The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
hughfarey
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:58 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 49 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#31

Post by hughfarey » Tue Nov 08, 2016 4:17 pm

Philip wrote:please Audie, just answer these simple questions
Can I have a go? Audie and I have some very different views, but then again, much in common, I feel.
A) Do you believe the source of ALL previously non-existing / non-physical things was eternal?
What does this mean? Non-existing things don't need a source, surely? Are you asking if the source of all that does exist was eternal? If so, then I'd like to know what you mean by eternal. If eternal means stretching back forever in time, then I'd have to say I don't believe that, as I believe time was created at the big bang. If you mean that the source of all that exists (including time) must lie outside time, then I'd agree with that.
B) Do you believe that non-intelligent, non-living things can blindly/randomly/instantly assemble things in things of astonishing precision and design? (per Big Bang science assertions)
Well, yes, as it happens. The best I can come up with at present are Lichtenberg Figures. Beautiful. But what, exactly do you mean by living? Every third-grader knows what's alive - something respiring, reproducing, absorbing nutrients, excreting and growing. If it doesn't do that, it's not alive. Whatever is responsible for the universe, it certainly doesn't do any of that, does it? So what's your interpretation of the word 'alive'.
C) Do you believe that whatever source of the universe had the ability to make the non-physical become physical?
Yes, obviously.
If you believe any of the above, your beliefs are metaphysical, yet without some identified spiritual Source.
Really? Don't you believe all of the above? So is your belief "without some identified spiritual Source"?
D) If you don't believe any of the above, WHY not?
Well, I do, as I say, so presumably this question doesn't apply to me...

Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 7259
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 316 times
Been liked: 553 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#32

Post by Philip » Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:43 pm

D) Hugh: If you don't believe any of the above, WHY not?

Well, I do, as I say, so presumably this question doesn't apply to me...
And so you'd be correct in that.

Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 7259
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 316 times
Been liked: 553 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#33

Post by Philip » Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:45 pm

Audie - Theo? Point me to what you are referring to.

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#34

Post by Audie » Wed Nov 09, 2016 7:22 am

Philip wrote:Audie - Theo? Point me to what you are referring to.
After all the times that I have tried to bring you back on track regarding your response to my response to the post from Theo supporting the ark, I guess its been so long it is no longer to be perceived back thro' the gauzy mists of time.

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined
Postby Philip » Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:22 am
theophilus wrote:
If the flood wasn't worldwide Noah wouldn't have needed to build an ark. He could simply have moved away from the area that was to be flooded.
Audie: We could of course get into the assumptions ( vast leaps of baseless faith) required of
flood-believrrs, but such would be churlish.

Now, it is my contention that such scenario as you describe is 100% fantasy,with no demonstrable
basis other than belief in the originator's notion of personal infallibility when it
comes to bible readin'.
That's all pretty rich, Audie,
And then you proceed to slam at me with all sorts of concocted nonsense
for which you still take no responsibility, AND, note please, it is generally considered appropriate to respond to the topic, the ideas, not to make irrelevant and scurrilous remarks about the person who expresses the ideas.

You are a complete fail, in that dept. (that is a personal, but not irrrelevant remark, from me)

Now, can you finally respond to my post to "theo", or, do you in fact have nothing to say about it? If so, admit it. And ask yourself why you started all this in the first place if you have nothing to say.

Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 7259
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 316 times
Been liked: 553 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#35

Post by Philip » Wed Nov 09, 2016 9:20 am

Really, Audie - I thought you were going to point me to where you had answered my specific questions - so, where is that - I sincerely would like to see how and where you answered them.

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#36

Post by Audie » Thu Nov 10, 2016 10:49 am

Philip wrote:Really, Audie - I thought you were going to point me to where you had answered my specific questions - so, where is that - I sincerely would like to see how and where you answered them.
You think a lot of inappropriate thoughts about things that are not so.

The exchange here started with your response to what i said to theo.

I asked what you didnt agree with.

As you can find nothing that I actually said that you disagree with, but
choose instead to charge off down a different path, inventing things that you claim I think or believe, then savaging those, this is stupid, and I am done with it.

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#37

Post by Audie » Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:04 am

hughfarey wrote:
Philip wrote:please Audie, just answer these simple questions
Can I have a go? Audie and I have some very different views, but then again, much in common, I feel.
A) Do you believe the source of ALL previously non-existing / non-physical things was eternal?
What does this mean? Non-existing things don't need a source, surely? Are you asking if the source of all that does exist was eternal? If so, then I'd like to know what you mean by eternal. If eternal means stretching back forever in time, then I'd have to say I don't believe that, as I believe time was created at the big bang. If you mean that the source of all that exists (including time) must lie outside time, then I'd agree with that.
B) Do you believe that non-intelligent, non-living things can blindly/randomly/instantly assemble things in things of astonishing precision and design? (per Big Bang science assertions)
Well, yes, as it happens. The best I can come up with at present are Lichtenberg Figures. Beautiful. But what, exactly do you mean by living? Every third-grader knows what's alive - something respiring, reproducing, absorbing nutrients, excreting and growing. If it doesn't do that, it's not alive. Whatever is responsible for the universe, it certainly doesn't do any of that, does it? So what's your interpretation of the word 'alive'.
C) Do you believe that whatever source of the universe had the ability to make the non-physical become physical?
Yes, obviously.
If you believe any of the above, your beliefs are metaphysical, yet without some identified spiritual Source.
Really? Don't you believe all of the above? So is your belief "without some identified spiritual Source"?
D) If you don't believe any of the above, WHY not?
Well, I do, as I say, so presumably this question doesn't apply to me...


