Noah's ark found

[arnisador]

Do you really think that watching a 1:40 comedy clip is comparable to sitting through a 3 HOUR video of a criminal with bogus academic credentials blathering about totally debunked creation myths?

Well, the intellectual content is certainly comparable.

 

[arnisador]

You are trying to attack me instead of taking the time and watch the videos and then make a comment.

Once again: That's a THREE HOUR investment (creationism) in what has been fully established as nonsense that you're asking for, and nearly 40 min. for Noah's ark. Maybe pick a single point and try that.

 

[grumpywolfman]

No. Flood is one thing, Creation v. Evolution another....though dinosaurs missing the boat fits kind of well with the whole "young earth" idiocy.

Try harder.

There is no evidence of macro-evolution. I remember my community college biology teacher telling me that humans simply do not mutate that fast - germs yes, insects - maybe, but NOT humans. I learned about earth science, geology, biology, chemistry, and astronomy all from public schools and community college. There was always gaps and leaps of faith to make the theory of evolution work. For example the "missing links" and "living fossils." The evidence for a world-wide flood is overwhelming if your only willing to look at the information from an unbiased perspective. I know this video below is very long, but please try to make the time to watch this impressive presentation of a theory that is solidly based on science; don't let people who aren't willing to learn something new, be cheerleaders for ignorance by posting negative comments without even taking the time to watch.

 

[grumpywolfman]

"Reality" always has a way of knocking that "by faith" thing all to ****. Oh well.

Please watch the video that I posted about Noah's Ark being found. You'll see archaeological evidence which has been verified scientifically, and acknowledged by the government of Turkey for its authenticity. Please don't be influenced by individuals who post negative comments on this thread without even taking the time to watch first; you may just come away with a different perspective on what faith really means to you ~ thank you.

 

[elder999]

There is no evidence of macro-evolution. I remember my community college biology teacher telling me that humans simply do not mutate that fast - germs yes, insects - maybe, but NOT humans.

"Modern Man" can be said to be 350000 years old, and we've domesticated animals for about 10000 years, give or take. Likewise, adult manufacture of lactase, the enzyme required to digest lactose-present in infants, but only in certain adult populations, developed about 9500 years ago. The Sherpa enzymatic adaptation for high-altitude hemoglobin manufacture probably occurred less than 8000 years ago. Your community college biology teacher was wrong. Try harder.

 

[jezr74]

There is no evidence of macro-evolution. I remember my community college biology teacher telling me that humans simply do not mutate that fast - germs yes, insects - maybe, but NOT humans. I learned about earth science, geology, biology, chemistry, and astronomy all from public schools and community college. There was always gaps and leaps of faith to make the theory of evolution work. For example the "missing links" and "living fossils." The evidence for a world-wide flood is overwhelming if your only willing to look at the information from an unbiased perspective. I know this video below is very long, but please try to make the time to watch this impressive presentation of a theory that is solidly based on science; don't let people who aren't willing to learn something new, be cheerleaders for ignorance by posting negative comments without even taking the time to watch.

You'll find the "leaps of faith" are what is compelling evidence with parts missing lending itself to the next discovery... then they are found. This is what we are talking about when we mention the term god of the gaps... we find a line of evolution, and to a creationist, they now see two gaps... the gaps are closed with the next discovery... and they see two more gaps etc etc..

There are many many examples of micro-evolution, remember that macro is about the time it takes. But you can easily Google the studies and evidence that many scientists have found, with better explanations from accredited professors.

I'll try and watch your video linked tonight. it's blocked for me at present. I've read a lot, and watched a lot of the creationist material in the past, so I'm interested if they are trying a new path, the last buzz word used was intelligent design, but that was more around trying to break into the school system by dominating school boards etc.

 

[arnisador]

There is no evidence of macro-evolution.

None? Not even a little bit? Not a single piece of evidence for it?

 

[arnisador]

Please watch the video that I posted about Noah's Ark being found. You'll see archaeological evidence which has been verified scientifically

Start citing journal articles, then, rather than a YouTube video.

 

[jezr74]

There is no evidence of macro-evolution. I remember my community college biology teacher telling me that humans simply do not mutate that fast - germs yes, insects - maybe, but NOT humans. I learned about earth science, geology, biology, chemistry, and astronomy all from public schools and community college. There was always gaps and leaps of faith to make the theory of evolution work. For example the "missing links" and "living fossils." The evidence for a world-wide flood is overwhelming if your only willing to look at the information from an unbiased perspective. I know this video below is very long, but please try to make the time to watch this impressive presentation of a theory that is solidly based on science; don't let people who aren't willing to learn something new, be cheerleaders for ignorance by posting negative comments without even taking the time to watch.

