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, seeing as how you think a sophisticated, complex physical universe can exist without an intelligent cause. Talking about a fantasy - you're off the charts in La-La Land! So your "who knows what we might discover, eventually, that we don't know about yet" is YOUR magic bullet excuse for everything. Of course, you MUST believe at least SOMETHING is eternal. If you'd don't believe that, you have abandoned all logic. So, keep making fun a flood that you don't know the scope of, insistent upon it being a proven fact to have not occurred, while ignoring your own unproven and unmerited fantasy as to what can exist without an intelligent eternal cause! Because, your own words aptly applied to your origins views, it takes "vast leaps of baseless faith."
You think an omnipotent etc can exist without any cause at all?
Lets see..next line is schoolyard insult, unworthy of this forum.
Same with the next, even without the "rubber / glue", or the concocted hypocrisy.
Then the next line, where you make up things for me to think, and the false dichotomy.
Did you even realize-
Nobody knows what time is, a little detail omotted from all of these "philosophical"
constructs that give people the infallible ability to know there is a god.
I didnt make fun of a flood, which you btw seem to think you "know" happened.
I think there could be some little seed of fact in the flood story. Or maybe not.
As told, it is a fantasy. I suppose this generates cognitive dissonance and angst in those who
figure the bible is a perfect truth. So the mature and sensible thing is to lash out at me
with everything you can think up?
I pointed out that WWF could not be an actual event, and an interpretation that there was
is either ignorant or intellectually dishonest. Pretty tough to make a sensible argument
against that. Speaking of "lala land", Noah's Ark? *
. Someone in lala land? Almost like some of that psychological projectin' .that we hear about, no?
It certainly has been proved a thousand times over that there was no WWF.
Do you care to deny that, and declare your turf in lala land, own the ignorance / dishonesty? Surely not.
So why the childish outburst of irrelevant and false claims against me?
Id like to think you can do a lot better than that.
Care to start over?
* or wait, it is all real! You can go see it! Noah's Ark Park Turkey.
Tell 'em Ron Wyatt sent ya! ( that is making fun, not of the story, but of those
who think it is all about actual events)