Home | Community | Message Board

MushroomCube.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
creation science
    #5575892 - 04/30/06 11:36 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

i've been watching ~7 hours of dvd by "dr" kent hovind the famous creation science advocate and i'm getting tired of yelling at the tv so i bring it to you guys.

first off, PLEASE if you are ever trying to discredit evolution do NOT.. EVER.. say: "Chimpanzees are still reproducing, why don't they pop out a human nowadays?"

UGH

ok now on to our 6,000 year old earth discussion. I've learned most of his arguments so i'd be glad to give you a brief overview explaining anything you might have questions about if i can.

he claims that homo erectus, neandertal and most of the australopithacine samples we have are in fact modern homo sapiens with mutated, disfigured bones. in the case of the neandertal skull he had he said the person probably had this disease that caused bone disfigurment. Now I'm sure I have to be mistaken about something here, because this just sounds so ludacris. I have so many arguments against this.. i don't even know where to start. i doubt anyone really needs one, but we could discuss this if you want.

ok he believes in microevolution, but since he thinks macroevolution is horse shit he has to explain the variety of species fitting into the ark 4000 years ago (including dinosaurs). by the way, he believes that due to a higher concentration of oxygen in the air back then common lizards were able to grow for hundreds and thousands of years, hence, dinosaurs. whatever. ok so how could the thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of species fit onto the ark before the flood? His answer is that they took baby animals, and they only took generic forms of the animal. for example, they just took a "Dog" a "Cat" a "Monkey" and what we have now are just varied forms of those animals. Does anyone else see the flaw in his logic? First of all he doesn't believe in macroevolution... second of all, is it really possible that we have all the variety of species we have today in a mere 4,000 years? thirdly, im curious how noah fed all these animals for 40 days. Where did he get drinkable water? (I'm not joking) How would he feed thousands of herbivores? thousands of carnivores?

actually he claims that the ocean was not salt water 4000 years ago, so i suppose that would have been drinkable.

if anyone is curious about anything creation science related feel free to ask, and ill get you back with a completely insane answer!

if you'd like to defend creation science, by all means!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5575950 - 05/01/06 12:07 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

oh i have a question if anyone could think of a possible solution..

if the earth was completely flooded, up to the highest mountain top (for one it would be pretty fucking cold up there for all those baby animals on the ark), where did all the water go after the flood?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblaze2
The Witness
Male

Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5576018 - 05/01/06 12:35 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Whew see its guys like this man that give God loving people a bad name. Yes I believe God created the earth, but do I think he did it 6000 years ago? Of course not. Science has actually proved that one. Same with evolution of course its a fact, but that doesnt mean God couldnt have used it to make us does it? Its easy to reconcille Science adn God. Since science in a way is just really disceting God. Showing us little snippets of different things. I am convinced there is a God, but I know science doesnt lie.

If you look at the Genesis creation story it tells teh same story as scientists do with fewer and less descriptive words(because they werent invented yet). I'll post it up tomarrow all as I see it, but I'm too tired to do it right now.

As far as the deluge, well It was obviously exagerrated. There was probrobly some civilazation right before the "first" civilzations showed up. And it probrobly got completely annihilated in a flood. Think about this, if there is only one city in teh whole world, then if it was destroyed it would have litterally been their whole world. Humans tend to view society as their whole world. People have been doing it since we can remember, why should it have been any different back then?




Take a look at teh einstien quote in my sig

Peace

blaze2


--------------------
"Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein

"peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein

"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Thomas Jefferson

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: blaze2]
    #5576057 - 05/01/06 12:53 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

"For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth. " Gen 7:4

it seems pretty black and white to me. that is a quote from god by the way, he is even talking in the first person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblaze2
The Witness
Male

Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5576168 - 05/01/06 01:33 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

a man wrote that not God. Men write things black and white that is the power of the written word. God gave them a formless Idea. and in this case we know for a fact taht this story preceded all writen history. This is probrobly the first oral history humans ever had. Of course its wrong. Just like an everyday rumor that has changed hands a few times.

Dont fault God for that fault man.


--------------------
"Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein

"peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein

"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Thomas Jefferson

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: blaze2]
    #5576533 - 05/01/06 08:04 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

blaze, do you understand the magnitude of the problems your theory brings up for you? You are discrediting the bible, the foundation of christian doctrine. How can you believe something so enormous that is founded on something containing lies or that is flawed?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEmptySpace
Stranger
Registered: 04/20/06
Posts: 69
Last seen: 16 years, 9 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5576681 - 05/01/06 09:46 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

The Noah story was stolen from the Babylonians, who transcribed on a wall about 300 years before the pentateuch was written.  In reality, it was probably only a small section of land that was flooded by some sort of natural disaster.  In my opinion it was on a much smaller scale, than the whole earth being flooded.  :smile:

I heard this on some History Channel documentary. 


--------------------
We can't stop here - This is bat country.

-Duke--Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas


Edited by EmptySpace (05/01/06 09:48 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: EmptySpace]
    #5576707 - 05/01/06 10:02 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

The science of creationism has a really havy burden:
It has to define god, explain how he works, what is he made of, and explain the mechanics of miracles, otherwise its not science but mysticism.

I think current proponents of creationism are too much influence by religion. One can not be a serious scientist if he bases his theories in belief in religious books.
While I do think these people have a few interesting points, and I do have my doubts in the current theory of origins of human beings,
I will not take any kind of creationist "science" seriously untill someone comes up with a good self-explaining theory.
Saying that "father" made us, all in archaic english, is just not a theory, its child talk. If someone comes up with an idea who this father is, and how did he make us, and then demonstrates the experiment in a lab, I'll be the first one to accept the theory.

And by the way, why is this discussed in this forum and not in mysticism and religion?


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledorkus
don't look back
Registered: 04/12/04
Posts: 1,511
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5576726 - 05/01/06 10:14 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Thou shall not discuss in the Mysticism forum.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5576746 - 05/01/06 10:24 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Welcome back Woody !!! :heart:
(Opps, sorry wrong thread)


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5576932 - 05/01/06 11:32 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

"Creation Science" = oxymoron.

:tongue:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #5576933 - 05/01/06 11:32 AM (17 years, 8 months ago)

I started laughing so hard at this thread, tears are rolling down my face.

When I was in High School we actually had an in school club called the "Creation Club". What amazed me was that to make a club in our school, a teacher had to sponsor it. Luckily, we had one very cool teacher who helped us sponsor the "Free Thinkers Society" to counter these fervent evangelists spouting phrases they didn't even think about and only recited them from memory.

Because of the Creation Club, I have had the pleasure of talking and meeting Dr. Kent Hovind on two seperate occasions. The only redeeming Quality about this man was that he can shoot rubber bands extremely far.

Great Story #1: So, He comes to our school to give his hour long (abridged he claims) presentation. After school hours of course. By this time, our club has amassed more members than theirs, so we had about 20 people on one side of the auditorium, and they had about 30 people with them, because all their parents came with them (shocker).
He must have been given a heads up what we were about and that we would be attending, because he started out addressing us with his (then 100,000) offer to prove evolution.
He then goes on to say that he will offer half that amount of money, if we can prove that the earth is older than 6000 years.
We immediatly say "what about stars?"... he quickly dodges that question and tries to move onto other topics, but throughout his whole speech we kept on asking him about starlight but he kept claiming that we were using poor debate tactics like "Hit and Run" or "rapid fire".
The best part of the discussion though is when raucous guffaws filled the auditorium after he claimed that the Grand Canyon was created in under 200 years or some ridiculously low number.

By the end of his discussion he was noticeably flustered and started ignoring us. Once he was done, we left, but overheard him trying to coach the Creation team on how to get our science book thrown out and replaced by one that doesn't support evolution.