Sorry. So many fantastical claims. The problem we have with people like this guy and like Walt Brown. Is during debate, they say so much drivel, you can't argue because they go from one ridiculous claim to the other.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[arnisador]

Sorry. So many fantastical claims. The problem we have with people like this guy and like Walt Brown. Is during debate, they say so much drivel, you can't argue because they go from one ridiculous claim to the other.

It's like the Creationists hold the license for that particular form of fallacious argument--"argument from SQUIRREL!!!".

 

[The Last Legionary]

Can you cite someone credible? Even the Creationist's thinks he's a quack. As to his doctorates, I have 12. Well, 11. #12 is still printing from my deskjet. But as a certified (soon as the ink dries) Doctor of CreationFreakology I can guarentee that he's nucking futts and my qualifications are just as valid as his are. I guarantee it. Except I'm not a tax cheat who's in jail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

Hovind's views are contradicted by scientific evidence and some of his ideas have also been criticized by young Earth creationist organizations such as Answers in Genesis.

He holds three degrees in Christian education (1974, 1988, 1991) from unaccredited institutions.

From 1972 to 1974, Hovind attended the non-accredited Midwestern Baptist College and received a Bachelor of Religious Education.[SUP][2][/SUP]

In 1988 and 1991 respectively, Hovind was awarded a master's degree and doctorate in Christian Education through correspondence from the non-accredited Patriot University in Colorado Springs, Colorado (now Patriot Bible University in Del Norte, Colorado, which no longer offers this program).[SUP][9][/SUP]

Other critics of Hovind have pointed out that Patriot Bible University is a diploma mill, as it has unreasonably low graduation requirements, lack of sufficient faculty or educational standards, and a suspicious tuition scheme.[SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP] The school's current policies allow students to attain bachelor's degrees, master's degrees, and even "Doctor of Ministry" degrees in months, rather than years, for as little as $25 per month. Currently Patriot offers a monthly fee, unlike most universities, which only charge per-credit fees.[SUP][14][/SUP]

[h=2]Criticism[/h][h=3]From creationists[/h]Hovind has been criticized by other creationists, including young Earth creationists and old Earth creationists, who believe that many of his arguments are invalid and, consequently, undermine their causes. Disagreements over how to respond to Hovind's claims have themselves contributed to acrimony between creationist organizations. The Australian and U.S. arms of Answers in Genesis (AiG) were critical of Hovind[SUP][77][/SUP] after he had criticized[SUP][78][/SUP] a position document from Creation Ministries International, "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use".[SUP][79][/SUP] In particular AiG criticized Hovind for "persistently us[ing] discredited or false arguments"[SUP][76][/SUP] and said Hovind's claims are "self-refuting".[SUP][80][/SUP]
The U.S. arm of AiG, led by Ken Ham, had an acrimonious split with its Australian parent in 2005. The Australian organization then split itself entirely off from its parent group, now styling itself Creation Ministries International. Material critical of Hovind was no longer available on the U.S. Answers In Genesis website, whereas the Australian CMI website retained the critical material.[SUP][81][/SUP] In the 2002 article and a 2006 update, written by Carl Wieland and Jonathan Sarfati stated that the claims made by Hovind are "fraudulent" and contain "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good."[SUP][77][/SUP][SUP][82][/SUP] CMI also criticized Hovind for using "fraudulent claims" made by Ron Wyatt in his claims.[SUP][77][/SUP] In August 2009, the Australian CMI website has since published an article praising Creation Science Evangelism for removing some faulty arguments, but decided against deleting its article altogether because "there are lots of 'free-to-copy' DVDs of Kent Hovind’s old talks circulating widely around the world and it will be some time before they disappear from circulation.[SUP][82][/SUP]
Creationist astronomer Hugh Ross, of Reasons To Believe, debated Hovind on the age of the Earth during the John Ankerberg Show, televised nationally on the Inspiration Network in September through October 2000.[SUP][83][/SUP][SUP][84][/SUP] Ross said Hovind was "misrepresenting the field" of different sciences,[SUP][85][/SUP] and Ross told Hovind: "Astronomers view the credibility of the 'Young Earth' as being much weaker than that for a flat Earth."[SUP][86][/SUP] Hovind and Ross previously debated in July 1999 on the Steve Brown Show.[SUP][87][/SUP]
Hovind has stated that carbon dating – a method used by scientists to estimate the age of various objects and events – is unreliable.[SUP][88][/SUP] He has been criticized by Greg Neyman of Answers in Creation (an old Earth creationist group), who says that in Hovind's statements "Hovind goes on to show that he knows absolutely nothing about the science of Carbon Dating."[SUP][89][/SUP] Neyman says that Hovind's claim that "scientists assume the amount of carbon-14 is constant" is wrong, and Neyman writes "there are many periods of decreasing C-14, which disproves his theory that the Earth is young based on C-14 equilibrium."[SUP][89][/SUP]
[h=3]From non-creationists[/h]Prior to his convictions, Hovind debated atheists, non-YEC Christians, skeptics, and scientists. In May 2004, Michael Shermer debated Hovind in front of a predominantly creationist audience. In Shermer's online reflection, while claiming he won the debate with intellectual and scientific evidence, he felt it was "not an intellectual exercise," but rather it was "an emotional drama."[SUP][90][/SUP] While receiving positive responses from creationist observers, Shermer concluded "Unless there is a subject that is truly debatable with a format that is fair, in a forum that is balanced, it only serves to belittle both the magisterium of science and the magisterium of religion."[SUP][90][/SUP] Others, like evolutionary biologist Massimo Pigliucci, have debated Hovind, and have expressed surprise at Hovind's ignorance of evolutionary theory.[SUP][91][/SUP] Pigliucci indicated surprise at hearing Hovind try "to convince the audience that evolutionists believe humans came from rocks" and at Hovind's assertion that biologists believe humans "evolved from bananas."[SUP][91][/SUP] In addition, William Reville, Biochemist and Director of Microscopy at University College Cork, wrote about Hovind, explaining "Creation science is not science. Science is based on ideas that are testable. What the creationists believe is not rational, but it cannot be disproved."[SUP][92][/SUP]
Hovind was criticized for his involvement with Arkansas state Representative Jim Holt's Anti-Evolution Bill in 2001 (House Bill 2548).[SUP][93][/SUP][SUP][94][/SUP] This bill "would have required that when public schools refer to evolution that it be identified as an unproven theory." Some politicians claimed this bill "would have made Arkansas a laughingstock."[SUP][95][/SUP] Holt called upon Hovind as an expert who "testified for Holt before the State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee, alleging much of the information pertaining to evolution in our science textbooks is false."[SUP][93][/SUP] As for the legislation, "Holt admitted much of the information in his bill came from Jonathan Wells' Icons of Evolution."[SUP][93][/SUP]
Critics charge that Kent Hovind's presentations on creation and evolution are a mix of Christian Fundamentalism and conspiracy theories.[SUP][90][/SUP] The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has criticized Hovind because of his selling of books such as Des Griffin's Fourth Reich of the Rich and Peter Kershaw's In Caesar's Grip, and recommending The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a well-known antisemitic hoax.[SUP][96][/SUP] The SPLC reported that Hovind accuses Darwinism of having produced "Communism, Socialism, Nazism, abortion, liberalism and the New Age Movement."[SUP][96][/SUP] It also quotes Hovind as claiming that "democracy is evil and contrary to God's law."[SUP][96][/SUP] In response to criticism, Hovind has stated: "I love the Jews. But The Protocols of Zion [sic] was written to explain how to control the world, I mean, it lays it all out. But it’s really carefully done so that if it is ever discovered the Jews take the blame for it."[SUP][54][/SUP]
The SPLC also criticized Hovind for "point[ing] his followers to Citizens Rule Book, popular among antigovernment "Patriots"; Media Bypass, an antigovernment magazine with strong antisemitic leanings"; and books by tax protester Irwin Schiff"[SUP][97][/SUP] (Schiff has since been convicted and sentenced to 13 years in prison).
While Kent Hovind is in prison, Eric has continued operating CSE and has received criticism for errors in his claims. Biologist PZ Myers criticized Eric and CSE employee Jonathon Sampson for their comments on cephalopods, writing "We do have explanations of cephalopod evolution" and "they lack the intelligence to grasp it."[SUP][98][/SUP] In his criticism, Myers criticized Hovind for failing to look up the evolutionary scholarship on cephalopods and linked to his blog article on cephalopod evolution.[SUP][98][/SUP][SUP][99][/SUP]

 

[jezr74]

It's like the Creationists hold the license for that particular form of fallacious argument--"argument from SQUIRREL!!!".

