Has Creationism been disproven?
- Thread starter Hazardous
- Start date
Remy LaCroix
Lou Thesz' Favorite Son
I don't interpret the Bible literally. Anyone who does is blind, and that's why Jesus saves.
Ah, ya dont say
To clarify:
As stated in my last post, there is scant evidence for potential massive floods (larger than anything seen in historic times, but not world covering - not even close) and it is possible that said floods influenced the widespread flood myth. Of course, it's not as if a great flood occurring would change anything vis a vis creationism. It would only have had localized, minor extinction power. So its not as if the occurrence of a great flood suddenly proves creationism to be true (or even lends any credence at all to the theory).
However, the more likely explanation is sociological.
Let's look at the common elements of flood myths.
They exist in:
1) The Abrahamic faiths (Noah)
2) Hinduism
3) Greek Myth
4) Sumerian myth (Gilgamesh)
All of the various stories contain an element of the water purifying the human race, and a cultural hero (Noah, Gilgamesh, etc.) emerging to save the culture in question. The metaphor behind this is obvious - all other cultures/religions are poor and wicked, and we are the chosen people. The reasons why a given religion or culture would want to espouse this concept ought to be obvious.
Furthermore, water is a primal fear of human beings (we know, via instinct, that it will kill us, much like great heights or wild animals) and therefore it makes sense for most cultures to turn one of our fears "up to 11", so to speak, and make it a primary antagonist. Triumphing over such a fear reinforces the power of the cultural hero, and by extension, the strength of the associated culture.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
Who said it was? Merely pointing out that it is no more a preposterous theory as any other
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
yes, the reasons for what people did, said, and thought who existed thousands (millions?) of years ago whom you have never met nor spoken to are all just so blatantly, plainly obvious.
COULD NOT have been becuase the shit actually happened, no siree.
Except that there is no physical evidence of a great flood (world covering, that is) ever occurred. In attempt to explain the problem, Occam's razor predominates and the simplest explanation is that the myth is sociological in origin, with perhaps a tad of truth (as stated above, the possible large floods). Furthermore, anthropologists have been successful in unearthing how early cultures lived, acted, and thought, allowing me to make such statements.
Remy LaCroix
Lou Thesz' Favorite Son
Great flood myths can be found in the Americas, too. Fuel for debate.
I wholeheartedly disagree. I think suggesting that only the fittest animals survived a flood while the others died is much more likely than the idea that a man took two of every animal and managed to successfully recreate an entire ecosystem after a catastrophe.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
Except that there is.
and the fact that numerous groups of peole who never had any contact tell staggeringly siumlair stories.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
Ok, so we agree there was indeed a great flood, or its perfectly logical it could have / very well may have happened.
Good then, not sure what we are arguing.
Getting two of every animal is perfectly easy to do if you get baby animals, no? Or at least, more feasable than the image everyone has in their head of full grown ones?
Whoever said I hate religion? While you could be further from the truth, I can assure you that I don't hate religion at all.
And (I think) we're arguing about what enabled animal life to survive a "great" flood.
And the baby animal part would make it more feasible, but still highly unlikely. He'd have to get tens of thousands of baby animals, hope they all survive, manage to coexist, reproduce as expected, etc. Then again, if he has divine help, anything is possible I suppose.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
We arent. I never said a word one about that. Simply that there is great evidence that an extinction level flood event occured.
Aye, just as anything is possible if you give it upteenth billions of years to formulate, and it basically happened for no reason whatsoever out of nowere? However, as you admit, the fact that those animals could be put together if they were tiny versions (babies) is something factual, tangible, and logical.
Factual? How is that even remotely factual? I don't know what you're getting at with tangible, and logical? If by logical you mean theoretically possible, than yeah, as far as I know it's possible, but it's extremely, EXTREMELY unlikely, given the fact that they'd probably run out of food, forcing some animals to eat each other or die. Not to mention the fact that preventing disease would be next to impossible.
Basically, it would be impossible without divine intervention. If you believe in God or a god that managed to help make this possible, that's cool, but without his/her/its interference, Noah's task would have been impossible.
Basically, it would be impossible without divine intervention. If you believe in God or a god that managed to help make this possible, that's cool, but without his/her/its interference, Noah's task would have been impossible.
I've never seen nothing supporting a great flood, outside of a church that is (yes, I went to church for years) So I am interested as well. the only thing that comes close to it is the extinction of the dino's from a meteor, which my sunday school teachers said never happened.. Which can be seen everywhere in the world. A flood? Never heard of it. There was a lake in the middle of the USA at one point though.
I really didn't want to get into THIS part of it.. but for the person who said "the bible is god words, and time doesn't mean the same".. where does it say that?
There MAY have been a documentary on some flood, but there was also one on Atlantis, saying it does exist, yet they haven't proved it.
I really didn't want to get into THIS part of it.. but for the person who said "the bible is god words, and time doesn't mean the same".. where does it say that?
There MAY have been a documentary on some flood, but there was also one on Atlantis, saying it does exist, yet they haven't proved it.
Utter madness. Do you have any idea how many extant species there are in existence? Two of every reptile and mammal, the majority of which did not, in fact, live within walking distance of Noah's residence? Oh, he'd also have to have cultivated a sufficient number of every single plant species in order to ensure they stuck around. Oh, he'd also have had to have collected viruses and bacteria, even though he had no idea what they were and had no possible way to see and contain them. Oh, yeah, also, all the aquatic life that couldn't survive in saltwater, or adjust properly to the change in depth.
But, no, you're right, that totally could have happened.
Also, just in case you weren't aware, merely two of every animal would only produce viable offspring for one generation, after which the entire process would succumb to inbreeding.
But, no, you're right, that totally could have happened.
Also, just in case you weren't aware, merely two of every animal would only produce viable offspring for one generation, after which the entire process would succumb to inbreeding.
It depends how big the great flood is. A worldwide one? No chance in hell, but a flood that washed out a large region?
Check this out...
Once again, if we're talking a regional flood, it's theoretically possible, yet highly improbable. If it was the entire world, then no way would it be possible. But again, we're talking from a purely scientific perspective, while Noah only rounded up all the animals because God told him to, so it's safe to assume that God helped a brother out.
Check this out...
Once again, if we're talking a regional flood, it's theoretically possible, yet highly improbable. If it was the entire world, then no way would it be possible. But again, we're talking from a purely scientific perspective, while Noah only rounded up all the animals because God told him to, so it's safe to assume that God helped a brother out.
Big Nick Dudley
Nick
12,000? Did you not listen to the woman in my video?
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
Baby animals are smaller than full grown ones, sometimes, by a very, very large margin. Fact.
Come down here, we will go to the pound. I will show you how a puppy fits into a crate much easier than a grown dog. Tangible.
Logical....Uh, lots more baby animals could fit on a huge ship than full grown ones. Can you tell me how to get, how to get to seasame streeeet
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
two fo every animal we still see today. As for the last part, it may be an account of merely one area, or one situation. If we are gonna go with "EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE IS LITERAL AND IT IS THE ONLY ACCOUNT" well then how the fuck did human beings in general come to exist as they do today? Hello?
Also, as has been said here numerous times, anyone who takes everything in the bible literally, to prove or disprove anything, is a right twat.
Space was never the issue I was arguing, as space would be the least of Noah's worries. His real worries would be in keeping the animals from eating or fighting with each other, or hoping that they'll still be healthy enough for mating after 40 days and nights on a ship.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
Aye, but scientific study and logical means to come up with literal explanations for them is perfectly possible, and does happen.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your earlier post, but I thought you were arguing that it was remotely feasible that two of every single species existent in the world today was carried aboard a large boat.
For reference, there are between 2 and 100 million species existent in the world today.
Big Nick Dudley
Nick
I agree, somewhat. Blind faith can also lead people into following some pretty fucked up orders. That shouldn't be ignored.
Similar threads