That was about 7 or 8 years ago. I have written him several e-mails in the "remember me?" fashion, but he has yet to reply.

The second time he came to our school, we somehow were not allowed to visit his presentation, but we waited in the hallways to ambush him. It was like a convicted child rapist running to their car with a jacket over their head... not literally, but that was about how he acted as he briskly walked to his car with us yelling "starlight!".


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5577118 - 05/01/06 12:19 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

ya he shoots the rubber bands in this dvd too.
OldWood, we had a creation science proponent and professor from biola university come debate at my college a few weeks ago with a doctor in biology and philosophy. He agreed that creation science should not be taught in schools at least until a valid general theory that can stand next to evolution is proposed.

creation science is too heavily grounded in religion and not enough in science to be unlaughable.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5577552 - 05/01/06 02:57 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

There is another potential problem with this creationism...

there are 3 levels of creationism:

1. creation of universe
2. creation of earth ecosystem
3. creation of man

it is often unclear which level we are discussing.
The first one goes beyond the very definition of science, so it is pointless to discuss it


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5577569 - 05/01/06 03:01 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
"Creation Science" = oxymoron.

:tongue:




Is it? What about creation of electronics, TV's, robots, drugs, genetic engineering. It's all creation in a very god-like manner and it's all science


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5577659 - 05/01/06 03:27 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Those things are all man-made, testable, replicable, with ample evidence of the creation process. Creationism has the Bible.

How are those things created in a god-like manner? You mean they were made by an invisible man in the sky? They took six days to make & then He rested? Do genetic engineers also turn people into pillars of salt?


Edited by Veritas (05/01/06 03:31 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5577867 - 05/01/06 04:26 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

if the earth was completely flooded, up to the highest mountain top (for one it would be pretty fucking cold up there for all those baby animals on the ark), where did all the water go after the flood?

Actually, to be completely fair, if the Earth were flooded to 30,000 feet or so (the hight of Everest), then the temperature at the new sea level would be comparable to what it is at our current sea level. This is because the lapse-rate (the rate at which temperature falls with altitude) is a function of the barometric pressure (and a few other details not important here). The barometric pressure at the sea surface on a flooded Earth would be about 1,000 millibars, same as now.

Still, where all that water came from and where it went should be explained by proponents of Creation/Bible non-Science if they want to be taken seriously.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5578113 - 05/01/06 05:11 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
Those things are all man-made, testable, replicable, with ample evidence of the creation process. Creationism has the Bible.

How are those things created in a god-like manner? You mean they were made by an invisible man in the sky? They took six days to make & then He rested? Do genetic engineers also turn people into pillars of salt?




And human beings are not recreatable, retestable? I bet they'd be able to make your grandma all with her old bathroom habits if you payed enough.

Creationism doesn't have the Bible as its origin, creationism is often used by christians to promote their beliefs. Creationism itself is a philosophical idea.
Because of christians creationism will never be really taken seriously

The myth of creation in the bible is like a poem, which is clear from its style. And besides, where exactly are terms like "spirit" clearly defined in the bible?
Your definition of words like that come from cartoons like Casper the friendly ghost.
Plus, you seem to forget that Bible was written by people, maybe they were inspired, maybe not, but they were all stupid and like children, and how would such a text come out any differently?

Tell me, how would you describe act of creating a sony robot to a medival man? Surely you wouldn't speak of transistors and capacitors, you'd say something like:
I made a man out of metal, and I put life into him


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: Diploid]
    #5578120 - 05/01/06 05:14 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
if the earth was completely flooded, up to the highest mountain top (for one it would be pretty fucking cold up there for all those baby animals on the ark), where did all the water go after the flood?

Actually, to be completely fair, if the Earth were flooded to 30,000 feet or so (the hight of Everest), then the temperature at the new sea level would be comparable to what it is at our current sea level. This is because the lapse-rate (the rate at which temperature falls with altitude) is a function of the barometric pressure (and a few other details not important here). The barometric pressure at the sea surface on a flooded Earth would be about 1,000 millibars, same as now.

Still, where all that water came from and where it went should be explained by proponents of Creation/Bible non-Science if they want to be taken seriously.




well obviously not all of earth was flooded, the current scientific ideas of a big flood in mezopotamia or wherever certainly doesn't suggest all earth was flooded. Though It mights seem like that to the primitive uneducated man.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5578146 - 05/01/06 05:20 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

right, and for that to happen it would take the moon to be stationary at a certain point and increase its pull exponentially greater than now.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5578247 - 05/01/06 05:51 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

psilocyberin said:
right, and for that to happen it would take the moon to be stationary at a certain point and increase its pull exponentially greater than now.




surely you can come up with more plausable scenarios


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5578275 - 05/01/06 06:02 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

for 30,000 feet of water to stay elevated in one spot? not really.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5578287 - 05/01/06 06:06 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Why 30 000 feet?


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5578406 - 05/01/06 06:44 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

ok, take whatever number sounds reasonable to you, then apply some logical explanation for why that height of water would possibly remain in one area, and why it wouldn't spread out evenly.

Maybe back then, water had triple its viscocity.... thats a good explanation. yeah.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5578438 - 05/01/06 06:56 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

how about we all just ask god when we get to heaven what really happened


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5578442 - 05/01/06 06:58 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

psilocyberin said:
ok, take whatever number sounds reasonable to you, then apply some logical explanation for why that height of water would possibly remain in one area, and why it wouldn't spread out evenly.

Maybe back then, water had triple its viscocity.... thats a good explanation. yeah.




Well saying it didn't happen isn't helping to solve it. The flood was mentioned in more sources that just Bible.

It is typical of modern science to answer to those questions which it doesn't have answers with "I didn't happen" or "It's all in your head"

Its' because modern scientists are rushing to answer all questions. It's like they are thinking, lets get it over with, I'm tired with questions, lets answer everything with what knowledge we have now so we can go home..

Every myth is a distortion of some reality. Some myths were proven some are still in question, but nobody ever proved that a single myth was a figment of someones imagination.

Those people, who were writing the bible we inspired by something, something was going on there at the time, otherwise they wouldn't kill people for not remembering the stories correctly, they must have thought the stories were important. It wasn't entertainment, it was human interpretation of some events.

Saying that everything in every religious text ever writen is a lie is illogical, because there is just no motif for so many lies on one place.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5578452 - 05/01/06 07:00 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

fearfect said:
how about we all just ask god when we get to heaven what really happened




That must be the smartest thing said in this thread, regardless of wheather it was sarcasm or a honest statement (it works both ways)


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5578478 - 05/01/06 07:08 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Im not saying the flood didn't happen.

Im just wondering how you could justifiably claim that "well, the flood only happened in this sector of the earth, and happened to stay at a phenomenal level for X amount of days".


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBasilides
Servent ofWisdom
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5578479 - 05/01/06 07:08 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

The creation versus evolution debate is so 1990's..


--------------------


"Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: SneezingPenis]
    #5578513 - 05/01/06 07:20 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

psilocyberin said:
Im not saying the flood didn't happen.

Im just wondering how you could justifiably claim that "well, the flood only happened in this sector of the earth, and happened to stay at a phenomenal level for X amount of days".




Well I'm not suggesting that It just floated there, mesopotamia is a valley connected with persian gulf.
The Bible mentions rain. There are two great rivers in mesopotamia, rivers tend to cause floods, sometimes you get 4 meters of watter for just a little flood around rivers covering entire houses that happens every year almost. It happened this year too in many parts of Europe.
I imagine a "great" affecting an entire region could cause catastrophic raise in watter level around rivers.

And I'm not suggesting the watter just stayed there, but constant rain could keep it on a steady level even though it was constantly being drained into the persian gulf. When the rain stoped, it would drain slowly into the ocean.

