How the Great Flood many have happened?

[_Bret Ripley]

Tell me about it. I tried Carbon 14 Dating and they tried to set me up with a conifer.

Did you buy her a fir coat?

C'mon, moksha ... you've got me on pines and needles.

[_SteelHead]

Did she spruce up for the date?

[_Bret Ripley]

Did she spruce up for the date?

Duh: he's not a sap, yew know.

[_bcuzbcuz]

and we see how they even deny science when it does not agree with their ego-entrenched positions.....sad really...but for them, as close to a concession as any other.

When you say "science", do you mean "science" like Discovermagazine.com's Scott Carney (November 2007 edition) whose merits are: an American investigative journalist. He contributes stories on a variety of medical, technological and ethical issues to Wired Magazine, Mother Jones (magazine), Playboy, Foreign Policy, Details (magazine) and National Public Radio.

Well, if it's good enough for Playboy, it's good enough for me.

Or do you mean "science" like the kind of 'gosh-darn hard research homework' kind of science produced at the Discovery channel's science section by Maria Trimarchi who lists Carney as one of her sources and further, that her merits are: Reasonably conversant in scientific and medical jargon, or how about: able to interpret research data and translate it to a consumer audience.

Wow, now that's what the world should call "science" and you're right, my

ego-entrenched positions

has difficulty accepting such drivel.

Check out the rest of "How Stuff Works"'s related articles: (Wow!!! real science!!)

Are there more floods now than there used to be?
Could Noah's ark really have happened?
How could it rain for 45 days straight?
How Creationism Works
How the Doomsday Ark Works

[Guest]

...

[_Drifting]

Did she spruce up for the date?

Duh: he's not a sap, yew know.

Did he take her to Coney Island...?

[_Themis]

How stuff works is junk science and it indoctrinates.

It's not junk science or science. It's just a site that has articles on many issues, many of which involve science. Some things will probably be accurate while other not. Fact checking is the responsibility of the reader, although that unfortunetly is far to lacking.

I don't think subgenious mentioned it ,but very coyly he likes to avoid the issue and maintain a certain element of plausibility. nothing wrong there , but your inability to avoid the feeling at odds trap , and ensueing tounge lashing everyone seems to feel compelled to respond with.

Subby is a troll who likes to avoid the issue and pretend he is an objective third party who is attacking anothers position. Problem is he has to change one's position much of the time in order to feel he is winning some debate.

Think before you respond ... subby does , and maybe think waht his response was meant to evoke.

If he did, he would not have made up such an obvious lie about other posters and what they thought.

[_Gunnar]

Though a secular point of view, it is funny how they think...
Please see: http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/di ... reat-flood

http://science.howstuffworks.com/nature ... flood1.htm

What you fail to recognize is that even if the author's speculation is correct, the scenario he described comes far short of a world-wide flood that covered the tops of the highest mountains and wiped out all human beings and land creatures on the entire face of the earth except for those supposedly saved by being passengers on a single boat.

Literal acceptance of the Flood myth in Genesis ignores the well documented fact that several ancient civilizations have continuous written histories that began well before any credible date for the Flood (based on a literal interpretation of Biblical chronology) and continue without interruption or mention of any such flood until well after the supposed date of the flood. If such a flood actually occurred, one would have to conclude that the ancient Sumerian, Elamite, Egyptian and other ancient civilizations (who all developed systems of writing well before the flood supposedly occurred) all cooperated in a massive conspiracy to falsify their own histories in order to mislead future generations into believing that this flood never occurred. Does anyone seriously believe that such a conspiracy is even slightly plausible?

[_LittleNipper]

Though a secular point of view, it is funny how they think...
Please see: http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/di ... reat-flood

http://science.howstuffworks.com/nature ... flood1.htm

What you fail to recognize is that even if the author's speculation is correct, the scenario he described comes far short of a world-wide flood that covered the tops of the highest mountains and wiped out all human beings and land creatures on the entire face of the earth except for those supposedly saved by being passengers on a single boat.

Literal acceptance of the Flood myth in Genesis ignores the well documented fact that several ancient civilizations have continuous written histories that began well before any credible date for the Flood (based on a literal interpretation of Biblical chronology) and continue without interruption or mention of any such flood until well after the supposed date of the flood. If such a flood actually occurred, one would have to conclude that the ancient Sumerian, Elamite, Egyptian and other ancient civilizations (who all developed systems of writing well before the flood supposedly occurred) all cooperated in a massive conspiracy to falsify their own histories in order to mislead future generations into believing that this flood never occurred. Does anyone seriously believe that such a conspiracy is even slightly plausible?

If Joseph Smith can concoct a fake history and call it the Book of Mormon --- and I believe he did, then civilizations can fabricate fake histories to uplift their own place in the world. What ruler would not wish to be considered a god. Egyptians, Chinese and Romans did it. Don't believe the Bible, but accept fables about dynasties that attempt to support the glories of kings.

[_ludwigm]

If Joseph Smith can concoct a fake history and call it the Book of Mormon --- and I believe he did, then civilizations can fabricate fake histories to uplift their own place in the world. What ruler would not wish to be considered a god. Egyptians, Chinese and Romans did it. Don't believe the Bible, but accept fables about dynasties that attempt to support the glories of kings.

Did You read Your comment before You submitted it?

You wrote: "civilizations can fabricate fake histories to uplift their own place in the world"
QED.

You accept one of them.
What makes it more acceptable than the other thousands?
Civilizations under Zeus, Odin, Quetzalcoatl (together with Tlaloc, Tezcatlipoca and Huitzilopochtli, I like them because of beautiful names and not because they were likeable in any way) and others.

Why Jehovah?
(Yehowah, Yahweh, YHWH, Adonai, יהוה , יְהֹוָה , Elohim, Κύριος , Dominus, Je-ho’vah, the LORD, אֲדֹנָי , אֱלֹהִים , ha-Shem, the name, Iehouah, Iehovah )
Has he (she? it?) more name than other gods? Does IT counts?

_________________
My additional signature:
"Where is the Graveyard of Dead gods? (link)"
I have a dime You will not read that.