I will be impressed with Cosmo thereforegod some time after one of its
proponents can say for a fact that they know what time is, and can explain it.

Obviously, unless all this stuff had a beginning, there is no role for a god
of the sort imagined, or as Paul might put it, "understood" to be. So things like "eternal", "beginning" are indispensable, however ultimately meaningless they may actually be.

While they are at it, I'd like to know if math has a beginning or an end.

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8535
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 314 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#38

Post by PaulSacramento » Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:23 am

Ah, Materialism, the self-refuting "science", LOL !

hughfarey
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:58 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 49 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#39

Post by hughfarey » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:26 pm

Audie wrote:I will be impressed with Cosmo thereforegod some time after one of its
proponents can say for a fact that they know what time is, and can explain it.
Obviously, unless all this stuff had a beginning, there is no role for a god
of the sort imagined, or as Paul might put it, "understood" to be. So things like "eternal", "beginning" are indispensable, however ultimately meaningless they may actually be.
While they are at it, I'd like to know if math has a beginning or an end.
I'd like to reply to this, but for the life of me I can't make head or tail of it. You seem to be inquiring about the nature of time, and at the same time suggesting that either time, or material, or both, did not have a beginning. Is that the gist of it?

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#40

Post by Audie » Sat Nov 26, 2016 9:22 am

hughfarey wrote:
Audie wrote:I will be impressed with Cosmo thereforegod some time after one of its
proponents can say for a fact that they know what time is, and can explain it.
Obviously, unless all this stuff had a beginning, there is no role for a god
of the sort imagined, or as Paul might put it, "understood" to be. So things like "eternal", "beginning" are indispensable, however ultimately meaningless they may actually be.
While they are at it, I'd like to know if math has a beginning or an end.
I'd like to reply to this, but for the life of me I can't make head or tail of it. You seem to be inquiring about the nature of time, and at the same time suggesting that either time, or material, or both, did not have a beginning. Is that the gist of it?
The gist is that sans any real info about what time is, the cosmo argument is meaningless.

User avatar
bbyrd009
BANNED
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:48 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Ft Myers, FL
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 8 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#41

Post by bbyrd009 » Sun Nov 27, 2016 7:53 am

Audie wrote:
Philip wrote:*my enduring fav. is that the extra water was wafted to Neptune, where it shines even unto this day as a warning beacon against incoming rogue angels.
actually scientists have just recently found all that water? like, a year ago? let me see if i can find it...ya, 2 years ago, i guess


https://duckduckgo.com/?q=science+disco ... 2__&ia=web
"Creation is continuous, and never stops."

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#42

Post by Audie » Sun Nov 27, 2016 3:45 pm

bbyrd009 wrote:
Audie wrote:
Philip wrote:*my enduring fav. is that the extra water was wafted to Neptune, where it shines even unto this day as a warning beacon against incoming rogue angels.
actually scientists have just recently found all that water? like, a year ago? let me see if i can find it...ya, 2 years ago, i guess


https://duckduckgo.com/?q=science+disco ... 2__&ia=web
All the water from a mythical flood?

User avatar
bbyrd009
BANNED
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:48 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Ft Myers, FL
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 8 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#43

Post by bbyrd009 » Sun Nov 27, 2016 3:57 pm

Audie wrote:
bbyrd009 wrote:
Audie wrote:
Philip wrote:*my enduring fav. is that the extra water was wafted to Neptune, where it shines even unto this day as a warning beacon against incoming rogue angels.
actually scientists have just recently found all that water? like, a year ago? let me see if i can find it...ya, 2 years ago, i guess


https://duckduckgo.com/?q=science+disco ... 2__&ia=web
All the water from a mythical flood?
ha, good point; but i accept "the flood" as useful mythology, meant to convey a lesson across millenia, and not a "factual" thing. Surely developed from "localized" flooding.
"Creation is continuous, and never stops."

Audie
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:41 am
Christian: No
Sex: Female
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Location: USA
Has liked: 164 times
Been liked: 113 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#44

Post by Audie » Sun Nov 27, 2016 5:19 pm

bbyrd009 wrote:
Audie wrote:
bbyrd009 wrote:
Audie wrote:
Philip wrote:*my enduring fav. is that the extra water was wafted to Neptune, where it shines even unto this day as a warning beacon against incoming rogue angels.
actually scientists have just recently found all that water? like, a year ago? let me see if i can find it...ya, 2 years ago, i guess


https://duckduckgo.com/?q=science+disco ... 2__&ia=web
All the water from a mythical flood?
ha, good point; but i accept "the flood" as useful mythology, meant to convey a lesson across millenia, and not a "factual" thing. Surely developed from "localized" flooding.
What lesson might that be?

If what you say is so, what is the takeaway lesson about the accuracy of bible accounts?

Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 7259
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains
Has liked: 316 times
Been liked: 553 times

Re: The Science Behind GLOBAL Flood Claims Examined

#45

Post by Philip » Sun Nov 27, 2016 7:51 pm

my enduring fav. is that the extra water was wafted to Neptune, where it shines even unto this day as a warning beacon against incoming rogue angels.
I did not write this - I think Audie did.

Post Reply