Why did man, after 2 million years, suddenly begin to scribble symbols into rocks? According to you, it couldn’t be for any particular reason. The first known writings of man are about 5,000 years old. This date in history just “happened” to coincide with the following verses in Gen 11:
7 “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
9 “Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
Maybe it was because a new method of communications was needed. Does your reasoning sound better, well, just because…
Fact:
Any claim of a particular date beyond 5,000 years using radiometric dating is an unfalsifiable claim. It cannot be proved or disproved.
What type of machine(car…computer…etc) simply evolved from the elements of the earth. They were designed and built by a creator. Just exactly how can any reasonable or logical person conclude a machine as complex as a man simply evolved from the elements of the earth.
Because answering machines hadn’t been invented yet? I’m not an expert on this but I dispute two points here: that writing “suddenly developed” rather than progressing gradually from things like cave paintings to symbols to something we would recognize as a language, and your proposed date means anything. If your theory is that people developed language in a hurry to write about the flood, you have to explain why they bothered - because they would have needed to teach everyone to read in a hurry. And you have to explain the evidence that writing systems were developing before that.
Where did I say that?
Not true, for reasons already given.
Unless you’re dealing in metaphors, a man is a living organism, not a machine. An overwhelming amount evidence shows that living organisms change over time.
So what about all this Bible stuff you’re giving us?
The Book of Rationalizations, 3:14 “And lo, the shark, which is a Bull Shark, shall grow most greatly in the mixing of the Waters and be called unto a Great White of the Large Teeth.”
Now your just flailing around. You can’t explain the gaping holes in the flood story, so you’re changing the subject.
Where’s the silt?
How did kangaroos get to Australia?
Why are Noah’s descendants so racially diverse?
Why don’t ice cores show any evidence of the flood?
This is particularly silly. We have ice core data going back hundreds of thousands of years. You can see the bands, just like with tree rings.
Someone who doesn’t have your best interests at heart has been lying to you. Why might that be?
Your two quotes from Ecclesiastes say nothing about differentiating temperatures. Something as mundane as the water cycle (and a rather poor version at that) belongs in a 6th grade science textbook - to claim that it shows knowledge of an author that “understood thermodynamics” is laughable at best.
Is it slightly more or less reasonable than someone who believes all life’s answers are written in a book, cobbled together centuries ago? Or believes a magic sky pixie breathed life into an eternal void because it was sick of talking to itself?
If both of those are true, please explain how life exists - since the fact is, if all the craters on the earth occurred within 10k years, no life would be possible. I’m not just talking about the KT or the vredefort craters. To quote from another board where I brought this up:
"There have been 5+ huge meteors that have struck the earth, in addition there have been over 140+ large meteors that have also hit the earth. The reason I bring up the 5 is that each of those five, by itself, is an extinction level meteor. Meaning that when it hit the earth, the entire earth was effected by it.
In otherwords it’s simply not even remotely possible that the earth is around 10k years old. It has to be older, unless there is some explanation of how mankind was able to survive these meteor strikes. There certainly isn’t any biblical support for all of these strikes.
So how do YEC explain them? For the most part, it seems that the YEC I’ve encountered have simply ignored them. "
In short, a young earth isn’t possible from the evidence on this planet.
It’s been awhile since we’ve come up against such an invincible foe in the fight against ignorance. We’re throwing everything we’ve got at him, and it’s just bouncing off!!
Oh, my god! standing in the street and pointing It’s Giant Jackie Gleason! He’s come to pound civilization into rubble for NOT laughing at “You’re In The Picture”! Ruuuun!!!
ETA: Wow. Was this as “cross-genre/cross-era entertainment geek” as it looks in hindsight?
Yeah! And I provided a list of perfectly reasonable (according to this thread) questions and comments that nobody responded to either! There is some nonsense chauvinism going on here.
Your posts are our cite. The sort of drivel (note spelling) you spout is a prime example of the worst sort of tinfoil-hat nuttery that the far right has to offer. It’s pointless to debate someone who deals in myth and circular logic, and who dismisses thoughtful argument with a Palinesque “you’re just playing ‘gotcha’”.
