Freethought & Rationalism Archive

funinspace · 04-06-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

I suggested conflict with what you claimed vs. what the Bible say, not within the Bible...jeeze, get a clue!

Again, you made the claim that all humans were in Shinar. Please back it up. Where is that stated clearly in your Bible.

I believe what I said was in Shinar or Mesopotamia which is a wider area around Shinar which includes Babylonia. That is the cradle of life and even modern day scientists say we came from there which confirms the good Book.

Why don't you just admit that you threw out your misconception without really first understanding what the Genesis tells you, and that you really don't know your geography? I don't think this will shake the roots of your theology/dogma...

Here is Mesopotamia:

Here is where some of the other people went, per your Bible:
Ge 10:18 the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. Afterward, the clans of the Canaanites spread out,
19 so that the Canaanite borders extended from Sidon all the way to Gerar, near Gaza, and all the way to Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, near Lasha.

And here is a map, showing it to be on the Mediterranean coast, far from the above:

funinspace · 04-06-2009, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Yes, but modern day scientists bias their results based on what their preceonceived notions tell them they want to find, so they can't be relied upon. Isn't that how it works?

Well we can't rely on their dating methods completely but anything younger than 4000 years we can rely on them pretty much, except for when they make conclusions based on non-belief.

So why is 4,000 the magic number? It wouldn't happen to be because it is convenient, in that it helps you manage your dogma, would it? Or is there some scientific reasoning you can point to (I'm not going to hold my breath, expecting any real source to be referenced)?

Free Indeed · 04-06-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demigawd

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

I believe what I said was in Shinar or Mesopotamia which is a wider area around Shinar which includes Babylonia. That is the cradle of life and even modern day scientists say we came from there which confirms the good Book.

Name one scientist (apologists masquerading as scientists don't count) who states humanity came from Mesopotamia.

Your tying my hands, I wouldn't ask you to give up your scientists to make a point.

Tom Sawyer · 04-06-2009, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Your tying my hands, I wouldn't ask you to give up your scientists to make a point.

Why wouldn't you ask that? It would seem to be a reasonable request when one makes the assertion that scientists have come to whatever conclusion.

DancesWithCoffeeCups · 04-06-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Your tying my hands, I wouldn't ask you to give up your scientists to make a point.

Why wouldn't you ask that? It would seem to be a reasonable request when one makes the assertion that scientists have come to whatever conclusion.

Asking questions makes the baby jesus cry.

Tom Sawyer · 04-06-2009, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DancesWithCoffeeCups

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Why wouldn't you ask that? It would seem to be a reasonable request when one makes the assertion that scientists have come to whatever conclusion.

Asking questions makes the baby jesus cry.

Which scientists came to that conclusion? Do you have links to their studies and research methodologies?

Free Indeed · 04-06-2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Well we can't rely on their dating methods completely but anything younger than 4000 years we can rely on them pretty much, except for when they make conclusions based on non-belief.

Varves

My information is 300 to 360 laminae formed in 160 years in Lake Walensee, Switzerland. We can't always assume that the rate of deposition that we see today has been the same for the past.

Keith&Co. · 04-06-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

That was just a lighthearted answer. I didn't think people really needed to have an explanation on why man does things.

So, your response to facts that can't be explained in your made-up history is to fend them off with a joke.
And, yes, we need an explanation for why a culture's memory shows evidence you need it to, but runs counter to human nature when you need it to.

As you mention, we still refer to Darwin a hundred years after. Why did the Egyptians and Chinese fail to refer to the God that destroyed the world and split up the nations?

Free Indeed · 04-06-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

I believe what I said was in Shinar or Mesopotamia which is a wider area around Shinar which includes Babylonia. That is the cradle of life and even modern day scientists say we came from there which confirms the good Book.

Why don't you just admit that you threw out your misconception without really first understanding what the Genesis tells you, and that you really don't know your geography? I don't think this will shake the roots of your theology/dogma...

Here is Mesopotamia:

Here is where some of the other people went, per your Bible:
Ge 10:18 the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. Afterward, the clans of the Canaanites spread out,
19 so that the Canaanite borders extended from Sidon all the way to Gerar, near Gaza, and all the way to Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, near Lasha.

And here is a map, showing it to be on the Mediterranean coast, far from the above:

I believe I explained that concerning the different accounts of Genesis 10 adn 11. Have you ever written a letter about what you did over a period of time, then went back and got more detailed later in the letter?

Free Indeed · 04-06-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Well we can't rely on their dating methods completely but anything younger than 4000 years we can rely on them pretty much, except for when they make conclusions based on non-belief.

So why is 4,000 the magic number? It wouldn't happen to be because it is convenient, in that it helps you manage your dogma, would it? Or is there some scientific reasoning you can point to (I'm not going to hold my breath, expecting any real source to be referenced)?

That's just a number I threw out to mean "after the flood". Uniformatiranists don't take the world wide flood into account when adjusting their measuring meters.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.