Omphalos Hypothesis

[Subduction Zone]

My point is only to show that we don’t know have everything been always the same.

Some things remain the same. You want to claim a magical change without any evidence. Which is why you are claiming that your God is a liar.

Instead of long foolish posts let's try to go over one point at a time. Would you like to choose one?

 

[Tiberius]

Sorry, for me it is enough if people understand that there is no reason or proof that long time is necessary.

And you expect them to reach this understanding with no evidence? How does that work?

If you make a claim, you must support that claim. You carry the burden of proof.

 

[Muffled]

Of course, there are lots of people who have differing beliefs, and they all believe that if they are wrong, God will tell them. And yet God never does, they each believe that they are right and the others are wrong, and they end up in fights about it.

Does this seem like it works to you? Or maybe, just maybe, a more rational explanation is that people just find an interpretation they are comfortable with, and they all find that there's nothing telling them they are wrong because anything that tells them they are wrong is not God, but their own inherent biases, and as long as what they believe is consistent with their own biases, they will find that there's nothing telling them they are wrong.

I believe I have only seen one on RF who believe he hears from God besides me and I believe he was a phony.

 

[Muffled]

The creation part is left untouched. This is only a different interpretation of the time scale. It should work then.
And no, it's not to accomodate evolution (which is, btw, a proven phenomenon), it's to accomodate the fact that the earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old (another proven fact).

If evolution had been proven it would have been nice to be informed how that happened but I have seen no evidence that it has been proven.

I don't believe creation needs to be extended in time to account for an old earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If evolution had been proven it would have been nice to be informed how that happened but I have seen no evidence that it has been proven.

I don't believe creation needs to be extended in time to account for an old earth.

That is because you do probably do not understand the concept of evidence.

And yes, if one believes in a lying God there is no need for an extended creation.

 

[1213]

And you expect them to reach this understanding with no evidence? ...

Usually the burden of proof is for those who make positive claim. That is what atheist say, when someone asks them to prove God doesn’t exist. Funny how things turn around.

But, I can form my claim better: no one has shown the evidence that long time is necessary.

 

[1213]

...Which is why you are claiming that your God is a liar....

I don’t claim God is a liar. Why do you think that I am making such foolish claim?

 

[1213]

...Worse yet is the water needed. You are forgetting your myth is you think that they could drink the water around them...

There was 40 days raining, I don’t think there is any intelligent reason to think they would not have had enough drinkable water.

...Gravity has always existed and the poop cannot float up....

No one is making such claims. It would not have been necessary. But, I understand now that you didn’t understand the drawings.

...Wood is not much less dense than water. The stronger the wood the denser it tends to be. A leak in a wooden ship would cause them to sink. ...

Normally wood is about half the density of water.

And, in this case, the ark was not like a modern wooden boat, but more like vast log raft that was built similarly as log cabin would be. Log cabin structure would have been good, because it is not easily broken, can stand even earthquakes. This I think should be obvious for everyone who looked the drawings I linked.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Usually the burden of proof is for those who make positive claim. That is what atheist say, when someone asks them to prove God doesn’t exist. Funny how things turn around.

But, I can form my claim better: no one has shown the evidence that long time is necessary.

No, the need for a long time has been demonstrated. You simply ignore or do not understand the evidence. That is why I repeatedly have offered to go over the basics of science with you. You refuse to do so indicating that you are afraid that if you understand the basics you will no longer be able to make your false claims without openly lying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don’t claim God is a liar. Why do you think that I am making such foolish claim?

Because you claim that God lied by covering up his evil deeds. Since you do not understand the basics of science and refuse to learn it is rather pointless to explain this to you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There was 40 days raining, I don’t think there is any intelligent reason to think they would not have had enough drinkable water.

Where would they keep that massive amount of drinkable water? And where did the water come from? Tell me that. Logistics alone refutes the flood.

No one is making such claims. It would not have been necessary. But, I understand now that you didn’t understand the drawings.

Then you have no way to get rid of it. Don't accuse others of not understanding your nonsense. It is because I understand your nonsense that we know it is wrong.

Normally wood is about half the density of water.

And, in this case, the ark was not like a modern wooden boat, but more like vast log raft that was built similarly as log cabin would be. Log cabin structure would have been good, because it is not easily broken, can stand even earthquakes. This I think should be obvious for everyone who looked the drawings I linked.

I am sorry but once again you fail at basic engineering. There is a reason that massive boats are not built like log cabins. Even floating structures are not made that way. You should start with the square cube law. Excessive mass is your enemy on a vessel on an heavy sea. And since you are proposing a storm worse than any other storm in the history of the world there would be massively heavy seas.

 

[Tiberius]

I believe I have only seen one on RF who believe he hears from God besides me and I believe he was a phony.

Do you think you are the only person who believes that God communicates with them?

 

[Tiberius]

Usually the burden of proof is for those who make positive claim. That is what atheist say, when someone asks them to prove God doesn’t exist. Funny how things turn around.

But, I can form my claim better: no one has shown the evidence that long time is necessary.

Fossil fuels require millions of years of heat and pressure to form. Every scientist in the field of geology and other fields related to it agree on this. Do you have qualifications to say they are wrong?

 

[darkskies]

If evolution had been proven it would have been nice to be informed how that happened but I have seen no evidence that it has been proven.

I don't believe creation needs to be extended in time to account for an old earth.

That's ignorance on your part.

My point was that creation can be reinterpreted. It could have meant one thing all along, there is no change except in your understanding of it.

 

[Thief]

What do People think of the Omphalos Hypothesis?

Wikipedia: Omphalos hypothesis

On one hand I think it's absurd...

...but on the other I think there may be something to it

So I feel conflicted about it

I think it is in Psalms.....
a day in the life of God
is LIKE unto a thousand years

a notation that our sense of calender has nothing to do with God
and Genesis was written to note the cessation of one creation event to another

 

[1213]

Fossil fuels require millions of years of heat and pressure to form. Every scientist in the field of geology and other fields related to it agree on this. ...

But they don’t seem to have any evidence or proof for that. Why they believe so?

 

[1213]

Where would they keep that massive amount of drinkable water? And where did the water come from?...

The drinkable water was around the ark, for example the rain water.

Then you have no way to get rid of it....

The sever system is open so that things float automatically away from the ark.

...Excessive mass is your enemy on a vessel on an heavy sea.

There is no excessive mass on the Ark. The base of the ark is basically almost solid wood, which density is about half of the water. It would have floated easily and carried the Ark and its passengers easily.

And since you are proposing a storm worse than any other storm in the history of the world there would be massively heavy seas.

I am not proposing any storm. There were not conditions that could have caused a storm.

 

[1213]

Because you claim that God lied by covering up his evil deeds. ...

Please show where did I say so?

 

[Tiberius]

But they don’t seem to have any evidence or proof for that. Why they believe so?

Do you have any qualifications in geology?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The drinkable water was around the ark, for example the rain water.

Nope, not a bit. You forgot the myth already?

The sever system is open so that things float automatically away from the ark.[/qoiute]

A hole in the bottom of a ship is generally a very very bad idea. You want to sink it even faster. And once again, it is an engineering fail.

There is no excessive mass on the Ark. The base of the ark is basically almost solid wood, which density is about half of the water. It would have floated easily and carried the Ark and its passengers easily.

So you are saying that it would break almost instantaneously.

I am not proposing any storm. There were not conditions that could have caused a storm.

Yes, you are where do you think the water came from? No matter where you get it from you cook Noah.