Where did all this wet stuff come from?

They certainly don't consider it "ancient" or "historical" when you are talking in geological time scales !

reply to post by CranialSponge


I understand that. But I absolutely belive that more than just the Bible
there are many stories across the globe. Many cultures have a flood story.
Combined they constitute history. Scientists have no business saying it isn't.
When they can't prove it isn't. And all they have is comets and steam for a source.
So the history from around the world says there was a flood. And I say there was.
And it came from the same source, as all the water that got here in the first place.
Not just comets and steam.

reply to post by Atzil321

What do you think about such things?

I think that helps my view. planets exist with more water than could
possibly come from gases cooling. Or comets that magically stop and
let life forms come about.

randyvs

They certainly don't consider it "ancient" or "historical" when you are talking in geological time scales !

reply to post by CranialSponge

 

I understand that. But I absolutely belive that more than just the Bible
there are many stories across the globe. Many cultures have a flood story.
Combined they constitute history. Scientists have no business saying it isn't.
When they can't prove it isn't. And all they have is comets and steam for a source.
So the history from around the world says there was a flood. And I say there was.
And it came from the same source, as all the water that got here in the first place.
Not just comets and steam.

How is it possible that the biblical flood is what brought about water to the planet (it happened during a time when humans were around to experience it and record it), when there are fossil records that prove water was on the earth millions (if not billions) of years prior to that ?

Divine creation or not... the biblical flood absolutely CANNOT possibly be the reason for how all the water happened on the planet. The flood incident is not old enough to account for all the plant life and living organisms that were around before it happened.

Biological life cannot exist without water.

Ergo, water was around before the "big flood" happened.

reply to post by randyvs


I love how you suscribe to the bible and the creationist god stuff, yet continue to use the word "magical" to refer to scientific concepts.

Lol.

Maybe you should seek help from a priest since you are looking for those type of answers.

Good luck on your queste.

reply to post by CranialSponge

Divine creation or not... the biblical flood absolutely CANNOT possibly be the reason for how all the water happened on the planet. The flood incident is not old enough to account for all the plant life and living organisms that were around before it happened.

Hey you're right and nobody said the flood was a source. obtuse.

reply to post by randyvs


Interesting.

When was the first rainfall on earth?

what "precipitated" the first rainfall? (pun)

I'd have loved to travel back in time to experience it.

randyvs
reply to post by CranialSponge

 

Divine creation or not... the biblical flood absolutely CANNOT possibly be the reason for how all the water happened on the planet. The flood incident is not old enough to account for all the plant life and living organisms that were around before it happened.

Hey you're right and nobody said the flood was a source. obtuse.

OMG, I'm so done with you, that is exactly the point that you seemed to be trying to make.

If that is not the point you were trying to make your ramblings are even more illogical and without direction.

reply to post by ProdigalSonofa

I love how you suscribe to the bible and the creationist god stuff, yet continue to use the word "magical" to refer to scientific concepts.

I know, turn abouts fair play.

reply to post by randyvs


How bout hypocracy?

reply to post by randyvs


I can't believe you're consistently allowed to spout your bs on this website. It's like the world has passed you by and you're too imperceptive to realize it.

Seriously, you believe a guy lived in a whales' stomach for three days, that Jesus ascended in a chariot of fire, that the garden of Eden was protected by a giant osculating flaming sword, that a snake talked.

I can't wait until you people die off. It's maddening.

randyvs
reply to post by Atzil321

 

What do you think about such things?

I think that helps my view. planets exist with more water than could
possibly come from gases cooling. Or comets that magically stop and
let life forms come about.

That's not a magical stop. Big ice/rock slams into planet surface - stops.
Whatever that ice/rock (comet) has on it and in it, is now on the planet, or planetoid. Or moon. Or whatever it slammed into.

reply to post by randyvs

Hey you're right and nobody said the flood was a source. obtuse.

Is that not what you've been trying to get at all along ?

And if not, then why bring the flood story into it at all ?


Again, this is why nobody is able to connect the dots that you were trying to make in your OP... you've caused confusion and miscommunication where none was necessary.


So all you were trying to say is that divine creation is what brought all the water to the planet (original genesis story), which has absolutely nothing to do with the flood story, and that's all you were trying to get at then.

Okay, so why didn't you just simply say: "God creating the earth is how all the wet stuff came about, and I believe that theory more because scientists don't have a definite answer to how the water got here."



I'm still completely baffled as to why you went on and on about the flood story if you were only talking about Genesis.

ProdigalSonofa
reply to post by randyvs

 

How bout hypocracy?

You mean hypocrisy? I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic.
But I'm sure no one posting here isn't one in some form or another.

reply to post by CranialSponge

And if not, then why bring the flood story into it at all ?

Whjy not? Why ask why?
I'm sorry you're having trouble.

The very first part of the OP.

Science postulates that when the earth was magically forming, billions upon
quadzillions of years ago(sarcasm). The planet was very hot and then slowly
began to cool. Scientists point to a lack of evidence and water available on
earth, in regards to the hundreds of ancient accounts, from diverse cultures
around the world, of an ancient deluge.

What does this say to you?

reply to post by randyvs

You mean hypocrisy? I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic.

Yes I mean hypocrisy. You know how to spell it which is good. Next step is to recognise it and not succumb to it.

It has nothing to do with the topic per se. It apllies to one of your remarks. It seemed pretty straightforward which one.

randyvs
reply to post by CranialSponge

 

And if not, then why bring the flood story into it at all ?

Whjy not? Why ask why?

I'm just simply going to repeat what I said in my last post:

Again, this is why nobody is able to connect the dots that you were trying to make in your OP... you've caused confusion and miscommunication where none was necessary.

And I'll end it there because it's obvious the direction you're wanting to take this... and I have no desire to get into an argument about semantical miscommunications.

Cheers.

reply to post by CranialSponge


Again, what does this say to you?

Science postulates that when the earth was magically forming, billions upon
quadzillions of years ago(sarcasm). The planet was very hot and then slowly
began to cool. Scientists point to a lack of evidence and water available on
earth, in regards to the hundreds of ancient accounts, from diverse cultures
around the world, of an ancient deluge.

reply to post by randyvs

Whjy not? Why ask why? I'm sorry you're having trouble.

Now you are just being pathetic. Your thread is an epic fail and you have made no effort at all to respond to valid comments in an adult or intelligent or even slightly relevant fashion.

I would call this religious trolling.

reply to post by beezzer

When was the first rainfall on earth?

That's a good question. And don't quote me on this.
But I've read that no tree rings go back past the time
when the flod could have occured. And that there was a
time on earth possibly, arguably, when there was no rain.
and the first rain was what caused the flood.

randyvs
reply to post by CranialSponge

 

Again, what does this say to you?

Science postulates that when the earth was magically forming, billions upon
quadzillions of years ago(sarcasm). The planet was very hot and then slowly
began to cool. Scientists point to a lack of evidence and water available on
earth, in regards to the hundreds of ancient accounts, from diverse cultures
around the world, of an ancient deluge.

Alright then...

Scientists point to a lack of evidence and water available on earth, in regards to the hundreds of ancient accounts, from diverse cultures around the world, of an ancient deluge.

Please link me to a source where scientists are saying there was a lack of water available on the earth.

And with regards to your "lack of evidence" to a flood story.... there's actually a number of scientific studies that do show there was some sort of huge flood in the middle eastern/European areas that could possibly have been around the time that the biblical story tells about. So no, scientists are not completely writing off the "big flood" story like you're trying to assert.



But I'll wait for your sourced link where scientists are saying there was a lack of water available on the earth prior to the "big flood".

Thanks.