• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does life on other planets disprove the BIble

See OP

  • Total voters
    67
obvious Child said:
But when you look at the actual flood stories, very, very, very, very, very few of them have anything in common other than water. The source of water, the amount of damage, loss of life and reason for the flood differ extremely. Hard to say that Genesis flood myth is true in a literal sense when virtually no other culture shares the same story. True, floods occur all the time in history. That doesn't mean they were the same one.
Click to expand...

Well, when you look at languages (especially ancient ones), very, very, very few of them have anything in common other than the fact that they're utterances from the throat. Pronunciation, grammar, spelling, alphabets differ extremely. My point? Different peoples have different takes on things, especially when large distances in geography and a time-line separate them. Not to mention, things get lost or changed in Oral tradition, we know this from the game Telephone, and things get lost in translation in almost every language to the next. Not to say this proves it was real, just that we all have very similar information, we just interpret it differently, especially regarding early history.
 
EpicDude86 said:
I didn't know if I should apologize for making you spew all over your keyboard.

And do you like your DP with a nice Chianti?
Click to expand...

http://www.chianti.com/

"In 1995 it became legal to produce a Chianti with 100% Sangiovese. For a wine to retain the name of Chianti, it must be produced with at least 80% Sangiovese grapes.[2] A Chianti may have a picture of a black rooster (known in Italian as a gallo nero) on the neck of the bottle, which indicates that the producer of the wine is a member of the "Gallo Nero" Consortium; an association of producers of the Classico sub-area sharing marketing costs.[3] Since 2005 the black rooster has been the emblem of the Chianti Classico producers association.[4] Aged Chianti (38 months instead of 4-7), may be labeled as Riserva. Chianti that meets more stringent requirements (lower yield, higher alcohol content and dry extract) may be labeled as Chianti Superiore. Chianti from the "Classico" sub-area is not allowed in any case to be labeled as "Superiore"."

Yes I do..;)
 
Last edited:
EpicDude86 said:
Well, when you look at languages (especially ancient ones), very, very, very few of them have anything in common other than the fact that they're utterances from the throat. Pronunciation, grammar, spelling, alphabets differ extremely.
Click to expand...

Rubbish!

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_grammar]Universal grammar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
EpicDude86 said:
Well, when you look at languages (especially ancient ones), very, very, very few of them have anything in common other than the fact that they're utterances from the throat. Pronunciation, grammar, spelling, alphabets differ extremely. My point? Different peoples have different takes on things, especially when large distances in geography and a time-line separate them.
Click to expand...

That's not exactly a great argument for why dissimilar floods are really the same one.

And especially when flood stories around the world aren't global in aspect, don't kill many people and recede relatively quickly. It takes a great many telephone games to turn a global, mass killer into a river flood that kills few.

Not to mention the sheer lack of any empirical evidence for such a global flood. The belief in a global flood requires a believer to reject principles of water they can test in their own sink. That alone is enough to reject it as history.
 
obvious Child said:
That's not exactly a great argument for why dissimilar floods are really the same one.
Click to expand...

I wasn't going one way or another, just saying it's a possibility.

obvious Child said:
And especially when flood stories around the world aren't global in aspect, don't kill many people and recede relatively quickly. It takes a great many telephone games to turn a global, mass killer into a river flood that kills few.

Not to mention the sheer lack of any empirical evidence for such a global flood. The belief in a global flood requires a believer to reject principles of water they can test in their own sink. That alone is enough to reject it as history.
Click to expand...

Who knows. Just saying, **** gets lost in translation and flood evidence goes away. And when you don't know there's a whole world out there when it does flood, all that you see getting flooded is your land.
 
paris said:
Indeed; but it is well substanciated, and it beautifully contradicts your blanket claim.

:nails
Click to expand...

I was merely offering a different viewpoint. And as if the Universal Grammar theory is without critics? Not to mention I made subsequent updates in my opinion.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
It's like schrodinger's cat. . . .until you find out the fate of the cat in the box you have to believe that it is both dead and alive.
Click to expand...
Never bought that one.
Its alive or its dead. You just do not know which; that you do not know which doesn't mean much.
 
Goobieman said:
Never bought that one.
Its alive or its dead. You just do not know which; that you do not know which doesn't mean much.
Click to expand...
In theory the cat exists in both quantum states until the probability wave is broken (e.g. a measurement/observation transpires).

This is an example of why folks have such a difficult time wrapping their mind around quantum physics. It is not at all intuitive.
 
Tashah said:
In theory the cat exists in both quantum states until the probability wave is broken (e.g. a measurement/observation transpires).
Click to expand...
Sure, that's the theory. Practice is obviously different as dead/alive is a binary operation.

Now, if you're talking about quantum mechanics and the position, etc, of electrons, you're discussing something different than a live or dead cat. What we call 'unpredictable', 'random' and 'unquantifiabile' aren't -really- any of these things, we simply do not comprehend the laws of physics to the point where we can, with certainty, describe the operation in queston.
 
Goobieman said:
Sure, that's the theory. Practice is obviously different as dead/alive is a binary operation.
Click to expand...
Substitute an electron for the cat.

