Noah's Ark found?

[154]

154 is another one who seems to be incapable of actually responding to anything, but I live in hope.
154 did you not notice this?

It was in response to an earlier post of yours, yet you simply come back with more bible passages which, I am very confident, nobody will bother to read.
Try using your own words and ideas to explain what it is you want to say.

What? You want an example of kryptonite or skeptics quoting the Bible? From this thread? Why? Who cares?

and "what is the relevance" since you say "the fact that" it isn't literal? Says you. So what now? I disagree.

These were the important questions to you?!

 

[Complexity]

You're losing it, dude.

Kind of embarrasing to watch.

 

[154]

You're losing it, dude.

Kind of embarrasing to watch.

This tactic won't work either.

Only depends on what you mean- I either threw it away, or found what I won't let go of, but there is no losing.

 

[Marduk]

This tactic won't work either.

Only depends on what you mean- I either threw it away, or found what I won't let go of, but there is no losing.

Youre way off topic either way 154
why don't you try this simple question
Has the Ark been found ?

 

[154]

Has the Ark been found ?

I don't know.

To tell you the truth, I really haven't been paying close attention because I've heard this several times before. If there's any substantiation to this and it becomes clearer and it turns out to be true? Cool! Otherwise, it makes no difference.

So you can see why I sometimes use such situations to throw in related points, even if some are irritated by them, that irritation only confirms the delivery. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

 

[kerikiwi]

What? You want an example of kryptonite or skeptics quoting the Bible? From this thread? Why? Who cares?

and "what is the relevance" since you say "the fact that" it isn't literal? Says you. So what now? I disagree.

These were the important questions to you?!

Actually, the question I was mildly interested in was how the bible quote you gave proved that the ark story was literal.
And also where skeptics in this thread had randomly posted biblical quotes they 'didn't like'
You disagree? Well I had figued that out.
You believe the ark story is literal.
Why do you believe that when everything we know about the world says it couldn't have happened?

 

[kerikiwi]

So you can see why I sometimes use such situations to throw in related points, even if some are irritated by them, that irritation only confirms the delivery. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

Can you remind us of a 'related point' you threw in?

And someone being irritated?

 

[Marduk]

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

Perhaps you can be clearer then
what exactly is your message ?

 

[John Jones]

So you can see why I sometimes use such situations to throw in related points, ...

Where?

 

[Ladewig]

Why do you believe that when everything we know about the world says it couldn't have happened?

In other threads, 154 has questioned the value of using science to determine what we know about the world. From that, I infer that scientific evidence is of much greater value to you than it is to 154.

 

[154]

In other threads, 154 has questioned the value of using science to determine what we know about the world. From that, I infer that scientific evidence is of much greater value to you than it is to 154.

Nonsense. Typical deliberate distortion.
I question the value of scientists. I question men. I question people. No exceptions for the self-exalted orthodox priesthood of Science, Inc.

 

[Complexity]

Nonsense. Typical deliberate distortion.
I question the value of scientists. I question men. I question people. No exceptions for the self-exalted orthodox priesthood of Science, Inc.

Good scientists don't want any 'exceptions' - they are much more critical of themselves, their thought processes, and their reasoning than you are.

I include myself in this category, by the way.

 

[Simon39759]

Nonsense. Typical deliberate distortion.
I question the value of scientists. I question men. I question people. No exceptions for the self-exalted orthodox priesthood of Science, Inc.

You seem to be under the impression that scientists are a small cabal of back-padding self-congratulatory buddies.

In reality, the method of science is all about scientists looking at each other research for any sign of weakness or mistake. It can even sometime be quite harsh...
That's the reason why just about any mistake made by scientists have been corrected by other scientists.

 

[kerikiwi]

Nonsense. Typical deliberate distortion.
I question the value of scientists. I question men. I question people. No exceptions for the self-exalted orthodox priesthood of Science, Inc.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that the ark story is real?
You clearly didn't rely on evidence.

 

[154]

You seem to be under the impression that scientists are a small cabal of back-padding self-congratulatory buddies.

You seem to be under a misimpression concerning my impression. It's ok, I'm used to it.

"Small"? No, no, not small at all. Large. Very large. Extra Large. XXL.
And "cabal"? I hadn't thought of it that way, but yeah, that could work, that case could be made.
"Back-paddling"? Yes, I'm sure there's plenty of that with all men.
"Self-congratulatory buddies"? And I'm sure there is plenty of that with every clique, club, group of people.
Of course, there are those heretics in every crowd too, and they even have their own smaller clubs, and they are usually treated as such by those in entrenched power positions.

 

[Complexity]

You seem to be under a misimpression concerning my impression. It's ok, I'm used to it.

"Small"? No, no, not small at all. Large. Very large. Extra Large. XXL.
And "cabal"? I hadn't thought of it that way, but yeah, that could work, that case could be made.

I think that you are insane.

Utterly delusional and impervious to argument or reason.

 

[Simon39759]

You seem to be under a misimpression concerning my impression. It's ok, I'm used to it.

"Small"? No, no, not small at all. Large. Very large. Extra Large. XXL.
And "cabal"? I hadn't thought of it that way, but yeah, that could work, that case could be made.

So... my 'mis-impression of your impression' was... quite accurate in all the important parts?

 

[154]

I think that you are insane.

Utterly delusional and impervious to argument or reason.

Well... that's certainly a change in tactic anyway... give it a shot if you must.

So... my 'mis-impression of your impression' was... quite accurate in all the important parts?

Yeah, I suppose...
A small group would likely be insignificant, so it had to be more dominant and influential.
Otherwise, the rest was just what is common to all men.
No contention required here.

 

[Vortigern99]

154, since you are an eyewitness of bigfoot, who will concede no alternate explanation but that such animals exist, may I inquire as to whether you believe that bigfoot animals were on the ark?

 

[154]

154, since you are an eyewitness of bigfoot, who will concede no alternate explanation but that such animals exist, may I inquire as to whether you believe that bigfoot animals were on the ark?

Hey Vort, how are ya?
Yep, as crazy as it sounds I admit, while I haven't really given this much thought previously, perhaps because it is an uncomfortable position to hold, I would have to consider that a real possibility, as unlikely as that even seems to me. Other possibilities are limited.