Does belief in the Flood indicate intellectual incapacity?

outhouse said:

Quote mining will get you no where.


You don't even have a clue what your posting.

Not one bit helps promote your faith.

Click to expand...

You do not understand the idea of a debate and feel your own opinion is all that is needed but this is not the case.

I've posted articles proving the DNA theory by credible scientist. You can not prove they are not credible nor can you post any links from any scientist who disagrees with their findings.

Why can't you just accept the fact that on this one issue you loose and we can move along to the next one?

What part of MYTH don't you understand?

List of flood myths - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Flood myths or deluge myths are, taken collectively, stories surviving from human prehistory, of a great flood which has generally been taken as mythical.


Abrahamic religions (Noah's flood)


Genesis flood narrative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Genesis flood narrative makes up chapters 6–9 in the Book of Genesis, in the Bible.[1] The narrative, one of many flood myths found in human cultures

Harold said:

I've posted articles proving the DNA theory by credible scientist.

Click to expand...

Science does not need you to prove DNA. It is already well known.



You have not however in any way by posting credible sources, proved anything related to DNA and its tie to a mythical flood.



You have posted some credible sources but YOU have made no tie at all to make you point. :slap:

outhouse said:

What part of MYTH don't you understand?

List of flood myths - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Flood myths or deluge myths are, taken collectively, stories surviving from human prehistory, of a great flood which has generally been taken as mythical.


Abrahamic religions (Noah's flood)


Genesis flood narrative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Genesis flood narrative makes up chapters 6–9 in the Book of Genesis, in the Bible.[1] The narrative, one of many flood myths found in human cultures

Click to expand...

Type this into Google and see what you find.

Myths that eventually turned out to be true.

outhouse said:

Science does not need you to prove DNA. It is already well known.



You have not however in any way by posting credible sources, proved anything related to DNA and its tie to a mythical flood.



You have posted some credible sources but YOU have made no tie at all to make you point. :slap:

Click to expand...

In your opinion, prove they are not creatable according to the science community.

I post a paper by a scientist about a DNA test and you post a link to Wikipedia about a myth.

Come on dude, you said you were scientist, bible scholar, prize winning debater, and now with no proof, no evidence nothing to stand on you want to through out a scientific research paper.

We can move along.

Here is proof of a world wide flood.

Startling Evidence for Noah

We can debate each topic one at a time. Pick a topic, give evidence that it either doesn't exist or doesn't prove anything and we move on to the next.

How does that sound?

In this case it doesn't matter who wrote what. All that matters is the evidence, it is either there or it is not there.

Harold said:

In your opinion, prove they are not creatable according to the science community.

Click to expand...

YOU don't get it do you?


Did I state that? no. Some of the links you posting were credible.


But you did not use said links to make any point what so ever, you have no tie.

Harold said:

Type this into Google and see what you find.

Myths that eventually turned out to be true.

Click to expand...

Well that is not true.


But many myths do have historical cores.



In this case a factual river flood spawned flood mythology in Mesopotamia that grew for thousands of years before Israelites used it in their culture. Writing it to meet their cultural and theistic needs.

outhouse said:

Well that is not true.

Click to expand...

In your opinion!

At the turn of the century, skeptics viewed the Bible as myth rather than real world history . For example, the Bible makes over 40 references to the great Hittite Empire. You see, 100 years ago, no archaeological evidence had ever been found to prove it really did exist. "Just another Bible myth!" skeptics charged in an attempt to destroy our faith in the Bible. This, however, cannot be said today, for in 1906, Hugo Winckler uncovered a library of 10,000 clay tablets. These ancient records fully documented the long lost Hittite Empire and confirmed the reliability of the Bible. Later excavations uncovered Boghazkoy, the capital city of this "mythical" empire.

Source They're Digging up Bible Stories!

I can find lots more myths that were later proven to be true if you would like.

Here is another link that show myths that have been later proven to be true that have nothing to do with the bible.

10 Mythical Things that Actually Existed - Listverse

Harold said:

Here is another link that show myths that have been later proven to be true that have nothing to do with the bible.

10 Mythical Things that Actually Existed - Listverse

Click to expand...

This one is weak in many places.

In no way were hobbits linked to the modern fossils found.


The tower of babel, is unknown still.


many others have no real merit as historical cores to the mythology.

Harold said:

Source They're Digging up Bible Stories!

.

Click to expand...

Apologetic nonsense :slap:

This is about your source and its lack of credibility.


Institute for Creation Research - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientific criticism

Creationism is rejected by nearly all scientists,[52][53] with more than 45 science organizations having criticized creationism as not science.


Professor Massimo Pigliucci, a professor of ecology and evolution at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, has criticized ICR for professing to present the same science as that taught in secular universities while at the same time requiring students and faculty to sign a statement of faith to ICR's fundamentalist religious mission, most notably in affirming conformity in all its work to Biblical doctrine


On January 7, 2007 the National Center for Science Education reported that Grand Canyon: A Different View, edited by Tom Vail and published by Master Books, the publishing arm of the Institute for Creation Research, and described as promoting "a young-earth creationist view of the geology of the Grand Canyon," was facing new scrutiny by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) in December 2006. The Chief of the Park Service's Geologic Resources Division recommended its removal on grounds that it "does not use accurate, professional and scholarly knowledge; is not based on science but a specific religious doctrine; does not further the public's understanding of the Grand Canyon's existence; [and] does not further the mission of the National Park Service


An April 2008 survey by Texas Freedom Network showed the majority of science faculties in Texas are opposed to ICR's request to issue science degrees with 185 (95% of respondents) opposed to certifying the program and 6 (3%) in favor


And you back this as science??