If we are going to talk about gods, If I were a god, I'd cause a heavy climatic disorder in that region. Considering the geography of that region, it would take only a fraction of water that is on earth (or even in the atmosphere) to flood that region

http://www.colorado.edu/geography/courses/geog_1982_s05/mesopotamia.jpg

If most of the advanced civilisation of that time was concentrated in mesopotamia, such a flood would literally result in destruction of human civilisation, and all that would be left would be small nomad tribes around the world.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5579144 - 05/01/06 09:31 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

constant rain could keep it on a steady level even though it was constantly being drained into the persian gulf

Mesopotamia is surrounded by high terrain, including mountains a few hundred kilometers to the north that range upwards of 4000 meters high.

Heavy rain might flood the Tigris/Euphrates flood plane but not the nearby higher land.

I don't buy the 'local rain flood' explanation.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: creation science [Re: Diploid]
    #5581307 - 05/02/06 12:24 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Somewhere I heard about a new discovery, that huge amounts of water are stored somewhere in the upper athmosphere. I did a quick google, but didn't find that, damned. I will try again.


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: creation science [Re: fearfect]
    #5582003 - 05/02/06 04:25 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Creation science...a true oxymoron...


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: creation science [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #5582022 - 05/02/06 04:31 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

:lol:  I already said that.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5582041 - 05/02/06 04:36 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

I didn't read the whole thread....you are welcome to full credit.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #5582067 - 05/02/06 04:46 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
Creation science...a true oxymoron...




assuming the idea of creationism is true, wouldn't you want to build a science around it to describe it, analise it?

Does that mean, if such an idea is true we should abandon science and stop trying to understand the act of creation?


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: creation science [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #5582070 - 05/02/06 04:46 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Nah, I cut up my credit cards years ago, I don't want any more credit. :grin:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5582078 - 05/02/06 04:49 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

"assuming the idea of creationism is true"

I never assume.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5582083 - 05/02/06 04:50 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

...maybe, but the interest rate is really low...


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: creation science [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #5582092 - 05/02/06 04:52 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Are you saying that you're not interested in what I posted?  :wink:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOldWoodSpecter
waiting
Male

Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
Re: creation science [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #5582098 - 05/02/06 04:54 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
"assuming the idea of creationism is true"

I never assume.




there is no thought without assumption

When you think about what do you currently have in your fridge without looking in it, you have to assume that you still have your fridge, that someone didn't steal it etc.
When you think about how atoms work, you have to assume they exist.
etc.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
Re: creation science [Re: Veritas]
    #5582106 - 05/02/06 04:55 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

I wish I had caught that, but my pun was unintentional...


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: creation science [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #5582881 - 05/02/06 08:06 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Somewhere I heard about a new discovery, that huge amounts of water are stored somewhere in the upper athmosphere.

There are about 10 grams of water per cubic meter of air, on average. This is a lot of water compared to a swimming pool, but it's a drop compared to the ocean.

Condensing ALL the water out of the air would raise sea level less than a meter.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5582890 - 05/02/06 08:08 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

assuming the idea of creationism is true, wouldn't you want to build a science around it to describe it, analise it?

Hell yes!

And the moment the very first, tiny, micro-scrap of evidence supporting it turns up, I'll be the first to support its study. Until then, Creation (non)Science is the Flying Spaghetti Monster by another name.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinequillini
one meanmotorscooter
Male

Registered: 04/18/06
Posts: 255
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: creation science [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #5582899 - 05/02/06 08:10 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

OldWoodSpecter said:
Quote:

Huehuecoyotl said:
"assuming the idea of creationism is true"

I never assume.




there is no thought without assumption

When you think about what do you currently have in your fridge without looking in it, you have to assume that you still have your fridge, that someone didn't steal it etc.
When you think about how atoms work, you have to assume they exist.
etc.