Same principle.

Observing the decaying isotope will cause the probability wave to break. The state of the cat (electron) is an unknown until this juncture.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
It's just a term :) It's neutral.

I'm quite scientific about things, though - I believe that anything's a possiblity unless it can be proven false or impossible.

It's like Schrodinger's cat. . . .until you find out the fate of the cat in the box you have to believe that it is both dead and alive.

So - I believe that God can very well exist as any one belief might think of him - or in a way which no one on earth has thought of before.

Unless we can absolutely prove he does *not* exist - we have to presume that his existance is a possibility. (a non believer could reverse it and it would make sense that way, too . . .have to believe he doesn't exist unless someone can, otherwise, prove without a doubt that he does exist).

Now - what is the nature of Gods existance is up for human interpretation and opinion and, in that regard, Schrodinger's cat does not apply.

That's just my opinion, anyway.
Click to expand...

FINALLY! I CAN USE THIS!!!
epicdude86-albums-stuff-picture1168-erwin-schroedinger.png
 
EpicDude86 said:
Who knows. Just saying, **** gets lost in translation and flood evidence goes away.
Click to expand...

Flood evidence doesn't go away like that. Strata containing fossils just don't disappear. What we should see in a global flood is similar mass and sized organisms in the same strata, aka woolly mammoths, mastodons, moderately large theropods from all the Dinosaur eras, early large carnivores and modern African elephants in the same layer. That happens nowhere. Furthermore, we should see small dinosaurs in the same layer with medium sized mammals from all eras. Again, no evidence of that anywhere. Flood believers come up with total bat**** arguments like mammals outran dinosaurs. Apparently they think Giant sloths are more nimble then Coelophysis :rofl. Furthermore, slightly MORE complex clams were able to outlive slightly less complex claim entirely as a species without a single member of the less complex outliving a single member of a more complex. **** makes no sense. Furthermore, we should see types of material sorted by density and weight globally. That doesn't happen anywhere aside from major catastrophes such as the asteroid that killed off the dinos that left a uniform iridium layer across the planet. There frankly is no evidence whatsoever that a global flood ever occurred.

When a belief system argues that hydrological sorting by mass and density doesn't occur despite being shown true in your sink, that belief is absolute garbage.
 
obvious Child said:
Flood evidence doesn't go away like that. Strata containing fossils just don't disappear. What we should see in a global flood is similar mass and sized organisms in the same strata, aka woolly mammoths, mastodons, moderately large theropods from all the Dinosaur eras, early large carnivores and modern African elephants in the same layer. That happens nowhere. Furthermore, we should see small dinosaurs in the same layer with medium sized mammals from all eras. Again, no evidence of that anywhere. Flood believers come up with total bat**** arguments like mammals outran dinosaurs. Apparently they think Giant sloths are more nimble then Coelophysis :rofl. Furthermore, slightly MORE complex clams were able to outlive slightly less complex claim entirely as a species without a single member of the less complex outliving a single member of a more complex. **** makes no sense. Furthermore, we should see types of material sorted by density and weight globally. That doesn't happen anywhere aside from major catastrophes such as the asteroid that killed off the dinos that left a uniform iridium layer across the planet. There frankly is no evidence whatsoever that a global flood ever occurred.

When a belief system argues that hydrological sorting by mass and density doesn't occur despite being shown true in your sink, that belief is absolute garbage.
Click to expand...


What I was saying is that it might have APPEARED to be a worldwide flood to people because what they saw get flooded, was the only world they knew. Do you think they had any idea what was farther than their borders in ancient times?? Most of these stories pre-date continent spanning (or even region spanning) peoples.


SO let's say some backwater tribe in Asia gets flooded out. They percieve that the World, actually the known world to them, gets flooded. And then add to that translation issues, which apparently aren't possible because of the Universal Grammar theory that paris brought up...cause...ya know how ancient languages were about as different as Italian and Spanish...


and wtf...Clams? really? CLAMS?! Don't bring the clams into this because you KNOW what picture I'm going to post...

EDIT: Too late.

gooey_duck1.jpg
 
Last edited:
EpicDude86 said:
What I was saying is that it might have APPEARED to be a worldwide flood to people because what they saw get flooded, was the only world they knew. Do you think they had any idea what was farther than their borders in ancient times?? Most of these stories pre-date continent spanning (or even region spanning) peoples.
Click to expand...

Most likely the black sea flooded, got written into the Epic of Gilgamesh, which followed the trade routes, got written into the Enuma Elish, traveled further down the trade routes and ended up in the oral traditions of the Israelites who then wrote it into the Torah. Other flood myths are likely because places in the world flood, simple fact of living on this planet. That doesn't equate to a single global flood ever happening.

I have yet to see even a half baked argument to support a global flood based on actual scientific evidence.
 
obvious Child said:
I have yet to see even a half baked argument to support a global flood based on actual scientific evidence.
Click to expand...

Now that is surprising, as the conspiracy forum is filled with half-baked theories of all colors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom