Creation vs. Evolution

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.

You don't understand how debunking works. It is up to the person making extraordinary claims to provide extraordinary evidence.

Example: You claim to be able to bend spoons with your mind.

Now, it is not up to me to prove you wrong. It is up to you to prove your claim. Real debunking is having a person try to prove their claims and not in poking holes in it.

In the case of Noah, the Noah story says that because the world was sinful, merciful god opened up the hard shell that is the sky and dumped billions of gallons of water through it mercifully killing everyone except the people on Noah's boat and their animal friends.

Unless you can present evidence to me that there is a hard shell instead of penetrable atmosphere, we have a non-starter. Without the firmament, you no longer have the real Noah flood.

There is evidence of widescale flooding in the Mediterranean region caused by glacial runoff. This evidence is from geological and archaeological sources. Corroborating this are flood stories from nearly every ancient culture in that region. This widescale flood did not cover the entire world, kill all the sinners, or result from a combination of a hole in the earth gushing water, a hole in the sky gushing water, or all the tiny holes in the sky dripping water (how the ancient hebrews explained normal rain).

If you would like to back up the Noah story, be my guest. However, there is zero evidence to support this "firmament" notion. Even John Calvin had a hard time with the intellectually dishonest switch from translating the firmament from the ancient hebrew definition to the more generic "sky". He considered it a copout since there was so much writing and art based on what they actually meant. However, even in John Calvin's time science was demystifying the world and the religious figures of the time were struggling with how to reconcile the Bible with science. In the case of the firmament, they fudged it.

If you take the position that "okay, so the details of Noah are wrong, but there was a regional flood, so this validates that the bible was history", then you have to give the same historical credence to every other culture with a flood myth in that region. However, I would not advise doing that since the Hebrews treated those other cultures' gods as demons more often than not. Especially, that nasty Poseidon guy.
 
Honestly, there is nothing lost in closing this thread. You can't have religion, science and honest, reasonable and objective discussion in the same sentence. It is bound to go nowhere.

Tone down the insults, ok, but really I feel that a lot of excellent links have been made to science-related sites. Many of the 105,000 and counting hits made by people to this thread can read and educate themselves. A good thing, yes?

Really interesting historical information, word origins (eg, the firmanent) and contrasting theology are here, too.
 
However, there is zero evidence to support this "firmament" notion. Even John Calvin had a hard time with the intellectually dishonest switch from translating the firmament from the ancient hebrew definition to the more generic "sky". He considered it a copout since there was so much writing and art based on what they actually meant. However, even in John Calvin's time science was demystifying the world and the religious figures of the time were struggling with how to reconcile the Bible with science. In the case of the firmament, they fudged it.

There's a good example of what I meant.
 
In the case of Noah, the Noah story says that because the world was sinful, merciful god opened up the hard shell that is the sky and dumped billions of gallons of water through it mercifully killing everyone except the people on Noah's boat and their animal friends.

No. It says the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Unless you can present evidence to me that there is a hard shell instead of penetrable atmosphere, we have a non-starter. Without the firmament, you no longer have the real Noah flood.

There is evidence of widescale flooding in the Mediterranean region caused by glacial runoff. This evidence is from geological and archaeological sources. Corroborating this are flood stories from nearly every ancient culture in that region. This widescale flood did not cover the entire world, kill all the sinners, or result from a combination of a hole in the earth gushing water, a hole in the sky gushing water, or all the tiny holes in the sky dripping water (how the ancient hebrews explained normal rain).

If you would like to back up the Noah story, be my guest. However, there is zero evidence to support this "firmament" notion. Even John Calvin had a hard time with the intellectually dishonest switch from translating the firmament from the ancient hebrew definition to the more generic "sky". He considered it a copout since there was so much writing and art based on what they actually meant. However, even in John Calvin's time science was demystifying the world and the religious figures of the time were struggling with how to reconcile the Bible with science. In the case of the firmament, they fudged it.

And what Hebrew word would you have chosen to refer to the sky to the people of the day? It seems reasonable to me that if I wanted to refer to "that thingh over there" to you that I would use a word that you would understand.

The Hebrew word used was often used to describe a solid dome but an expanse isn't outside the definition. The word worked both then and now because we all know that the "firmament" is refering to the sky or atmosphere...solid or not.
If you take the position that "okay, so the details of Noah are wrong, but there was a regional flood, so this validates that the bible was history", then you have to give the same historical credence to every other culture with a flood myth in that region. However, I would not advise doing that since the Hebrews treated those other cultures' gods as demons more often than not. Especially, that nasty Poseidon guy.

To give credence to other flood stories that may refer to the same flood isn't the same as believing in their gods....it's believing in a flood.
 
the reason you kept your input short and vague is because you are a true MORON. Your religious rant has NO PLACE on this board. How about you go discuss your beliefs with the islamist divers.......

Calling people names is what's out of place on this board...says the TOS. Have you read it? Do you understand it? If you need help with it, please ask.
 
windows of heaven were opened.

Which means literally that there was a large hole in the firmament. You have to remember, in hebrew mythology, half the waters were below the firmament and half were above. When the windows of heaven were opened, the water trapped above the hard shell of the sky came pouring through.
 
To give credence to other flood stories that may refer to the same flood isn't the same as believing in their gods....it's believing in a flood.

A flood in that particular region doesn't require belief. Its history. A world wide flood that Jehovah used as genocide however is pure belief.

If you take away the scale of the Noah flood, then its no longer special is it? If God really didn't destroy the world by flood, then the covenant that he would never do so again is either fiction or God lied to Noah since the world was not destroyed.

Once these things fall apart, they fall apart in bad ways.
 
Thank you again Thaly boy,
Everyone that doesn't share your enlightened faith is farm animal stupid in your eyes. I am pleased to be in that category.

here is another link to a site for you to (sic) debunk.

Ooparts & Ancient High Technology--Evidence of Noah's Flood?-Literature, Art & History Crawling with Dinosaurs

Reading the responses from the hehe "enlightened" is just amazing. The unbelievable intellectual dishonesty or just flat out stupidity of their mental gymnastics is too humorous.
:popcorn:
No, actually I have many very good friends who do not share my outlook most of them are reasonably bright, most of them are nice people, all of them I genuinely care about ... you're another case. You are intolerant, uneducated and farm animal stupid to boot. Those attributes when combined with your overweening ego is what has revealed you all, as a liar, to boot. You are (I'm sure) and embarrassment to any good Christian).

If you really need to bring up the Ica Stones, that have been so thoroughly debunked by so many diffefrent sources, including fundamentalist Christians, let's at least give people something to laugh at beside you

Notes on a Strange World

Ica Stones: Yabba-Dabba-Do!

Massimo Polidoro

We all know that humans and dinosaurs actually coexisted, even if that only happened in Hanna-Barbera's The Flintstones cartoons and in some popular sci-fi movies. But what about reality? Was there ever a time when a triceratops snorted at some bearded man crossing its path? Or when some desperate girl ran away screaming with a hungry T. Rex on her heels?


All scientific evidence so far tells us that this has never been the case. Modern man first appeared on Earth a few million years after the last dinosaur thought something like: "Hey, where's everybody?"


This fact alone should rest the case once and for all, one thinks, but as it usually happens, things on this strange world of ours are never that simple. As we have recently seen (Polidoro 2002), until a few years ago there were some people who were sure that a pterodactyl had survived up until the Civil War era only to be shot down by some overweight Union soldier. There was even a photograph that someone apparently snapped in the 1860s to commemorate the event. As we now know, the whole thing turned out to be just a hoax, courtesy of the creators of The Blair Witch Project.


Such revelations obviously never stop those seeking evidence of something they intuitively know to be true: dinosaurs and men shared the same land and sometimes the same stomach.


Is there, then, any better evidence for this idea than fake pictures and intuition? Well, would you consider good evidence the existence of, let's see, some ancient drawings depicting dinosaurs done by man at the dawn of time? Of course, you would, right? Good, now brace yourself because such drawings exist!

Welcome the Rolling Stones

In 1994 scientists were stunned by the accidental discovery of some spectacular prehistoric paintings of horses, rhinoceros, lions, buffalo, and mammoths on the walls of a cave at Ardeche Valley, south-eastern France, considered to be the world's oldest paintings (between 29,700 and 32,400 years old) (Chauvet 1996). Are there, anywhere in the world, similar paintings depicting dinosaurs?

Yes there are, according to some, but they are not drawn with charcoal on some obscure grotto, instead they are carved on thousands of rocks of various shapes and dimensions, apparently hand-etched some 65 to 230 million years ago. And what do these etchings show? You guessed it: brontosaurs, triceratops, stegosaurs, and the whole dino collection of beasts!


That alone would have made the most sensational discovery ever, not only able to eclipse the beauty of the Chauvet paintings, but also most everything else discovered so far.


But wait, there's more! Some other stones, in fact, depict pictures of primitive men hunting and killing dinosaurs and other men flying on the back of pterodactyls. What tops them all, however, are some precisely detailed drawings of ancient men watching the heavens through what look like telescopes and others piloting flying machines or performing open-heart surgery, cesarean section births, and brain transplants!


Are we then in the presence of the astounding proof that not only dinosaurs lived until "recent" times but also that ancient men were far more advanced than we ever thought possible? Just give me a few more minutes before jumping to conclusions, will you?

Let's Rock!

The story begins in 1966, in Ica, a small town on the south coast of Peru, when a Peruvian physician, Dr. Javier Cabrera Darquea, received a small carved rock as a gift for his birthday. The carving looked ancient but when Dr. Cabrera saw it the first thing he thought was that it was a drawing of an extinct fish.

From that moment on, hearing of the extreme interest that the good doctor showed for that rock, local natives approached him with the fantastic news that if he wanted more stones they had a few and could sell them to him. He wanted them and he got them. Actually, he got so many of them (about 15,000) that he allegedly abandoned his career in medicine in Lima to open up the Museo de Piedras Grabadas (Engraved Stones Museum) in Ica where he housed his collection.


News of the opening of such a museum were greeted with hurrahs by at least three groups of people, as Robert Todd Carroll points out in his Skeptic's Dictionary (Carroll 2002): "a) those who believe that extraterrestrials are an intimate part of Earth's 'real' history; b) fundamentalist creationists who drool at the thought of any possible error made by anthropologists, archaeologists, evolutionary biologists, etc.; and c) the mytho-historians who claim that ancient myths are accurate historical records to be understood literally."


Please, allow this poor European to dispense with the creationists' pretenses, considered on this side of the ocean to be totally absurd not only by any sensible people hearing them but also by many Catholics, the Pope included.
The question, however, remains: since man first appeared on Earth about 2 million years ago, while dinosaurs were already extinct approximately 60 million years earlier, how could these stones be authentic?

Stoned

Now, there are many things in this story that ring more than one alarm bell: 1) since when does one need to get specialized knowledge in extinct fish to become a medical doctor?; 2) exactly what kind of extinct fish is depicted on that famous first stone and when did it become extinct?; 3) How is it that if there once was such an evolved civilization able to build telescopes and flying machines, and perform microsurgery, the best they could do to preserve the memory of their existence was to carve crude drawings on some stones?; 4) If such a civilization really existed, why is it that nowhere else in the world can traces of their existence be found?; 5) And finally, why is it that no dinosaur's fossils can be dated to an age contemporary with man?

Please, spare me answers like: "There are no traces of that civilization simply because they left the planet (taking everything with them, except the stones) to colonize another solar system!"; or: "It's all just a test of your faith from the Lord, brother"; or even: "It's a coverup! That's it, I said it! Ah-ah, and you are in it! Along with those hidden powers that planned Kennedy's assassination and Elvis Presley's death-simulation and . . ." Thank you, thank you, I've got the picture: don't call us, we'll call you.


We are trying here to examine the facts from a scientific point of view and would like to get scientific (or, at worst, scientific "sounding") answers.


The matter could be easily solved by dating the stones. Have they been dated yet? Nope, sorry. Carbon dating can only be done on artifacts that contain organic material, and the stones do not. The only way to date them would be to examine the strata in which they were found.


Okay, then: what about that strata? Well, there's another little problem here: no one knows exactly were the stones come from. Some say they were found by locals on the bed of a river, others in an unidentified cave.
As compensation for these shortcomings, however, one could read a very revealing interview with a Basilio Uchuya and his wife, Irma Gutierrez de Aparcana, two peasants from Callango, published some years ago by Mundial magazine (Anonymous 1975). In it, Basilio and Irma admit that all of the stones they sold to Cabrera they had carved themselves. As for the subjects to be depicted on the stones it was easy: they chose illustrations from comic books, school books, and magazines.


Cabrera objected that andesite is too hard to carve well by mere mortals using stone tools. "True," says Carroll in his entry on the Ica stones, "but the stones are not carved. They are graved, i.e., a surface layer of oxidation has been scratched away. Cabrera assumes that the creators of the stones only had stone tools available to them. The Inca, Maya, and Aztec cultures all (already) had advanced metallurgy by the time the Spanish arrived. Cabrera and the Ica locals certainly have more than stone tools available to them." That yellowish, ancient layer that covered the stones was as easily obtained, said Basilio: once the etching was done, the stones were placed in a poultry pen and chickens did the rest. Finally, a recent examination of the stones, done in Barcellona by José Antonio Lamich, founder of the Spanish "Hipergea" research group, revealed signs of sandpaper and recent carvings, thus fueling the hoax hypothesis. When questioned why they did it, the hoaxers answered that etching stones was easier than tilling the soil.


Great! What time is it, now? Oops, that late! Maybe I can make it for a late night showing of Attack of the Clones: it's still science fiction, agreed, but at least in the movie they have better special effects.

References

Anonymous. 1975. "Confront: . . . Las hizo Basilio Uchuya." Mundial, No. 6, January 17. Cabrera Darquea, Javier. No date. The Message of the Engraved Stones of Ica. Ica: Privately Printed.
Carroll, Robert Todd. 2002. "The Ica Stones," in: The Skeptic's Dictionary (skepdic.com/icastones.html).
Chauvet, Jean-Marie, Eliette Brunel-Deschamps, and Christian Hillaire. 1996. Dawn of Art: The Chauvet Cave: The Oldest Known Paintings in the World. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
Polidoro, Massimo. 2002. "A Pterodactyl in the Civil War." Skeptical Inquirer, 26(3), May/June 2002: 21-23.
About the Author

Massimo Polidoro is an investigator of the paranormal, author, lecturer, and co-founder and head of CICAP, the Italian skeptics group.
 
I have regretted posting my first comment to this thread and this will be my last. You have to know that the name of God is unspoken and cannot be spoken in any words uttered by man. To know the reasons or the acts are also as unknown. They cannot be known, It denies faith! The truth is as simple as what is in front of you at any moment. This is your Universe! It is your choice to try to understand it - or just accept the simple reality of it.
No science can explain it all...
No religion can make it easy...
No philosophy can answer the questions...
It is what it is! As simple or as complicated as you want to make it.
Everyone knows their final fate. It is up to you to chose how to live and it would be nice to be able to decide how to die.
There are so many I have known who have died believing that they will be taken away directly to heaven without suffering death! The silliness of the modern church is beyond belief. especially the fundamentalists. They call it the old time religion. little do they know that most of their ideas were dreamed up in the early 1800's and were eventually annotated into the bible.

Happily I have to say the truth is all around for everyone to see. Just look! The sciences are as much an extension of Gods truth as the the written word. All words are the truth of an individual and if they are part of the creation thus it is the words of god. There can be no exceptions!

I know... there is always that horrible Antichrist called satin or whatever! Well, guess what! It is also a creation of God! He is the creator after all! He has attained the extreme status as the most evil of all. Tempting and alluring you away from the true path. Well guess what... Goodness cannot exist without evil do in the end they are one! One cannot exist without the other because they are after all a human concept. Is this not the story of the creation! The feeling of shame caused by the recognition of good and evil! The coming of age by a man to see his own failings - This is the casting out - Silly people, Trick are for kids!
 
Ok, one more post... That was the words of another poor foolish human trying to speak the truth. sadly it was a lame attempt!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom