The "ice age"

But you seem to insist on witnesses, so are you going to provide any or not? Scientists do insist on some kind of evidence in place of direct observation.
 
But you seem to insist on witnesses, so are you going to provide any or not? Scientists do insist on some kind of evidence in place of direct observation.

The bible lists the witnesses. Or are you going to claim they were imaginary as well? :D You guys are so funny. You believe things that no one has witnessed or documented, and you don't believe what has been witnessed or documented. That just proves that scientists live in their own fantasy world, not in the real world.;)
 
The bible lists the witnesses. Or are you going to claim they were imaginary as well?

Ah, so you're going to use the bible to prove the bible. Need I explain how ignorant that is?

Moreover, if we apply your fallacious reasoning regarding science, your bible and your gods don't stand a chance. Need I explain how ignorant your arguments are?

I'm going to make a prophecy now: your anti-science nonsense isn't going to last long here.
 
Ah, so you're going to use the bible to prove the bible. Need I explain how ignorant that is?

Moreover, if we apply your fallacious reasoning regarding science, your bible and your gods don't stand a chance. Need I explain how ignorant your arguments are?

I'm going to make a prophecy now: your anti-science nonsense isn't going to last long here.

:bugeye: That's like saying you can't use Einstein's theories to prove Einstein's theories. :D Until you realize how impossible that is, you're not educated enough to converse with. :rolleyes:
 
Using the bible to prove the bible is circular reasoning and a logical fallacy. Please, cite where anyone has "use[d] Einstein's theories to prove Einstein's theories."
 
So they know there is much evidence of a global flood yet deny the biblical account because it's in the bible.
Is that why most acknowledge that much of what is in the Bible is, in fact, verifiable and has contemporary suporting evidence?

If they deny the flood "because it's in the bible" why would they not deny:
The existence of the Biblical kings?
The Babylonian conquest of Persia?
Abraham?
 
Is that why most acknowledge that much of what is in the Bible is, in fact, verifiable and has contemporary suporting evidence?

If they deny the flood "because it's in the bible" why would they not deny:
The existence of the Biblical kings?
The Babylonian conquest of Persia?
Abraham?

Many of them do. They claim that the bible is a myth. So since there's no reason to deny a global flood when they say there was a global ice age (which is nothing more than frozen water), especially when over 200 ancient cultures have passed along accounts of a global flood and no one has passed along accounts of a global ice age, then the only reason they do is to try to deny the bible. There can be no other reason.
 
I'm not sure if you're aware of this but there was no Human life in the jurassic period, so how could that have been Noah's Flood?
*************
M*W: Because it's a fairy tale by ancients who thought they knew what they were talking about. Noah and his animals is an A-T reference to the zodiac and it's entities.

Perhaps in the beginning of earth being formed, there was water/ice on the surface of the whole globe. I don't know, but I think I heard this on Nova. This ice began melting, so I think global warming has been going own since the beginning of our expanding universe. We just helped it along with our industrialization and advancing technologies. I am nowhere near a geologist, so I am simplifying what I am saying.

There is some evidence that scientists believe the flood was limited to the Black Sea overcoming it's banks and flooding what was known as the whole world at that time.

The A-T take on it is that Noah and his Ark were what the ancients believed to be in the stories they created about the night skies. It was purely entertainment for them. There were no TVs or DVDs or telescopes then. This was all created from early man's imagination, and that's my take on it. I am rabidly studying astro-theology in that all religions came to be from man-made myths and not necessarily beliefs. Too bad modern folks still believe what the ancients did. It's really time for people to grow up.
 
Most scientists deny the biblical flood because they claim there is no evidence that water flooded the earth even though over 200 ancient cultures have passed along accounts of a global flood where one family survived.
*************
M*W: Apparently, you did not read my post to parcal. I'm not surprised. I have said there is recent scientific evidence that there was some sort of flood in the region of the Black Sea when it overcame it's banks. To the people who existed in that day, that was their entire world. BTW, I am an atheist.
 
Sorry they claim there was no global flood but instead, a global ice age. Of course God doesn't say that, but who cares what God says? Certainly not scientists. ;) So ask any scientist if he believes the biblical account of the Flood. Or better yet, look at all the posts on this forum alone which deny the Flood. ;)
*************
M*W: May I ask, what is your reading comprehension, and has it ever been tested?

I'm still waiting for your answer to my much earlier question, "What language does god speak?"

If you can't come up with an honest answer by tomorrow, I'm going to report you to the mods for fraud.
 
That is incorrect. There have been many speculations that there was an ice age based on certain observations. The sedimentary rock layers can also be used to claim there was a global Flood. ;)
*************
M*W: Right about now, I'm really missing IAC.
 
Get educated and read what he said in the bible just like you read what scientists say in their textbooks. Only then will you be speaking from knowledge rather than your imagination. :rolleyes:So you're right; there's no point in discussing a topic with you until you first get educated about it.

*************
M*W: Man, I've got to admit that if there were an ice age n right now, you'd be treading on the thinnest part of it.
 
And as I already said, there are only a few options for "fluid flow" to create sedimentary rock layers all over the earth. And only ONE of those options has been recounted by ancient cultures; a global flood. ;)
*************
M*W: In ancient times, what was the total area (figures please) of this "global" flood?
 
Just because you're ignorant and undereducated doesn't imply that others aren't knowledgeable or that they don't or can't understand.

Yours is a position that is to be either pitied or ridiculed.
*************
M*W: I have a couple of suggestons:

1) Put him on eternal IGNORE;

2) Put him on eternal BAN.

He will get very lonely, and go away to preach to somebody else.
 
ust because you're ignorant and undereducated doesn't imply that others aren't knowledgeable or that they don't or can't understand.

I'm ridiculed because most people here don't know that each animal can only produce its own kind. But you don't want to be educated on the birds and the bees so you'll continue to ridicule me and live in the twilight zone where animals turn into humans. :D So you ridicule me because your theory is indefensible. But I know you can't help your ignorance & fear of the truth so I forgive you. :)
 
@Medicine*Woman, was it entirely necessary to post TEN successive posts in a row, use the multi-quote button.

@Carico, please actually *read* the posts that others post in response to your comments.
 
I'm ridiculed because most people here don't know that each animal can only produce its own kind.

Really? And, here I thought all along it was because you're deluded. Silly me.

But you don't want to be educated on the birds and the bees so you'll continue to ridicule me and live in the twilight zone where animals turn into humans.

Aren't humans already animals, by definition? Are you a plant, perhaps?

So you ridicule me because your theory is indefensible.

I'd rather ridicule you because your deluded, if that's ok with you?
 
Back
Top