You don't think this effects your credibility?

Harold said:

In your opinion!! Can you show scientific proof or is that just your opinion?

Click to expand...

I can, actually. The case of the northern elephant seal demonstrates this. By the end of the 19th century, they had been hunted so extensively that only about 20-30 were left alive. Since then, they have been able to increase to about 100,000 in number. Despite the fact that their numbers have increased significantly, they show a reduced genetic diversity when compared with southern elephant seals, which did not go through a bottleneck event. The cheetah has a similar problem with genetic divesity. You really should learn what a genetic bottleneck is what effects it has on a population.

Harold said:

Here is the information on the author

Name: Dr. Jeffrey Tomkins Title: Research Associate Specialty: Genetics

Dr. Jeffrey Tomkins earned a master’s degree in plant science in 1990 from the University of Idaho, where he performed research in plant hormones.

He received his Ph.D. in Genetics from Clemson University in 1996.

While at Clemson, he worked as a research technician in a plant breeding/genetics program, with a research focus in the area of quantitative and physiological genetics in soybean.

After receiving his Ph.D., he worked at a genomics institute and became a faculty member in the Department of Genetics and Biochemistry at Clemson. He had become a Christian as an undergraduate at Washington State University in 1982, with a goal to eventually work as a scientist and author in the creation science field. In 2009, Dr. Tomkins joined the Institute for Creation Research as Research Associate. He is the primary author of The Design and Complexity of the Cell.
Available books by Jeffrey Tomkins:

• The Design and Complexity of the Cell

Not sure how a scientist is no longer credible. Can you explain what makes someone creatable and not creditably.


It seems science is awesome when it is proving your point but no longer creditable when it is not.

Click to expand...

A scientist abandons all credibility when they go to work for a bunch of notorious liars. One just needs to read the statements of faith required by such outfits to see that they do not produce credible science. Their staff are required to promise not to do so.

Harold said:

I post a paper by a scientist about a DNA test and you post a link to Wikipedia about a myth.

Come on dude, you said you were scientist, bible scholar, prize winning debater, and now with no proof, no evidence nothing to stand on you want to through out a scientific research paper.

We can move along.

Here is proof of a world wide flood.

Startling Evidence for Noah

We can debate each topic one at a time. Pick a topic, give evidence that it either doesn't exist or doesn't prove anything and we move on to the next.

How does that sound?

In this case it doesn't matter who wrote what. All that matters is the evidence, it is either there or it is not there.

Click to expand...

I click on the link and goes straight to Answers In Genesis...

Anyways, pick a topic? OK. How did all the marine life survive?

Harold said:

In your opinion!

At the turn of the century, skeptics viewed the Bible as myth rather than real world history . For example, the Bible makes over 40 references to the great Hittite Empire. You see, 100 years ago, no archaeological evidence had ever been found to prove it really did exist. "Just another Bible myth!" skeptics charged in an attempt to destroy our faith in the Bible. This, however, cannot be said today, for in 1906, Hugo Winckler uncovered a library of 10,000 clay tablets. These ancient records fully documented the long lost Hittite Empire and confirmed the reliability of the Bible. Later excavations uncovered Boghazkoy, the capital city of this "mythical" empire.

Source They're Digging up Bible Stories!

I can find lots more myths that were later proven to be true if you would like.

Click to expand...

These points you have provided do not prove the reliability of the bible. Ancient civilizations existed, we know this and we find evidence of it constantly, global floods are not so common or easy to believe in, it requires more convincing evidence.

It's very possible that the stories in the bible are based on real people, places and events but that doesn't mean that they are all true and accurate. I have heard the story of Jesus likened to that of the movie Abraham Lincoln: Vampire hunter. We all know the movie is based on a real person but everything else in the movie was a complete work of fiction.

So because the authors of the bible knew of a civilization that lived around the same time as them, this somehow proves that all other stories in the bible are reliable?

Sorry for the thread resurrection, but I had done a search for "maximum likelihood" and this thread popped up, and, well...

Harold said:

The authors wrote that the maximum-likelihood of time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago.

Can you explain why after so called millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans how human genome diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?

Click to expand...

Jeff Tomkins... What happened to him?

Well, I know one thing - he finally figured out that he had made a fool of himself in that article - you see, "maximum likelihood" is a statistical method of analyzing data, not some sort of way of saying 'the maximum timeframe of this activity lines up with bible lore'.

Think I'm wrong?
The 'new' version of that article no longer mentions 'maximum likelihood'.

You refer to Tomkins, the author of the 'new' article (2013), but you quoted from a 2012 article on the same subject, using the same source and the same graphic but written by Brian Thomas, who is not a geneticist.

Weird stuff going on at ICR...