how are the vast insect types explained ?
Proof of Noah's Flood - Presently watching a Documentary about Europe & the Ice Age
You dont need oxygen at 8km, people live and work above 5km all the time.
Just how many times have you had your arse handed to you on the subject of dinosaur "soft tissue"? Because I have seen Leolaia wipe the floor with you on several occasions on exactly this issue. Yet you keep on bringing it up as if you haven't been proved wrong time and time again.
See the link for just one of the threads, I'm sure I can find the others if needed.
It is impossible to maintain a belief in a global flood or a young earth or to deny common ancestry without intellectual dishonesty.
Its common practice to ignore previous debates and pretend an old cannard still has some validity.
I love discussing these topics but it would be refreshing to see some effort from the other side.
You need to give some of us some time to catch up. I never realized how much of the flood story I just accepted without thinking it through. I was talking to my daughters (they are in their early 20's) about this thread. They told me they never thought the story was literal. I on the other never doubted it was true.
Until now. I guess I never sat down and thought it through.I accepted the official explanation and figured if it was in the bible, it must be true. My daughter told me she never understood how the org. would say some parts of the bible was literal and some was symbolic.
One of the arguments for the flood being real was that Jesus referenced it.
Did he reference it because it was part of the Jewish traditional writings and they would be familar with it and understand his point?
I asked my daughter why she never took the story literal. She said after she studied history and anthropology she knew the flood
story could not be literal. So she figured it was an aligory
I meant allegory. it was nice to have an open conversation with her. I did feel a little embarrassed that she figured it out before I did. She was just to tactful to argue about it. But when I brought it up after reading this thread and some of the liinks....I found shsa e agreed with you and was m. ing the same points you were. It's going to take me a while to process.
But I wanted to thank you guys for the way you present your arguments and provide links and info to back it up both pro and con. I am
then able to read the research and think about what makes sense. It helps that I have my daughter to bounce things off. I teased her that she must come here in secret because she will bring up similar points that i found here-lol.
The North Sea used to be land mass before it was filled with water after a climate changed 15 000 years ago. Scientists and researchers know that man was roaming on the low lying plains between Holland and the UK before this localised flooding. Yes they do dredge up spears, and bones on very rare occations.
It is utter tosh that it is being used to prop up the Noah flood story.
Perhaps the Loch Ness mosnster will also prove that dinosaurs were on the ark too?
Miss fit - good comment
Ok. I hadn't forgotten about this discussion, which I personally feel to be very important. I haven't been feeling too good lately.
I found the clip on You-tube.
European Ice Age Evidence - Wild Europe - BBC Natural History.
In the North sea off Holland, scientists search for remains of bones.
100 yrs ago, bones were given to a doctor for identification.
He,. the Dr, said it was clear evidence of Noah's flood, whatever your belief about Noah, the Dr was right about the flood. as they were the bones of land animals, massive ones, woolly mammoths, in the middle of the N Sea
The sea level was 100 M lower than it is today. The N sea area was all dry land.
Not all of europe was buried in ice.
N sea was one vast green valley.
So that is the exact wording fromm the documentary.
They are a very good series.
England used to be down near the south pole. The world is a very different place from the ancient beginnings.
Whether you find evidence for Noahs flood or not depends on the world view you adopt.
So watch what you think and watch what you believe in.
If you adopt a secular materialistic world view than you will not be attuned to the volumes of
evidence supporting the theory of a world wide flood.
and vice versa if you are a creationist you wont digest the evidence referencing that there was no world
In theses matters, if you believe it you will see it.
That also applies to if you believe you will make lots of money and look for the evidence
and work at the evidence you will see it.
Its easier to work at theories of existence; God or no God. It is not as labor intensive, and can
be pursued in an easy chair in air-conditioning.
Global deluge or no, it is semantics really, people will believe what they want to believe.
Through discussion and education, people learn about, origins, cultures, history, science, evidence and facts.
Nature v nurture. chicken and egg.
Science, as far as I am aware, does not 'deal' with emotions.
Which is why it has taken so long for people to recieve the correct treatment they need.
any way.... the search goes on, as does the learning process.
Where did all the water come from.