With time you can actually break down each statement and point out the false claims. He's used allot of big words, with clearly no real science background. But then again he only has to spot this stuff to true believers, and they wont know it, or fact check anyway.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[jezr74]

Can you cite someone credible? Even the Creationist's thinks he's a quack. As to his doctorates, I have 12. Well, 11. #12 is still printing from my deskjet. But as a certified (soon as the ink dries) Doctor of CreationFreakology I can guarentee that he's nucking futts and my qualifications are just as valid as his are. I guarantee it. Except I'm not a tax cheat who's in jail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

It really is a shame these con's give legitimate people of faith a bad name.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[arnisador]

Currently Patriot offers a monthly fee, unlike most universities, which only charge per-credit fees.

This, actually, is slowly in the process of changing, and one prominent new-but-legit institution is now doing something sort of like this, but the point still stands--charging other than by credit has traditionally been the domain of diploma bills. If you can join the "Ph.D. Club" like the "Black Belt Club" for one fixed price, odds are they want to get you that credential ASAP so they can start charging you again or focus their attention on new payers. His academic degrees carry no weight, and he must be well aware of that.

 

[oftheherd1]

Many Christians do not agree with me, but I don't believe Noah's ark has been found, or ever will be. Mind you, it is my belief only, and I can't point anyone to a verse in the Bible that says we will never find Noah's ark.

My belief is based on the fact that we don't know for sure where Jesus was born, where He died, or was buried. We don't have any confirmed parts of the cross Jesus was crucified on. There are places that tradition holds as His birth or burial place. We also don't know the burial place of Moses.

Those pieces of wood that are thought to be from His cross; they are articles of worship to many people. Other artifacts that are thought to be associated with Jesus Christ are also worshipped. They become like idols, and their worship, idolatry, a practice specifically forbiden in the Bible. The same would probably be true of the place of burial of Moses, if we knew where that was. If we had Noah's ark, the same would be likely to occur.

That is my reason for my belief. No one else is required to agree or believe as I do. But my belief makes the whole discussion above rather pointless for me.

 

[Scott T]

What do you mean "found"..... Noah's ark is docked in Cologne, Germany.....

Unless Noah's Ark utilizes TARDIS technology, it looks a little small to carry a male and female sample of each land animal. No wonder the unicorn didn't get to join the 'green alligators and long-neck geese, the humpy-back camels and the chimpanzees...'

 

[arnisador]

Unless Noah's Ark utilizes TARDIS technology, it looks a little small to carry a male and female sample of each land animal.

It was seven pairs for each type of "clean" animal, wasn't it?

 

[grumpywolfman]

It was really...Really...... REALLY....BIG

You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it was... that and he forgot the unicorns

300 Royal Egyptian cubits = 515 feet long

 

[Xue Sheng]

300 Royal Egyptian cubits = 515 feet long

How long was the original cubit

The length of a cubit was based on the distance from the elbow to the fingertips

Hebrew (short) 17.5in (44.5cm)
Egyptian 17.6in (44.7cm)
Common (short) 18in (45.7cm)
Babylonian (long) 19.8in (50.3cm)
Hebrew (long) 20.4in (51.8cm)
Egyptian (long) 20.6in (52.3cm)

But when Noah came off the Ark, only one cubit measurement existed—the one he had used to construct the Ark. Unfortunately, the exact length of this cubit is unknown. After the nations were divided, years later at the Tower of Babel, different cultures (people groups) adopted different cubits. So it requires some logical guesswork to reconstruct the most likely length of the original cubit.

 

[grumpywolfman]

How long was the original cubit



Hebrew (short) 17.5in (44.5cm)
Egyptian 17.6in (44.7cm)
Common (short) 18in (45.7cm)
Babylonian (long) 19.8in (50.3cm)
Hebrew (long) 20.4in (51.8cm)
Egyptian (long) 20.6in (52.3cm)

Royal Egyptian cubit (20.6in)

300 Royal Egyptian cubits = 515 feet. The unit of measurement that Moses, who wrote the Book of Genesis, would have been familiar with was the Royal Egyptian Cubit. This is the same unit of measurement used in the construction of the Great Pyramid in Egypt. This cubit was employed until at least the time of King Solomon as gates constructed by him, in Israel, are based on this unit of measurement