Does science disprove the bible

[PaulSacramento]

Im not sure I want to pursue this with you further, but it does seem to say with great clarity that all was made in 6 days, A and E were the first people, flood, etc.

I've heard the written for us not to us, but then, I dont get that as the middle east and its writings are not my heritage, at all.

Yes, it does say those things in Genesis, now all you have to do is prove that the writer was making a scientific statement as opposed to a theological one ( or a creation mythos one, or a poetic one, or a cosmological one, etc).

See, a scientific statement, even in those days when science as we know it didn't really exist, would mean that the writer was making a OBSERVABLE statement about nature.
We know that he obviously wasn't, so...

[Audie]

Im not sure I want to pursue this with you further, but it does seem to say with great clarity that all was made in 6 days, A and E were the first people, flood, etc.

I've heard the written for us not to us, but then, I dont get that as the middle east and its writings are not my heritage, at all.

Yes, it does say those things in Genesis, now all you have to do is prove that the writer was making a scientific statement as opposed to a theological one ( or a creation mythos one, or a poetic one, or a cosmological one, etc).

See, a scientific statement, even in those days when science as we know it didn't really exist, would mean that the writer was making a OBSERVABLE statement about nature.
We know that he obviously wasn't, so...

Since you ask so... here is my So...
whoever started the story just made something up, it was told and retold until someone wrote down a version of it.

An acquaintance of my Dad lived in the arctic for a number of years, and this story came up:

In a certain Eskimo village, the land is very flat but there are two hills a fw miles away, a bigger and smaller one. The bigger is flat topped.

The local story is, a giant was carrying a big rock, and dropped it. It broke, and the smaller piece rolled to make the smaller hill.

The lady who told him the story said that she god it from her grandmother. Everyone in the village knows the story, and its what they all tell their kids.

As an adult, she asked her grandmother where she got it, and the grandmother said "Oh, I just made it up when you were little, and asked about those hills."

I suppose after a few hundred years the story would have changed, maybe added a lot of details, and nobody would know where it came from. Eyewitness, maybe.

[PaulSacramento]

Im not sure I want to pursue this with you further, but it does seem to say with great clarity that all was made in 6 days, A and E were the first people, flood, etc.

I've heard the written for us not to us, but then, I dont get that as the middle east and its writings are not my heritage, at all.

Yes, it does say those things in Genesis, now all you have to do is prove that the writer was making a scientific statement as opposed to a theological one ( or a creation mythos one, or a poetic one, or a cosmological one, etc).

See, a scientific statement, even in those days when science as we know it didn't really exist, would mean that the writer was making a OBSERVABLE statement about nature.
We know that he obviously wasn't, so...

Since you ask so... here is my So...
whoever started the story just made something up, it was told and retold until someone wrote down a version of it.

An acquaintance of my Dad lived in the arctic for a number of years, and this story came up:

In a certain Eskimo village, the land is very flat but there are two hills a fw miles away, a bigger and smaller one. The bigger is flat topped.

The local story is, a giant was carrying a big rock, and dropped it. It broke, and the smaller piece rolled to make the smaller hill.

The lady who told him the story said that she god it from her grandmother. Everyone in the village knows the story, and its what they all tell their kids.

As an adult, she asked her grandmother where she got it, and the grandmother said "Oh, I just made it up when you were little, and asked about those hills."

I suppose after a few hundred years the story would have changed, maybe added a lot of details, and nobody would know where it came from. Eyewitness, maybe.

Do you believe that story is making a scientific claim ?

[Kurieuo]

Audie, in what the text clearly says, do you think "day" means a solar day or 24-hour day?

If by day you mean.... http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/inde ... by-whiskey.

Err... no, not whiskey. Have you been hanging with FL?

YECs often say "day" is a literal "24 hour" day, but I didn't know that 24 hours was a literal day.
I know you don't really care much about interpretation, but you did make a statement about it.
So what do you say a "day" clearly is in Genesis 1?

The story is just a story, so what difference does it make?

If that's the case then perhaps you shouldn't comment on it at all?
Because, you know, not everyone here believes it is just a story.

I don't think it is as clear cut as you say.
So I was just wanting to quickly take you through some thoughts,
to make you think a bit more on your original statement.

