• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Biblical Flood? Fish, squid, and shrimp fossils in the mountains of Lebanon and Peru

DOC said:
Then you don't believe the world was one continent at one time and broke up into several continents as many scientists believe.

From the article: Pangea

"The idea of a single continent breaking up into the ones we have today was first proposed in 1859 by creationist Antonio Snider-Pellegrini, partly on the basis of the description in Genesis 1:9-10 .[1] However, the idea was not accepted by others at the time. Even after Wegener resurrected the idea, it took another half century before it came to be widely accepted.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Pangea

And there is no rule that God couldn't have created new species after the flood.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that Pangea was still one land mass 6000 years ago? And everything moved to where it is since then?

If 'god' could have solved things with a miracle, then 'god' deciding to kill everyone because 'god' blew it is unspeakably evil.
 
DOC said:
He also said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their hearts. This implies things had changed and people could handle his new laws whereas they didn't have the ability before. Even Christ told the apostles there are some things you can't bear at this time.

In the verse Christ was talking about fulfillment and accomplishing... Also what exactly he means by the "The Law" is not exactly clear. Also the quote you gave is not in context. When he talks of commands he could have been talking about what he just commanded above the verse you mentioned. For example the command to shine your light before others.
Click to expand...

Gee, if only "The Law and the Prophets" were a colloquialism to the editors and redactors of the collected stories that have come to be called the bible...
 
DOC said:
Ad hom fallacy. This ad hom fallacy occurs every time I mention this site and the fallacy will probably continue in the future.
Click to expand...

Since an argumentum ad hominem is an argument "to (or against) the man", who (or what) is "the man" against which (or whom) the argument that Conservi-("E-MC2 is 'liberal claptrap' ")-pedia is a...questionable...source is raised?

You should consider learning what an argumentum ad hominem actually isbefore you pretend to use it again.

At least you did not call this one an "invisible ad hom"...
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
He also said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their hearts. This implies things had changed and people could handle his new laws whereas they didn't have the ability before. Even Christ told the apostles there are some things you can't bear at this time.

In the verse Christ was talking about fulfillment and accomplishing... Also what exactly he means by the "The Law" is not exactly clear. Also the quote you gave is not in context. When he talks of commands he could have been talking about what he just commanded above the verse you mentioned. For example the command to shine your light before others.
Click to expand...
So previously, people had to be killed by flood because they couldn't follow the rules. But, people are better now??
 
DOC said:
Ad hom fallacy. This ad hom fallacy occurs every time I mention this site and the fallacy will probably continue in the future.
Click to expand...
Yes, I will laugh everytime you use it as a source. Because it is a terrible source.
 
Slowvehicle said:
Are you saying that Pangea was still one land mass 6000 years ago? And everything moved to where it is since then?
Click to expand...
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
 
Last edited:
joobz said:
Yes, I will laugh everytime you use it as a source. Because it is a terrible source.
Click to expand...
Then you would prefer not to know that the originator of Pangaea partly got his idea from the bible or a Jesuit priest (Georges Lemaître) was the first to come up with the idea of the big bang.
 
DOC said:
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
Click to expand...

Say . . . what?
 
DOC said:
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
Click to expand...
And therefore unicorns.
 
DOC said:
Then you would prefer not to know that the originator of Pangaea partly got his idea from the bible or a Jesuit priest (Georges Lemaître) was the first to come up with the idea of the big bang.
Click to expand...
To put another way,if conservapedia said the sky was blue, I would have to confirm it with another source first.
Such is there quality.
 
DOC said:
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
Click to expand...

DOC: Let's play with this, a bit. How much energy do you suppose it would take to squish two pieces of Pangea into each other so hard that the Himalayas were lifted 5 miles into the air? Round numbers will do...

Genesis also mentions a Talking SnakeTM, the Burning BushTM, and two completely contradictory (and contrary-to-fact) creation myths. How does that make it a reliable source for hydrologic information?

Read this: http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/hydro.html
 
DOC said:
Then you would prefer not to know that the originator of Pangaea partly got his idea from the bible or a Jesuit priest (Georges Lemaître) was the first to come up with the idea of the big bang.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of room in that "partly"--which part of the idea did the "originator of Pangea" get from the bible? (BTW: who are you calling the "originator of Pangea", and what is your source?)

The person who discovered the principles of genetics was an Augustinian Friar.

The people who established the stratigraphic column were (as much by default as anything else) "creationists".

Edward Jenner was an Anglican.

Trivia is fun!

None of that makes it at all possible that the continents Aesthenosphere-Hockeyed into their present configurations from a uniformly flat condition 6000 years ago.

Funny that the extant civilizations do not mention all (or any) of that land-mass surfing...
 
DOC said:
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
Click to expand...
Loosened thing up! You are saying the continents fragmented, and pieces travelled thousands of miles in a brief period of time because they had been soaked by the flood. This is surely a joke.
 
DOC said:
He also said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their hearts. This implies things had changed and people could handle his new laws whereas they didn't have the ability before. Even Christ told the apostles there are some things you can't bear at this time.

In the verse Christ was talking about fulfillment and accomplishing... Also what exactly he means by the "The Law" is not exactly clear. Also the quote you gave is not in context. When he talks of commands he could have been talking about what he just commanded above the verse you mentioned. For example the command to shine your light before others.
Click to expand...

Relevance to a biblical flood? Stop the darned preaching, or I'm telling.
 
DOC said:
It's a possibility since it would seem the entire earth being under water 150 days and "fountains of the deep" (mentioned in Genesis) shooting out water, could have loosened things up quite a bit for a subsequent sudden shift of land masses.
Click to expand...

I'm virtually certain that you won't know this but there are civilizations whose history pre-dates that. There was no global flood 6000 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom