So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Is there a god? What is the meaning of life?

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby 1nick » Aug 25th, 2019, 10:06 am

E50B3FFF-C9E0-478C-88EB-4C473520D541.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
I dunno man, pretty sure that guy’s batsh$t crazy
1nick
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3956
Likes: 319 posts
Liked in: 1034 posts
Joined: May 6th, 2006, 8:55 am

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby capleton » Aug 30th, 2019, 1:15 pm

cutter7 wrote:
capleton wrote:Life beginning from nothing is not Evolution, try again. We can see numerous kinds of evidence for Evolution on a daily basis. How do you think germs and diseases get drug resistant over time?


That is my point exactly.

You people miss the fact that many people have different views on evolution.

My question remains unanswered. How can life evolve from lifeless matter?

One theory scientists have adopted is that life began from bacteria found in the ocean , coral reefs If i remember correctly.


Abiogenesis is not evolution and even if we.do not know, it does not mean God magic was the cause
capleton
Board Meister
 
Posts: 353
Likes: 25 posts
Liked in: 146 posts
Joined: Oct 29th, 2017, 6:39 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby alanjh595 » Aug 30th, 2019, 1:43 pm

Evolution Created Life From Lifeless ‘Primordial Soup

By: Clara Moskowitz, LiveScience Senior Writer
Published: on LiveScience

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Just as species are believed to have evolved over time, the individual molecules that form the basis of life also likely developed in response to natural selection, scientists say.

REAL LIFE. REAL NEWS. REAL VOICES.
Help us tell more of the stories that matter from voices that too often remain unheard.
Join HuffPost Plus
Life on Earth first bloomed around 3.7 billion years ago, when chemical compounds in a “primordial soup“ somehow sparked into life, scientists suspect. But what turned sterile molecules into living, changing organisms? That’s the ultimate mystery.

By studying the evolution of not just life, but life’s building blocks as well, researchers hope to come closer to the answer.

Two become one

The molecules swimming in early Earth’s primordial soup would have been continually destroyed by ultraviolet radiation from the sun, as well as heat and other processes on the planet. [7 Theories on the Origin of Life]

But when certain special pairs of molecules combined to form a larger compound, they sometimes came out with protections that neither had alone.

“When molecules interact, they start taking on properties they don’t have as individuals, but do gain when they’re in a complex,” Robert Root-Bernstein, a physiologist at Michigan State University, said Sunday (Feb. 19) here at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “This provides a means of natural selection.”

Molecules that could combine to gain attributes would survive longer and proliferate, while those that were more easily destroyed would fade away.

Better together

One example is the compound of glutamic acid and two glycine molecules.

Individually, each of these molecules was easily destroyed by ultraviolet radiation. But put together, they were extremely stable.

“In this case we are buffering this pair of molecules against destruction, and they would have been around much longer than other things,” Root-Bernstein said. “Very specific pairs are going to survive and others aren’t.”

Another example is the hormone epinephrine, also known as adrenaline. When combined with ascorbic acid (vitamin C), the compound is resistant to oxidation — a loss of electrons that can cause a substance to disintegrate. This is an attribute that neither possesses alone. [What Are the Ingredients of Life?]

The watchmaker problem

These chemical combinations may help explain one of the greatest mysteries of how life got started.

There’s a famous parable called the “watchmaker problem,” first described by Nobel Prize-winning economist Herbert Simon.

Imagine two watchmakers trying to assemble a watch of 1,000 pieces. The first watchmaker assembles his watch one piece at a time — he must assemble it in one sitting or it falls apart and he has to start over. The second watchmaker builds hers by first putting together small stable modules of a few pieces, and then building these up into ever-larger subconfigurations until she has a whole watch. If she is interrupted, the smaller modules don’t break down and she can resume from roughly where she started.

The second is a much more efficient way of putting together a watch, because it offers protection against having to start over from the beginning if the process is interrupted.

Building up the first organisms on Earth may have worked the same way, Root-Bernstein said.

“If you have to evolve a receptor composed of a precise ordering of 400 amino acids, it wouldn’t be possible to do it all at once,” he said. “You have to use stable modules.”

These modules are the compound molecules that have become stable by combining. If life assembled from combinations of these already-stable building blocks, rather than a random combination of raw molecules from scratch, the process would have been much more efficient.

“The difference between trying absolutely everything and trying a small number of stable modules is huge,” Root-Bernstein said. “It makes something that’s virtually impossible into something that’s very likely.”


At the very least, scientists are still looking for an explanation, the creationists have closed their minds and have only their single-minded beliefs to fall back upon, without ANY evidence or proof to substantiate their position.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
User avatar
alanjh595
Guru
 
Posts: 9912
Likes: 3869 posts
Liked in: 4850 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby Hmmm » Aug 31st, 2019, 1:53 am

Science is in 100% agreement on how life started? Science is in 100% agreement on how life evolved? There are no scientific disagreements in the field of evolution? No real scientist believes in creation? Are these statements all true? No. Why, because as much as many of you here love to quote and spout your so called facts, even science can't really agree on them, why? Because of unresolved holes. But science is always in 100% agreement with true scientific facts. Like the water cycle, the sun setting and rising, orbit of the earth. Why? Because they are 100% proven and unassailable truths.

Bottom line is, you can spout your so called facts all day, but its not as clearly true as you would love them to be. As for evidence of a flood, there is a lot of it. Can someone argue its not real evidence? Yes. Same problem as I started with. I think one would first need to look at a different question rather than a flood question for the real answer.
Last edited by Hmmm on Sep 1st, 2019, 6:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
I thought you said your dog doesn't bite....That's not my dog.
User avatar
Hmmm
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2737
Likes: 401 posts
Liked in: 1117 posts
Joined: Jan 6th, 2012, 7:27 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby capleton » Aug 31st, 2019, 10:40 am

Hmmm wrote:Science is in 100% agreement on how started? Science is in 100% on how life evolved? There are no scientific disagreements in the field of evolution? No real scientist believes in creation? Are these statements all true? No. Why, because as much as many of you here love to quote and spout your so called facts, even science can't really agree on them, why? Because of unresolved holes. But science is always in 100% agreement with true scientific facts. Like the water cycle, the sun setting and rising, orbit of the earth. Why? Because they are 100% proven and unassailable truths.

Bottom line is, you can spout your so called facts all day, but its not as clearly true as you would love them to be. As for evidence of a flood, there is a lot of it. Can someone argue its not real evidence? Yes. Same problem as I started with. I think one would first need to look at a different question rather than a flood question for the real answer.


Very few Scientists would disagree with Evolution, the evidence is to overwhelming. There are not many creationist scientists and they are not taking seriously because they promote pseudoscience. At least science has facts unlike Christianity which is based on superstition. The vast amounts of evidence of Evolution makes it a fact like how Germ Theory is fact or how gravity is a fact. You say there's lots of evidence of the Flood but don't provide any, I am going to guess that you have none.
Last edited by capleton on Oct 15th, 2019, 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
capleton
Board Meister
 
Posts: 353
Likes: 25 posts
Liked in: 146 posts
Joined: Oct 29th, 2017, 6:39 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby Hmmm » Aug 31st, 2019, 11:39 pm

capleton wrote:
Very few Scientists would disagree with Evolution, the evidence is to overwhelming. There are not many creationist scientists and they are not taking seriously because they promote pseudoscience. At least science has facts unlike Christianity which is based on superstition. The vast amounts of evidence of Evolution makes it a fact like how Germ Tgeory is fact or how gravity is a fact. You say there's lots of evidence of the Flood but don't provide any, I am going to guess that you have none.

You should really reread my comment. I think you read it to fast and missed my point. Let me know if you still think your reply is accurate based on MY comment.
I thought you said your dog doesn't bite....That's not my dog.
User avatar
Hmmm
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2737
Likes: 401 posts
Liked in: 1117 posts
Joined: Jan 6th, 2012, 7:27 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby capleton » Sep 3rd, 2019, 7:04 pm

Your post was barley coherent. Funny I think i mentioned something about creationists and not being coherent in my original post.
Last edited by capleton on Sep 6th, 2019, 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
capleton
Board Meister
 
Posts: 353
Likes: 25 posts
Liked in: 146 posts
Joined: Oct 29th, 2017, 6:39 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby Hmmm » Sep 3rd, 2019, 9:13 pm

capleton wrote:Your post was barley coherent. Funny I think i mentioned something about creationists and not not being coherent in my original post.

It was pretty late at night. But my point was that although most scientists agree that we evolved they dont agree on how we evolved, the time frame of it. They also don’t agree on how life first started. So YOU posters here that seem to write how clear the facts are on this topic scientist don’t even agree on the so called facts. So stop trying to sound so smart. Maybe a little humility and accept that you may believe in evolution but the facts really aren’t that clear regarding it.
I thought you said your dog doesn't bite....That's not my dog.
User avatar
Hmmm
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2737
Likes: 401 posts
Liked in: 1117 posts
Joined: Jan 6th, 2012, 7:27 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby Ranger66 » Sep 4th, 2019, 9:17 am

" you may believe in evolution but the facts really aren’t that clear regarding it."


But we are referring to facts, the how and time frame are particulars to be resolved.
To cool to live, to smart to die
Ranger66
Übergod
 
Posts: 1911
Likes: 55 posts
Liked in: 464 posts
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am
Location: West Kelowna

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby capleton » Sep 5th, 2019, 6:14 pm

Hmmm wrote:
capleton wrote:Your post was barley coherent. Funny I think i mentioned something about creationists and not not being coherent in my original post.

It was pretty late at night. But my point was that although most scientists agree that we evolved they dont agree on how we evolved, the time frame of it. They also don’t agree on how life first started. So YOU posters here that seem to write how clear the facts are on this topic scientist don’t even agree on the so called facts. So stop trying to sound so smart. Maybe a little humility and accept that you may believe in evolution but the facts really aren’t that clear regarding it.


So what if they don't know? science is slowly figuring it out which is more then religion does, which just makes up stories based on superstition. What facts do scientists not agree on? The majority of scientists agree that Evolution is fact which is why it is a Scientific Theory along with Germ Theory and the Theory of Gravity. what facts do creationism have? none whatsoever.

I'm still waiting for all these "facts" on how Noah's Flood is real, you did say there was tons of evidence for Noah's Flood after all.
capleton
Board Meister
 
Posts: 353
Likes: 25 posts
Liked in: 146 posts
Joined: Oct 29th, 2017, 6:39 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby alanjh595 » Sep 5th, 2019, 6:49 pm

Scientists keep looking, creationists gave up and quit looking.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
User avatar
alanjh595
Guru
 
Posts: 9912
Likes: 3869 posts
Liked in: 4850 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby cutter7 » Sep 22nd, 2019, 8:47 am

There is a show on the history channel this morning on this subject. the secrets of noahs ark or something like that.

an archaeologist named woollery found evidence of massive flooding in the city of ur, translating the documents from mesopotamian times show a close resemblance to the story of noahs ark in the bible.

a scientist called jennifer pournelle has been over in that area taking core samples around iraq

there are definite signs of flooding and according to pournell floods were common all over the area with super floods occurring every so many years.

pournell does not believe that there was just 1 flood but a series of floods over time
cutter7
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2414
Likes: 207 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2008, 11:11 am

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby cutter7 » Sep 22nd, 2019, 8:49 am

alanjh595 wrote:Scientists keep looking, creationists gave up and quit looking.


why would creationists look for something they already believe?
cutter7
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2414
Likes: 207 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2008, 11:11 am

Re: So any evidence of Noah's Flood?

Postby alanjh595 » Sep 22nd, 2019, 8:51 am

A belief is not evidence.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

capleton likes this post.
User avatar
alanjh595
Guru
 
Posts: 9912
Likes: 3869 posts
Liked in: 4850 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Previous

Return to Religion & Spirituality

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests