Fables vs. Restored Truths

[_Tobin]

There is so much evidence that it is almost undeniable. The are literally hundreds of pieces of evidence, not the least of which bones of whales found 440 feet, 500 feet, and even 600 feet above sea level.

You keep saying that gdemetz, but you need to cite real scientific articles and evidence. I think when you go looking, you'll find an appalling lack of anything credible.

[_gdemetz]

OK Tobin, check out geologist Russel C. Hussey's find of Michigan's fossil whales.

[_ludwigm]

OK Tobin, check out geologist Russel C. Hussey's find of Michigan's fossil whales.

I am not Tobin, but:

from http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/michwls.html:

Michigan's Fossil Whales
The discovery of fossil whale bones in Michigan has been a source of some embarrassment for the conventional geologic story of the history of the Great Lakes region, and the notion that the area has remained above sea level for 290 million years since the end of the Pennsylvanian period, as whale fossils are obviously evidence that the land was submerged beneath the sea.

Whaaaat? 290 million years?

Before, after, or during the global flood?

It would be better for You to read Your references before cite them...

at least the first paragraph!

[_Bond James Bond]

Yes, that's true, but I don't think that applied to the sea creatures, or those that could survive in the seas such as amphibians, etc. So, if there were some land animals who were not on the ark, or at least led to a place other than the "face of the earth," possibly a place with high mountains that weren't covered by water, then they would have been destroyed.

What part about the Bible saying "I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.” (NIV Gen 7-4) suggests God didn't mean "every living creature"? You posit a mountain top survival except "The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits." (NIV Gen 7-20).

You further argue that sea life lived but "Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark." (NIV Gen 7-21-24) That's a lot of redundancy to leave caveats when it should be assumed that only Noah and the Ark animals survived.

[_Bond James Bond]

OK Tobin, check out geologist Russel C. Hussey's find of Michigan's fossil whales.

I am not Tobin, but:

from http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/michwls.html:

Michigan's Fossil Whales
The discovery of fossil whale bones in Michigan has been a source of some embarrassment for the conventional geologic story of the history of the Great Lakes region, and the notion that the area has remained above sea level for 290 million years since the end of the Pennsylvanian period, as whale fossils are obviously evidence that the land was submerged beneath the sea.

Whaaaat? 290 million years?

Before, after, or during the global flood?

It would be better for You to read Your references before cite them...

at least the first paragraph!

I'm going with the Hungarian on this one.

[_Bond James Bond]

There is so much evidence that it is almost undeniable. The are literally hundreds of pieces of evidence, not the least of which bones of whales found 440 feet, 500 feet, and even 600 feet above sea level.

I don't deny that. But seas dry up as plate tectonic movements change the level of bodies of water over millions of years. I lived in an area that is currently 5000+ feet above sea level that was part of an inland sea 200 million years ago.

[_ludwigm]

if there were some land animals who were not on the ark ... they would have been destroyed.

...the Bible saying "I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

I've censored it for Your over-sensitive eyes.

The original caricature can be shown here.

by the way
I was banned two weeks because of breasts and/or genitals.

... and nobody missed me ...

[_bcuzbcuz]

from http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/michwls.html:

This article is a load of hogswoller. Harrington is quoted as carbon dating the whale bones to be less than a thousand years old. A thousand years old??? That means that the great lakes have suddenly gone from salt water to fresh in less than a thousand years.

I suggest reading the following: http://greatlakesgazette.wordpress.com/ ... eat-lakes/

It's all about going whale watching on Lake Michigan

But please pay attention to the date of the article.

[_ludwigm]

from http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/michwls.html:

This article is a load of hogswoller.

Please tell it to gdemetz, it is his reference...
I've detected only the 290 million years expression.

[_Franktalk]

The scientific evidence means nothing. Either you believe in supernatural events or you do not. If you believe in supernatural events then evidence or the interpretation of evidence is unreliable because we have no idea how a supernatural event manifest. If however you don't believe in God and rest your faith on the knowledge of man then feel free to interpret any trace evidence anyway you wish. But for those who do tow the line with scientific projections back in time you should be careful just how factually you make your case. Because any day could bring new evidence which would overturn what you now feel is fact. But for those of us who have faith in the power of God we look forward to the coming of our Lord. For those who deny Him it will not be a good day. But have your fun until then. My faith is strong enough to withstand any and all of the scientific theories of man.

Since the late 1700's when the age of naturalism started man has formed a foundation of scientific theories. Many of these theories rest on assumptions which can not be proven or disproven. So all of science rest on assumptions of faith. So we stand on equal ground even though the average science type will never admit it. They all stand around and declare facts when they are indeed standing in a murky swamp with no foundation.

Take for instance the decay rates of radioactive elements. At one time these were thought of as fixed and unchanging. This led to the theory of dating using radioactive elements. But today we find that decay rates do change. So the assumption was in error. But the people who embrace these dates will not let go of what they consider fact. They refuse to even consider that is is possible that decay rates in the past were vastly different than today. Those reading this comment will ask for proof of what I say but I will offer no proof. Instead I will offer this piece of scripture.

Joh 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

So these men with Jesus standing before them and witnessing miracles would not change from the carnal nature or natural nature of men. So how can some believe when there is not a Messiah standing before them working miracles? And even then many would not follow but instead will embrace the world even today. So if the Son of the Father could not change the heart of man how can I form an argument that would make a difference. I can not. But I do have hope that all see the light and follow that light one day. Nothing is impossible with the Lord.