[Audie]

Im not sure I want to pursue this with you further, but it does seem to say with great clarity that all was made in 6 days, A and E were the first people, flood, etc.

I've heard the written for us not to us, but then, I dont get that as the middle east and its writings are not my heritage, at all.

Yes, it does say those things in Genesis, now all you have to do is prove that the writer was making a scientific statement as opposed to a theological one ( or a creation mythos one, or a poetic one, or a cosmological one, etc).

See, a scientific statement, even in those days when science as we know it didn't really exist, would mean that the writer was making a OBSERVABLE statement about nature.
We know that he obviously wasn't, so...

Since you ask so... here is my So...
whoever started the story just made something up, it was told and retold until someone wrote down a version of it.

An acquaintance of my Dad lived in the arctic for a number of years, and this story came up:

In a certain Eskimo village, the land is very flat but there are two hills a fw miles away, a bigger and smaller one. The bigger is flat topped.

The local story is, a giant was carrying a big rock, and dropped it. It broke, and the smaller piece rolled to make the smaller hill.

The lady who told him the story said that she god it from her grandmother. Everyone in the village knows the story, and its what they all tell their kids.

As an adult, she asked her grandmother where she got it, and the grandmother said "Oh, I just made it up when you were little, and asked about those hills."

I suppose after a few hundred years the story would have changed, maybe added a lot of details, and nobody would know where it came from. Eyewitness, maybe.

Do you believe that story is making a scientific claim ?

It is just a story, some believe it.

Some xtians think the flood is a scientifically verifiable literal account of actual historic events.
I dont know if their thinking was so deranged all along, or if
bibleism made them crazy.

[abelcainsbrother]

Im not sure I want to pursue this with you further, but it does seem to say with great clarity that all was made in 6 days, A and E were the first people, flood, etc.

I've heard the written for us not to us, but then, I dont get that as the middle east and its writings are not my heritage, at all.

Yes, it does say those things in Genesis, now all you have to do is prove that the writer was making a scientific statement as opposed to a theological one ( or a creation mythos one, or a poetic one, or a cosmological one, etc).

See, a scientific statement, even in those days when science as we know it didn't really exist, would mean that the writer was making a OBSERVABLE statement about nature.
We know that he obviously wasn't, so...

Since you ask so... here is my So...
whoever started the story just made something up, it was told and retold until someone wrote down a version of it.

An acquaintance of my Dad lived in the arctic for a number of years, and this story came up:

In a certain Eskimo village, the land is very flat but there are two hills a fw miles away, a bigger and smaller one. The bigger is flat topped.

The local story is, a giant was carrying a big rock, and dropped it. It broke, and the smaller piece rolled to make the smaller hill.

The lady who told him the story said that she god it from her grandmother. Everyone in the village knows the story, and its what they all tell their kids.

As an adult, she asked her grandmother where she got it, and the grandmother said "Oh, I just made it up when you were little, and asked about those hills."

I suppose after a few hundred years the story would have changed, maybe added a lot of details, and nobody would know where it came from. Eyewitness, maybe.

Do you believe that story is making a scientific claim ?

It is just a story, some believe it.

Some xtians think the flood is a scientifically verifiable literal account of actual historic events.
I dont know if their thinking was so deranged all along, or if
bibleism made them crazy.

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

[Kenny]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

I know we cannot do it God set a boundary so that the water cannot pass over but it could be demonstrated on a computer simulation.I mean it is simulated on computers how the matter that makes up the universe just appeared out from nothing then it formed itself into planets,etc all on its own and yet that cannot be demonstrated but is accepted by a lot of scientists.

[Kenny]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

I know we cannot do it God set a boundary so that the water cannot pass over but it could be demonstrated on a computer simulation.

Make-believe and computer simulations is not evidence that something may have happened

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

I know we cannot do it God set a boundary so that the water cannot pass over but it could be demonstrated on a computer simulation.

Make-believe and computer simulations is not evidence that something may have happened

Ken

Then why are you agnostic? You think the universe can create itself out of nothing?There are computer simulations that demonstrate it.I could post one and show you. The difference is mine will be shown true that if we leveled out the earth's surface the whole earth would be flooded,you already agreed before but have a scientist who believes the universe can create itself out of nothing demonstrate it to you.Mine will be based on truth while there's will be make believe.It is pure make-believe how they show planets forming on their own.

[Kenny]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

I know we cannot do it God set a boundary so that the water cannot pass over but it could be demonstrated on a computer simulation.

Make-believe and computer simulations is not evidence that something may have happened

Ken

Then why are you agnostic?

I am not agnostic; I'm skeptic.

You think the universe can create itself out of nothing? There are computer simulations that demonstrate it.I could post one and show you.

Just because someone made a computer simulation doesn't mean there is an ounce of evidence it happened!

The difference is mine will be shown true that if we leveled out the earth's surface the whole earth would be flooded,

How 'bout if I made a computer simulation showing if a 200 lbs pig had a 24 ft wingspan, and flapped it's wings hard enough, it could create enough lift to fly! Would that be evidence that pigs could fly???

you already agreed before but have a scientist who believes the universe can create itself out of nothing demonstrate it to you.Mine will be based on truth while there's will be make believe.It is pure make-believe how they show planets forming on their own.

You must be mistaking me with that agnostic you had in mind because I never agreed to any of that craziness you spittin out right now!

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny"]

I have already gave you evidence and it was not from AIG.I was reading Psalm 104:5-9 Then I just did some research to see if I could find evidence and I did.It may not prove it happened but it shows it is very possible.It is a fact that if we could level out the earth's surface the water level would rise and the whole earth would be flooded over the tallest mountains right now.The oceans are very deep.

How about if we could NOT level out the earth's surface; would such a flood be possible then?

Ken

I know we cannot do it God set a boundary so that the water cannot pass over but it could be demonstrated on a computer simulation.

Make-believe and computer simulations is not evidence that something may have happened

Ken

Then why are you agnostic?

I am not agnostic; I'm skeptic.

Why are you skeptic of a flood?I gave you evidence that it is possible,I didn't say it proves it you'd have to go back in time to see it for proof,I just proved it is possible based on the depth of the oceans and you reject it.Based on what? I mean I can't make you change your mind and we can't go back in time so we must go by evidence.

You think the universe can create itself out of nothing? There are computer simulations that demonstrate it.I could post one and show you.

Just because someone made a computer simulation doesn't mean there is an ounce of evidence it happened!

I agree but a lot of people believe it because some scientists believe it and show computer simulations or just explain how it happened,yet it cannot be demonstrated like my evidence for a global flood can.

The difference is mine will be shown true that if we leveled out the earth's surface the whole earth would be flooded,

How 'bout if I made a computer simulation showing if a 200 lbs pig had a 24 ft wingspan, and flapped it's wings hard enough, it could create enough lift to fly! Would that be evidence that pigs could fly???

That would be like their computer simulations showing how the universe created itself out of nothing.

you already agreed before but have a scientist who believes the universe can create itself out of nothing demonstrate it to you.Mine will be based on truth while there's will be make believe.It is pure make-believe how they show planets forming on their own.

You must be mistaking me with that agnostic you had in mind because I never agreed to any of that craziness you spittin out right now!

You said you agreed at first but then it was clear you took it back which is why I posted Flurry for you.It is a song about whatever evidence is given to you for God adds up like snow flakes that pile up on a limb and can make it bend or break.How come it is craziness to you? We were talking about the flood and I gave evidence for it.Evidence is what I use to determine truth from a lie or theory and I think you should too.
Ken[/quote]

[Kenny]

Why are you skeptic of a flood?I gave you evidence that it is possible,I didn't say it proves it you'd have to go back in time to see it for proof,I just proved it is possible based on the depth of the oceans and you reject it.Based on what? I mean I can't make you change your mind and we can't go back in time so we must go by evidence.

You proved nothing. You said (paraphrasing) "IF the entire world were smooth as a cue ball, and the water currently on earth remained the same; the entire planet would be covered with water"
Well guess what? The entire planet is not as smooth as a cue ball, it never was so unless you can prove it was, your entire argument fails! You have proven nothing my friend! How about this one? If the moon were made of water, and that water somehow came to earth; it would be enough water to flood the entire planet. If I could make a computer simulation of such a scenario, would that be proof enough for you? (LOL)

Ken