The Religion Discussion

[bluefete]

How could Noah's Flood cover mountains like Everest?



Mount Everest lies between Tibet and Nepal in southern Asia. It is 9 kilometers high. The waters from the worldwide Flood of Noah's time would cover a fairly level earth only to about 3 kilometers. So how could the water form Noah's Flood cover Mount Everest?

The answer is that Mount Everest was formed after or during the Flood — it wasn't in existence in its present form before the Flood. We know this because its higher parts contain fossils of sea creatures and seashells, showing that it is made of rock that was once under water.

Before the Flood, the mountains were not as high as today, and the ocean valleys were not as deep. Mount Everest and other high mountains were pushed up by the enormous underwater volcanic activity of the Flood (“the fountains of the great deepâ€

[bluefete]

How did you come up with the earth being 10,000 years old when by calculation from the bible puts it at around 6,332 to 6,579 years old

What was the date of Noah's Flood?

Quick-read this article:
According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Irish archbishop and chronologist James Ussher, Bible historians and most conservative Christian scholars, the Flood of Noah's time occurred between 2500 BC and 2300 BC.



First century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus used manuscripts available during his time to calculate that Noah's Flood occurred 1556 years after the creation of Adam. By adding the ages of the patriarchs listed in the Bible, other scholars have come up with roughly similar dates.

(We must point out though, that according to the King James Version of the Bible, the Flood was 1656 years after Creation, which is regarded as more accurate than Josephus's dates.)

Irish archbishop James Ussher calculated that the creation of the world took place in 4004 BC. If 1656 is deducted from 4004 then the worldwide flood of Noah's time was around 2348 BC (if both chronologies are correct; but please note that there is some disagreement even among conservative Bible believers on these dates).

Josephus, Ussher, and other scholars disagree slightly on some of their dates. But most agree that a straightforward reading of the Bible indicates the Deluge must have taken place in the third millennium before the birth of Jesus Christ — probably between 2500 BC and 2300 BC.
Evolution problems

The widely accepted evolutionary history of the world, however, theorizes that a common ancestor of humans and apes existed around 10 million years ago. Modern humans, according to the evolutionary theory, came on the scene around one million years ago. There is no indisputable fossil evidence of the many alleged missing links in human evolution of course, including the hypothetical common ancestor from which humans and apes supposedly evolved.

An interesting area of support for the biblical date comes from the study of population statistics. Dr. Henry Morris asked in his book The Bible Has the Answer whether it was more reasonable to think that the present world population came from the few people on Noah's Ark 4300 years ago, or the first “dawn manâ€

[bluefete]

When was I not calm?
I said my 2c and if some stranger doesn't get it the sun still shines through the window and wake me up on a morning.
You're twisting words and manipulating what people say, you're avoiding questions and valid points. Then you call it God's logic. That's not logic, it's arguing like a woman. Only difference is that you smile all the time, you don't say hurtful things and you don't remember stuff we forgot to do a year ago.
That's not the logic of God, that's your ability to debate dirty. Dance around something until the other side gives up.
I would congratulate you for your skill, but in 40 pages all you said was "I HAS A BASEBALL"
Just remember, you can paint a rock, put stuff on it and call it a turtle all you want, but no matter what, it's a rock.

Hard to believe we are supposed to be on the same side.

I have used a standard reference for my arguments. There is nothing to twist. I start from the Biblical perspective. Others start from an Evolutionary perspective and we go from there and try to work towards a middle ground.

Unfortunately, without God, finding that middle ground is proving to be a bit difficult.

[bigga514]

"To have examples of three geographically dispersed populations adapting in different ways to the same stress is very unusual," said Cynthia Beall, a physical anthropologist at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. "From an evolutionary standpoint the question becomes, Why do these differences exist? We need to figure out when, how, and why that happened."

Source: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ution.html

Nat Geo is well known as a proponent of the Evolutionary Theory and evolution as a whole.

This is a quote from the source you sent me to. There is no mystery here. Go back to the Bible.

Genesis 11:1,9 "And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.... Therefore is the name of it called Babel, because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth."

When God scattered people abroad all over the earth, some went to hot climates, some to temperate and some to cold climates. Humans adapt easily to their environments.

No need for evolution there.

Evolution does not bring about a new species of dog. Cross breeding does. That is not evolution.

Dinosaurs did not eat people. You have been watching too many T-Rexes.

Caveman drawings showing this relationship just have not been discovered as yet. Just as it took until the early 1960's for archaeologists to uncover scientific proof of Pontius Pilate's existence.

Firstly you cant dismiss the evidence produced by nat geo because as you say there"proponents of the Evolutionary Theory" Its based on facts are you saying they made it all up the tribes and thier adaptations? and as you quoted its independent research by Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio that nat geo reported on even your bible quote just speaks of LANGUAGES lol even the part in bold is evolution by definition go look up the definition.
your trying too hard to sound stupid here seriously. all the sites you use are proponents of "Creation" are they not? so since i dont believe in that shouldn't i say the same for your so called evidence? at least mine come from reputable sources.
irc.org = Institute for Creation Research :roll::roll:

Secondly i know dinosaurs didnt eat humans your the one saying they coexisted or are you saying there were no carnivorous Dinos?

Third the dog example was to your irc website who said man could not recreate evolution. Again look at what they define evolution as and re read what i wrote i gave you examples of new dog species and of Species becoming smaller "toy" or larger "mastiffs" and also for Intelligence. WHAT ABOUT THE FINCHES?

Fourth you wanna guess how they were able to date the tablet that your calling proof back to that time, its funny how you accept scientific when its convenient . as i said before jesus never claim to be god and quite possibly did exist its RELIGION thats BS and is used to brain wash sheep like you. .


further more i take it that you realize your quoting out your ass since the bible time line is almost double what YOU said it was. just like the dino theory, or poor example of fossils caused by the "great floods" as for the dino monument jus look at the location (mudslides, flash floods, avalanches ) isnt too far fetched now is it?

Dinosaur National Monument is a National Monument located on the southeast flank of the Uinta Mountains on the border between Colorado and Utah at the confluence of the Green and Yampa Rivers.

im wasting time even trying to have a intelligent convo with you when your bringing random un verified "evidence" that even basic research could dispel whether intentional or out of desperation its a bit trivial.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Bigga: God sent you to ask the perfect question.

I though everyone had free will?

or is this bluefete contradiction #483?

[bigga514]

How did you come up with the earth being 10,000 years old when by calculation from the bible puts it at around 6,332 to 6,579 years old

What was the date of Noah's Flood

Here are the years from the creation of Adam (the first man) until the Deluge (Noah's Flood):
Patriarch's name Years before son's birth

Adam 130
Seth 105
Enos 90
Cainan 70
Maleleel 65
Jared 162
Enoch 65
Mathusela 187
Lamech 182
Noah 600
To the Deluge 1656

Source: http://www.creationtips.com/flooddate.html

your math would still be off by minimum 1000 years according to your argument AGAIN you dont know what your talking about enough with the random quoting even if the flood was 1656 year of the earth double check your math im not holding your hand no more. the "facts" your trying to argue is off even by biblical reference.

Forgot to ask b4 where in the bible did it say the earth was one continent and its separation was caused by the great floods ?

[Sabot]

http://bibleprobe.com/1928exorcism.htm

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Port Royal in Jamaica was one of the wickedest cities on earth.
Once called "the richest and wickedest city in the world", Port Royal was also the virtual capital of Jamaica. To it came men of all races, treasures of silks, doubloons and gold from spanish ships, looted on the high seas by the notorious "Brethren of the Coast" as the pirates were called. From here sailed the fleets of Henry Morgan, later lieutenant-governor of Jamaica, for the sacking of Camaguey, Maracaibo, and Panama, and died here, despite the ministrations of his Jamaican folk-doctor. Admirals lord Nelson and Benbow, the chilling Edward "Blackbeard" Teach, were among its inhabitants. The town flourished for 32 years until at 20 minutes to noon, June 7, 1692. It was partially buried in the sea by an earthquake

Source: http://www.noquartergiven.net/jamaica.htm

Now, I could say that God destroyed the city. You could say that it was geologic forces or the shifting of tectonic plates that caused the earthquake.

But isn't it more than passing strange that Port Royal, a city that was so renowned, like Sodom & Gomorrah, suffered such a "natural" fate?

LOL you are worst that those people trying to find a Nostradamus prediction in 9/11

Port Royal? So what about all the other HUGE cities in the world with far more sinning going on? Las Vegas, Amsterdam's Red Light District?

Also what about all those earthquakes that destroy villages with children and churches, mosques, temples etc? Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, and Thailand are all Sodom & Gomora type places too when the tsunami devastated those places?

Are you even thinking rationally?

Stop picking only the few things that match your delusional theories and ignoring the all the rest of everything.

If you were correct then you would have won since page 1 and no one would have been able to counter. You've even managed to run all the religious people!

[bigga514]

Duane Sin city too hype to touch!!!
or like a next man say "make it fit, make it fit"

[nareshseep]

OMG, (no pun intended ) bluefete ,,,, are you preacher?

[Sky]

[buzz]

. You've even managed to run all the religious people!

ouch

[Logic42]

i'm surprised this ched ain't locked yet

[16 cycles]

please don't lock as yet, waiting for the following

.....
The moon now moves about 1 1/2 inches farther away from earth each year due to tidal interaction.....

please clarify...

I am putting some info together to answer you. Have some patience. Remember it is just one or two of us and the rest of you.

[Razkal]

^don't hold your breath dawg, just let him marinate in his stupidity. i assure you, nothing he can compile will be done so with any logic we can relate too or see eye-level with.
unlike his bible, we have 43 pages of hard evidence that bluefete is a deluded, hard-headed, religiously blinded fool.

[16 cycles]

Razkal, on a serious note, not saying bluefete is, but what causes someone to see only one point of view or to twist evidence to support one way of thinking?

are ppl socialized to think a certain way? how does one break that mould?

is this an either / or paradigm?

can someone theorize that the boss made the big bang and allowed things to evolve from there on - guiding stuff when he/she/it/them not too busy?

do i need to smoke a spliff and contemplate?

[DFC]

blufete...common sense would tell you...
first of...you believe god is omnipotent...omnipresent.
omnipresent-means god is everywhere....

That means God is in Hell !!....OMG...God is in Hell....why d ass then yuh striving to go to heaven?
God & Satan in hell?...how can they both be in hell? OR IS GOD ALSO SATAN? (oh no!)

If god is not in hell..then he is NOT omnipresent..then he is NOT god.

Also... GOD IS AN ATHIEST!!
Does God..believe in GOD?
does god....believe in a power higher than him....that has control over him?

hhahah...God is an Athiest...so dont blame me for being one!!

DFC: If you create a robot and gave it free will, will that robot ever be higher than you?

Let's say you give the robot artificial intelligence, would that robot ever be smarter than you, who made it?

Why abrogate unto yourself, a power that you do not and will never have?

no....the robot will not be higher than me..
how does that relate to what i said?

now answer my questions...

[b068755c]

Is the bible supposed to be taken literally?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Is the bible supposed to be taken literally?

bluefete seems to think so
but only when he wants it to

[illumin@ti]

44 pages..... oh dear ... he should get a medal for his persistence....

First person i have ever seen epitomize the term ' walk by faith, not by sight '

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ you've heard of blind faith - this seems to be blind, deaf and dumb faith.

DFC: If you create a robot and gave it free will, will that robot ever be higher than you?

Let's say you give the robot artificial intelligence, would that robot ever be smarter than you, who made it?

Why abrogate unto yourself, a power that you do not and will never have?

oh dear
every day man makes computers and machines that are more capable than we are. A computer can do complex calculations that we cannot humanly do - yet WE created computers. Robots are known to be stronger, faster, more resilient and less prone to error - already that is superior to their creator.

Another thing to think about:
Man is far from perfect. If we make robots with AI and free will, are we their God? should we insist that they pray to us and fear us? Would it be immoral to do so?

Luckily though with their intelligence and heuristics the robots will be smart and logical enough to know not to write texts about their creator and fill it with feelings, emotions, stories and ideas to make themselves feel comfortable in the universe.

[Razkal]

Razkal, on a serious note, not saying bluefete is, but what causes someone to see only one point of view or to twist evidence to support one way of thinking?

are ppl socialized to think a certain way? how does one break that mould?

is this an either / or paradigm?

can someone theorize that the boss made the big bang and allowed things to evolve from there on - guiding stuff when he/she/it/them not too busy?

do i need to smoke a spliff and contemplate?

i honestly can't answer that
but imo, one of the most humbling things is reflecting on how much we still don't know, accepting that and being open to what we do know or can figure out is one of the most fulfilling things.

i see no reason your idea can be theorized on, but again, once you can provide accompanying evidence and logical explanations along the way to support your postulations...some ppl tend to forget that detail.

smoke a spliff? why not!...take the roll-on from bluefete, clearly what ever he smoking is some guuuud shiit

[16 cycles]

all starts with the trial of B1-66ER or SKYnet becomes self aware...

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Razkal, there lies the difference between faith and spirituality

I notice that most people with blind faith have left little or no room for spirituality though most of them do not realise this. They are so caught up in the exactness of the written word, rituals and practices that they forget to even talk to God or realise a deep sense of belonging and understanding.

IMO spirituality > faith and not faith > spirituality

hopefully one day one may equal the other

[Sky]

^^ And where does fear fit into that equation?

[bluefete]

please don't lock as yet, waiting for the following

.....
The moon now moves about 1 1/2 inches farther away from earth each year due to tidal interaction.....

please clarify...

I am putting some info together to answer you. Have some patience. Remember it is just one or two of us and the rest of you.

Okay people, I just have time to post this and run (not from allyuh licks, eh) But I'll be back.


Recession of the Moon:

As the moon orbits the earth, its gravity pulls on the earth's oceans, causing tides. Since the earth rotates faster than the moon orbits, the tidal bulges induced by the moon are always "ahead" of the moon.

For this reason the tides actually "pull forward" on the moon, which causes the moon to gain energy and gradually spiral outward.

The moon moves about an inch and a half farther away from the earth each year because of this tidal interaction. Thus the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past.

6,000 years ago, the moon would have been about 800 feet closer to the earth. So this 'spiralling away" of the moon is not a problem over the biblical time scale of 6,000 years, but if the earth & moon were over 4 billion years old (as the big-bang supporters say), then we have big problems.

This is because the moon would have been so close that it actually would have been touching the earth less than 1.5 billion years ago. This suggests that the moon cannot possibly be as old as secular astronomers claim.

Secular astronomers who assume the big bang is true must invoke other explanations to get around this.

For example, they might assume that the rate at which the moon was receding was actually smaller in the past but this is an extra assumption needed to make their billions-of-years model work.

The simplest explanation is that the moon has not been around that long. The recession of the moon is a problem for a belief in billions of years, but is perfectly consistent with a young age.

DETAILED EXPLANATION:

Tidal bulges develop on earth because the moon is closer to one side of the earth than the other, and thus its gravity pulls harder on the near side. This causes the overall shape of the earth to be slightly elliptical.

The height of the tidal bulges would be greater if the moon were closer to the earth. The earth rotates faster than the moon revolves; thus, the tidal bulges are always ahead of the moon.

Since they pull forward on the moon, the bulges transfer angular momentum and kinetic energy, increasing the moon's orbital energy and causing it to move away from the earth. The rate of this recession is approximately proportional to the inverse sixth power of the earth-moon distance.

This can be show, roughly, as follows:

The tidal bulges are approximated as a dipole (2 points separated from the centre of the earth). The dipole separation is proportional to: l / r³, where r is the earth-moon separation.

