Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Minimalist · 03-17-2010, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Quote:
Hapgood's theory of Earth Crust Displacement has been devastated by real science.
So? One refuted theory doesn't discredit the man. That would be like dismissing all of Hawkins for his failed string theory.

Earth Crust Displacement was his rationale for that jumble of allegedly frozen bones which you cite as evidence for your mythical flood. In this case, that theory is all you can hang your hat on and it is worthless.

Just like your bible.

archaeologist · 03-17-2010, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Why is it so difficult for you to answer a very simple question?

it is not difficult, it is a frivolous question, one which you already know the answer.\

Quote:

I forgot to add in the above post: How did these ancient mariners that Hapgood said existed miss an entire continent?

So they missed Australia, many ancient maps also miss North and South America, it is no big deal. But then again peole like you just like to fond something to blow out of proportion so you do not have to believe anything.

Quote:

Speaking very roughly, this means at least around 5000 species of mammal, 9000 species of bird, 9000 species of reptile, about 1000 known species of dinosaur and let's say 1,000,000 species of insect.

You error is in not knowing how many species of animals or kinds were alive at that time. Put it this way, the ark was sufficient in size for the animals and humans along with all the food they needed.

Quote:

Didn't the Egyptians know that there was a flood which wiped them out? They seem to think that they had a continuous reign from long before Djoser circa 2600BCE straight through the flood era and on to the first intermediate period.

So they excluded the flood. The Sumerians didn't so why don't you use them in your argument instead of this cherry picking. As you see, the Egyptians did have a flood story:

Quote:

Egypt:
People have become rebellious. Atum said he will destroy all he made and return the earth to the Primordial Water which was its original state. Atum will remain, in the form of a serpent, with Osiris. [Faulkner, plate 30] (Unfortunately the version of the papyrus with the flood story is damaged and unclear. See also Budge, p. ccii.)

http://www.crystalinks.com/floodstories.html

Quote:

As you can see, the membership in the Flat Earth Society hasn't quite died out

youre mistaken. I have never been a member and the Bible never teaches there was a flat earth.

Quote:

As with many other earth sciences, one uses over lapping records to provide the continuum.

One of the many errors in the secular dating systems.

Quote:

Earth Crust Displacement was his rationale for that jumble of allegedly frozen bones which you cite as evidence for your mythical flood. In this case, that theory is all you can hang your hat on and it is worthless.

You need to comprehend better as I never 'hung my hat' on his theory but cited his recording of the discoveries. There is a big difference between the two acts.

Johnny Skeptic · 03-17-2010, 02:25 PM

Message to archaeologist: Would you like to discuss the global flood at the Evolution/Creation forum?

funinspace · 03-17-2010, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archaeologist

youre mistaken. I have never been a member and the Bible never teaches there was a flat earth.

Oh, the ironies.... But you are correct, in that the "Bible never teaches". Humans do that, and humans have a massive legacy of teaching gibberish, that they claim derives clearly from their holy book, cuz it says so. Funny how that teaching has to keep evolving to adjust to science and knowledge...

Quote:

One of the many errors in the secular dating systems.

Nice vacuous claim. But it is still funny how we get all those details right on the trajectory from earth to Mars, and then get the landing right from 40 million miles away; but just can't get those rings figured out right...

Johnny Skeptic · 03-17-2010, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archaeologist

The Bible never teaches there was a flat earth.

Yes it does, as I showed in my new thread.

arnoldo · 03-17-2010, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by archaeologist

The Bible never teaches there was a flat earth.

Yes it does, as I showed in my new thread.

The Bible also teaches that the world is only 6,000 years old. :constern02:

Johnny Skeptic · 03-17-2010, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The Bible also teaches that the world is only 6,000 years old.

But you do not believe that the Bible teaches that, do you? Your buddy Dr. Hugh Ross certainly doesn't. http://www.reasons.org/deep-core-tests-age-earth

arnoldo · 03-17-2010, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The Bible also teaches that the world is only 6,000 years old.

But you do not believe that the Bible teaches that, do you? Your buddy Dr. Hugh Ross certainly doesn't. http://www.reasons.org/deep-core-tests-age-earth

My "Buddy" Glenn Morton also doesn't believe the flood was global.

Quote:

I believe the historicity of the Genesis account of the Flood because the Bible does NOT teach a global flood. The word which refers to 'earth' and is used in Genesis 6-9 is the word 'eretz'. Young-earthers translate that as meaning 'planet earth'. But is that what the word really means? The word which is translated as 'earth' in Genesis 6 is 'eretz'. Abraham was told to leave his 'eretz' and go to an 'eretz' which God would show him. If 'eretz' means 'planet earth' then Abram was disobedient to God because he didn't get in a rocketship and go to Mars. Since we know Abram was obedient, and left his 'eretz', (country/land) we have no problem accepting this translation of 'eretz' as a local area but strangely YEers will argue strongly that 'eretz' in Genesis 6-9 must mean 'planet earth' rather than a localized area of the earth. This is inconsistent.

Some will argue that the phrase 'under the whole heaven' means global. The word 'heaven' has a connotation of the visible vault of the sky. Thus, even this phrase does not require a global flood.

Since the Genesis account does not require a global flood, it means that the earth can be old and still agree with Genesis.

Why I Believe Genesis is Historically Accurate

Minimalist · 03-17-2010, 04:20 PM

Quote:

it means that the earth can be old and still agree with Genesis.

Or, it means that the earth is old and genesis means nothing at all.

arnoldo · 03-17-2010, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Quote:

it means that the earth can be old and still agree with Genesis.

Or, it means that the earth is old and genesis means nothing at all.

If genesis teaches the earth is only 6,000 years old.

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

03-17-2010, 02:25 PM	#63
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to archaeologist: Would you like to discuss the global flood at the Evolution/Creation forum?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.