Assumptions are made on the basis of probability, unless one believes in magic (Christians). For example, I assume my fridge is still there and everything is as I left it because, all things considered, that is most likely (though not necessarily) the case. If I come home and find my door has been busted open, all assumptions about the contents of my place are called into question. Most likely, a burglar isn't going to raid my fridge, but obviously my place in general got raided, so I then assume that everything has been tampered with until an inventory check proves otherwise. Such an inventory check would involve looking into the fridge.

We assume atoms to exist because, of all the phenomena we have observed, the model of the atom is the simplest, most consistent explanation we have. Furthermore, the model of the atom can be used to predict phenomena that has not yet been observed. That such predictions turn out to be accurate (atom bomb detonation) is testament to the accuracy of the model.

Assuming creationism to be true (not the philosophical notion of order among chaos, but specifically the biblical intelligent design model) involves assuming the absolute truth of the bible. Intelligent design takes all of its cues from the bible, and goes out of its way to conform to a literal interpretation of it. It is convoluded, far from comprehensive (the bible never mentions other planets, or even other continents), has zero predictive ability, and is not falsifiable. One can only conclude that if the bible makes some claim that runs contrary to everything we know about the world around us, then the bible is most likely wrong (granted this is an assumption, but like I said, all we can go on is probability). Furthermore, the bible is an ancient text among many ancient texts. To use it as a basis for a scientific model is arbitrary.

The theory of evolution has itself evolved, and one could say it is still flawed. But to say it is just as flawed as intelligent design is absurd.


--------------------
No; truth, being alive, was not halfway between anything. It was only to be found by continuous excursions into either realm, and though proportion is the final secret, to espouse it at the outset is to insure sterility.

Only connect...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefearfect
Registered: 01/15/04
Posts: 1,845
Loc: Flag
Re: creation science [Re: quillini]
    #5584184 - 05/02/06 11:53 PM (17 years, 8 months ago)

the debate at UTexas a few weeks ago with Dr. Paul Nelson of Biola University, (a christian college) who supported intelligent design, was really interesting. We had a panel of UT professors along with Dr. Nelson's counter-debater. Nelson had been trying his hardest to leave God, especially the christian god, out of the debate. During the time where the panel got to ask Nelson questions, he was accused that intelligent design is not a theory and is founded on a non scientific belief in god. Nelson responded "When have I said anything about god?". At the same time, behind him his screensaver came up over his powerpoint presentation revealing the scrolling marquee "Nature is God's art".

The whole auditorium cracked up.

Anyway, the debate revealed how little science is involved in intelligent design. I was concluded on both sides that since there is yet to be any evidence and absolutely no scientific general theory, that it should absolutely not be taught in schools in place of or even beside evolution.

There are a few theories being developed by the people at Biola, but they deal with why evolution couldn't have happened more than being able to stand in its own feet.

The theories mentioned by nelson were the irreducible complexity, information mechanisms, and specified complexity.

I can go into more detail if anyone cares about these theories, but generally they are very abstract and very hard to prove anything.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* evolution or creationism?
( 1 2 3 all )
top 5,371 54 11/17/05 09:19 PM
by Moonshoe
* I want to debate a "creation scientist".
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )
Phluck 16,415 232 12/01/04 04:26 PM
by Diploid
* Bush Wants Kids Taught 'Intelligent Design' In Biology Class
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
DiploidM 14,158 102 08/10/05 12:54 AM
by MushmanTheManic
* Fairness in Science Ravus 851 12 08/10/05 05:32 PM
by Ravus
* Intelligent Design
( 1 2 all )
djd586 3,245 22 12/18/03 03:32 PM
by fireworks_god
* The Problem With The Intelligent Design Debate
( 1 2 3 all )
Divided_Sky 4,985 42 10/06/05 05:05 PM
by dr0mni
* How would one go about testing the Intelligent Design Theory?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
dr0mni 11,879 103 05/17/09 02:49 AM
by Darwinian
* Einstein A Father of Science Believed in GOD...
( 1 2 3 all )
BleedingSickness 6,076 42 10/07/02 02:00 PM
by Zahid

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,383 topic views. 0 members, 8 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.041 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 14 queries.