So the tidal-bulge height would be roughly: h = l / r³

However, the forces with which the tidal bulges pull back on the moon also goes as h / r³ for a given height (h). So we should expect the rate of tidal recession to be approximately l / râ

[slimshiney]

Approaching three weeks

12,500 views

[3stagevtec]

you are making a huge assumption, you assume that the moon is pulling away from the earth at a constant rate.. but that could never be true..

think of all the factors involved.. when the moon was closer to earth, the gravitational force between the 2 would have been different.. it's kinda obvious.. if you want to factor in spin rate as well, be my guess..

it's similar to two magnets.. closer together = different force..

your argument is clearly flawed..

now, scientists HAVE factored in that difference in force and it CAN be shown WITHOUT any assumptions that the moon is a few billion years old..

science can use MULTIPLE methods to show the actual age of the moon, whereas you can only know one method, based on faulty assumptions to come up with flawed answers to support your biblical nonsense..

also, judging from the intelligence you have shown in your replies, i'm willing to bet you have NO idea how the formulas you posted work.. sad..

[Sky]

please don't lock as yet, waiting for the following

.....
The moon now moves about 1 1/2 inches farther away from earth each year due to tidal interaction.....

please clarify...

I am putting some info together to answer you. Have some patience. Remember it is just one or two of us and the rest of you.

Okay people, I just have time to post this and run (not from allyuh licks, eh) But I'll be back.


Recession of the Moon:

As the moon orbits the earth, its gravity pulls on the earth's oceans, causing tides. Since the earth rotates faster than the moon orbits, the tidal bulges induced by the moon are always "ahead" of the moon.

For this reason the tides actually "pull forward" on the moon, which causes the moon to gain energy and gradually spiral outward.

The moon moves about an inch and a half farther away from the earth each year because of this tidal interaction. Thus the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past.

6,000 years ago, the moon would have been about 800 feet closer to the earth. So this 'spiralling away" of the moon is not a problem over the biblical time scale of 6,000 years, but if the earth & moon were over 4 billion years old (as the big-bang supporters say), then we have big problems.

This is because the moon would have been so close that it actually would have been touching the earth less than 1.5 billion years ago. This suggests that the moon cannot possibly be as old as secular astronomers claim.

Secular astronomers who assume the big bang is true must invoke other explanations to get around this.

For example, they might assume that the rate at which the moon was receding was actually smaller in the past but this is an extra assumption needed to make their billions-of-years model work.

The simplest explanation is that the moon has not been around that long. The recession of the moon is a problem for a belief in billions of years, but is perfectly consistent with a young age.

DETAILED EXPLANATION:

Tidal bulges develop on earth because the moon is closer to one side of the earth than the other, and thus its gravity pulls harder on the near side. This causes the overall shape of the earth to be slightly elliptical.

The height of the tidal bulges would be greater if the moon were closer to the earth. The earth rotates faster than the moon revolves; thus, the tidal bulges are always ahead of the moon.

Since they pull forward on the moon, the bulges transfer angular momentum and kinetic energy, increasing the moon's orbital energy and causing it to move away from the earth. The rate of this recession is approximately proportional to the inverse sixth power of the earth-moon distance.

This can be show, roughly, as follows:

The tidal bulges are approximated as a dipole (2 points separated from the centre of the earth). The dipole separation is proportional to: l / r³, where r is the earth-moon separation.

So the tidal-bulge height would be roughly: h = l / r³

However, the forces with which the tidal bulges pull back on the moon also goes as h / r³ for a given height (h). So we should expect the rate of tidal recession to be approximately l / râ

[3stagevtec]

All well and good, but lemme bust a few holes in it.
1. This is NOT the primary assumption, so don't call other assumptions secondary. You're just accepting this one because it supports YOU!

2. k is NOT a constant. For christ's sakes man, everyone knows the earth wasn't always covered by 75% water. A diff equation would NOT stand up.

3. The leading hypothesis is that there was a collision and the debris formed the moon. The moon doesn't have an iron core like the earth, because the iron from earth already sank to the core. The moon has the same oxygen isotope composition as earth. Mama?

This stood up for more than 20 years. I read it years ago and I haven't heard anything recently so I'm assuming it still stands.

Stop thinking scientists out to disprove God, they're just looking for facts, meng.

Pun intended??