. would have to triple production , and run around the clock for 20 years just to make and get ready the one million stones each over a ton that were required.This using modern machinery , logistics, roads and methods. That slaves with ropes, logs and copper tools did it is stupid.If ancient peoples could accomplish that then an ark would have been pretty simple.

Thank you for the reply. Have you heard of the theory that morter could have been formed in place to build the pyamids?

[xxxooxxx]

Subduction Zone wrote:

<quoted text>
Water covering the Earth 2.5 billion years ago is not evidence of a Noah's Ark type flood. If you reject the claim that this occurred 2.5 billion years ago then you have to reject the claim that the Earth was covered with water using that evidence.

where is your proof that this occurred 2.5 billions tears ago?

[xxxooxxx]

ah...tears of heaven...years for tears.

[The Dude]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
Here's a list of a few places that have their own version of a WORLD WIDE FLOOD:
Europe
Greek, Arcadian, Samothrace
Roman
Scandinavian, German
Celtic, Welsh
Lithuanian, Transylvanian Gypsy
Turkey
Near East
Sumerian
Egypt, Babylonian, Assyrian, Chaldean, Hebrew, Islamic
Persian, Zoroastrian
Africa
Cameroon
Masai (East Africa), Komililo Nandi, Kwaya (Lake Victoria)
Southwest Tanzania, Pygmy, Ababua (northern Zaire), Kikuyu (Kenya), Bakongo (west Zaire), Bachokwe?(southern Zaire), Lower Congo, Basonge, Bena-Lulua (Congo River, southeast Zaire)
Yoruba (southwest Nigeria), Efik-Ibibio (Nigeria), Ekoi (Nigeria)
Mandingo (Ivory Coast)
Asia
Vogul
Samoyed (north Siberia)
Yenisey-Ostyak (north central Siberia), Kamchadale (northeast Siberia)
Altaic (central Asia), Tuvinian (Soyot)(north of Mongolia)
Mongolia, Buryat (eastern Siberia)
Sagaiye (eastern Siberia)
Russian
Hindu, Bhil (central India), Kamar (Raipur District, Central India), Assam
Tamil (southern India)
Lepcha (Sikkim), Tibet, Singpho (Assam), Lushai (Assam), Lisu (northwest Yunnan, China), Lolo (southwestern China), Jino (southern Yunnan, China), Karen (Burma), Chingpaw (Upper Burma)
China
Korea
Munda (north-central India), Santal (Bengal), Ho (southwestern Bengal)
Bahnar (Cochin China), Kammu (northern Thailand)
Andaman Islands (Bay of Bengal)

And here's a list of just one place which didn't:

Planet Earth.

[The Dude]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
Earth was once a ‘waterworld’ much like the one depicted by Hollywood, scientists believe.
http://metro.co.uk/2008/12/31/early-earth-was...

Ah, yes. And note that it took place before life got beyond micro-organisms.

[KJV]

Subduction Zone wrote:

<quoted text>LOL!!

Do you know how many times that they have "found Noah's Ark"?

Please. Get real. Once again, does ice float in your world? It does in mine.

Keep that in mind because where you headed there will be no such thing as ice.

[KJV]

woodtick57 wrote:

<quoted text>yet when people went to find this 'ark' it was just a rock...

reality is fun!

The petrified forest is just rocks also.

[KJV]

FREE SERVANT wrote:

<quoted text>Thank you for the reply. Have you heard of the theory that morter could have been formed in place to build the pyamids?

It was a stone mountain. They just caved the pyramids out of it. That's why there is all that sand.

[FREE SERVANT]

One of the first things Noah built after the flood was an altar which was an elevated structure where he offered burnt offerings unto the LORD. God blessed Noah and his sons and he said for them to be fruitful and multiply and after Noah died and his son Ham had a son Cush who had a son Nimrod who is the one that is Nimrod/Marduk who built pyramid towers and caused God to confound mans language so they could not understand one another's speech.

[woodtick57]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
where is your proof that this occurred 2.5 billions tears ago?

our friend science!

[KJV]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>And here's a list of just one place which didn't:

Planet Earth.

Those places in the list are all in this planet Earth.

I'm surprised atheist don't try and change the name of our planet seeing as to how God named it Earth.

[The Dude]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
None?
No dealing with idiots.
I just listed some pretty good evidence. And there's more a lot more

Just one problem - your position makes evidence superfluous. An invisible magic Jewdidit. If something looks young then it's young. If something looks old then God just made it look old by using Godmagic therefore it's young.

Evidence is irrelevant to you, therefore it is dishonest of you to claim any kind of evidence supports your position.

But then, we are dealing with creationist idiots.(shrug)

[woodtick57]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
The petrified forest is just rocks also.

No....no it isn't, it is petrified wood. very distiguishable from other igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rocks.

they did not find a petrified ark, they found a big rock just like all the other rocks that made up the mountain.

no evidence of an ark, and not just no ecvidence of a flood in human times...complete debunking of that myth.

your cult lied to you....again....