Conversation Between Åzurε and Luck
16 to 30 of 35
  1. Luck
    October 18th, 2009 7:06 PM
    Luck
    Exactly.
    No one ever gives the ice cream love.
  2. Åzurε
    October 18th, 2009 6:26 PM
    Åzurε
    I've decided. The Organization Moogle needs a representative here. As soon as I have access to our original computer (using somebody else's laptop), I'm making a theme. And Ice Cream does need more love.
  3. Luck
    October 17th, 2009 10:11 AM
    Luck
    I have a few questions, but I'll ask them later since I'm not in the mood for replying to these subjects for now.

    And thanks :3
  4. Åzurε
    October 17th, 2009 10:00 AM
    Åzurε
    It's kind of (read: very) late to be saying this, but if you have anymore questions for me, don't hesitate to ask.

    I like your new theme, by the way. I may have to find some O13 myself.
  5. Åzurε
    September 16th, 2009 8:44 PM
    Åzurε
    Ok, I'm back.
    First sentence: why not?
    Second: Perhaps some fish did die. I'm sure the aquatic mammals would have had a time of it, too. But, while the salinity of the pre-flood waters was presumably lower, but it could have been that it was still high enough for certain species to survive, or it could be that (bringing it back around to evolution,) the fish that survived simply deviated to adapt to their new environs.
    Your last point. Out of all humans, the Bible says, Noah and his family were the only ones left across the whole earth who were faithful to God. The rest were unusually evil in their behavior and turned to other gods, or to their selves, for worship. So, to cleanse the planet, enter Flood, stage right. Only Noah and Co. survived, which serves a second purpose: everyone would have the chance to learn about God by preserving knowledge of Him, in such a way as to show that He wasn't invented by humankind. And my thoughts on the hypocrisy comment, it wasn't simple violence. He told Noah He'd flood the earth, and even gave others a chance to hop on, for about 100 years anyways, while the Ark was being built. The public laughed at the old dude building it and went along their merry way. God continued with His plan, and the flood came. God does this quite often in the Old Testament, and in much more direct fashion. There was one incident involving Abraham, where Abe was trying to change God's mind by asking that if 100 (I think, I need a refresher) good people existed there, He'd spare the city. He kept reducing the number, down to 5, and God destroyed the city after telling Abraham not one righteous person lived there. He's compassionate to those who believe in Him, and lets destruction take it's course on others, and one big thing, He gives the people what they want. If there is no God or afterlife, what's the big deal if you die? And they find out. There is no god, and I don't want one if there is. He let's those people leave. That's why I feel sadness for people who don't quite get it. But we still enjoy each other's company. Love 'em while you got 'em, people say over here. I honestly enjoy talking to you quite a bit, you come across as a decent, intelligent person, and I haven't had a good civil debate of any kind in far too long. Off topic, I realize, but sometimes things click in my head.

    End: wall of text. Try to read it, though.
  6. Luck
    September 16th, 2009 12:12 PM
    Luck
    The sediment couldn't be formed that way. And although there are many adaptive species, certain species will die out immediately after the salinity is changed.
    I also don't see how killing everyone on Earth was needed, and even how an ark was made, since he could've just brought them up to heaven until it was over. And further more, he destroyed violence with violence; Am I the only one getting the hypocrisy here?
  7. Åzurε
    September 16th, 2009 7:59 AM
    Åzurε
    Since when did default position lead to scientific proof? On the fish, you would be surprised at the amount of adaptive species around today, and there's some implied evidence that specialization of habitat took place, which seems a logical conclusion, as the salinity would likely differ from region to region, and when the seas dried up, the fish were deposited wherever, and stayed there. There's also the 'layered seas' argument. And the fact that the water could have been primarily what we call estuarine today, to begin with, and the fish simply were within an acceptable range of water salinity. It makes good sense that salt has leached out over the years.

    With that out of the way for the moment, what are you telling me to look at with your diagram? I see the canyon, do you mean the sediment or the formation? I'm confused.
  8. Luck
    September 15th, 2009 9:24 PM
    Luck
    If there was an actual flood that killed every animal, then a lot of fossils would appear, especially in the same place. However, the fossils go from simpler animals to more complex organisms. And I know that the bible didn't mention it, but the default position is that the animals required food and other needed substances. Please explain to me how both freshwater fish and saltwater fish could survive in such flood, because there are very few species that can live in both conditions. I also find it hard to believe that the flood formed something like this, since it is impossible.
  9. Åzurε
    September 15th, 2009 8:19 PM
    Åzurε
    I understand that I was stating something that could have happened, not something that was stated. The simple fact of the matter is the Bible says Noah, his family, and the animals survived on the ark for 150 days after the storm. There is no instruction by God to bring food aboard and throughout the Bible God is characterized as loving and as one who provides. One logical conclusion, guy. Also, I think somewhere it's stated that in one of these instances it was alright for incest to take place, and that God created a wife for Cain when he was exiled for killing Abel. The flood thing could easily be lost to translation, or altered to make it more dramatic or twisted to fit within the set of beliefs of the religion being advertised. Also, sediment could indeed have formed due to the Flood, as only 40 days, 1 and 1/3rd months were actually spent flooding Earth, and the next 150 days, roughly 5 months, drying out. And with all of the vegetation and mud that would have been floating on top, the water would have been still enough to settle, even with the wind created to help dry out the planet. This could also explain some of the sheer volume of water, in addition to all the underground reservoirs bursting out.
  10. Luck
    September 15th, 2009 4:21 PM
    Luck
    What you are doing is implying something when it is not said. I never remembered the scripture of your choice saying that they survived on god's will, because I could very well imply that incest is okay because of Lot and daughters, Noah and family, or Adam and Eve. As for the flood story thing, if it were true, then they would more often than not have very similar stories. A lot of them have stories that are only the same through a flood.
  11. Åzurε
    September 15th, 2009 3:59 PM
    Åzurε
    For your first point, if Noah and his family were common ancestors of all people alive today, wouldn't it make sense that many religions had a flood story?
    For the second click, I only found real problems with the animals fitting on the Ark, and I still think juvenile organisms would work. I'd need to see the literal Hebrew translation for "mate" and "kind". And if they used a set measurement for a cubit. Diet wouldn't be an issue, God said nothing about bringing food in Genesis, and His nature is that of a provider. Perhaps they simply lived through it of God's will. As for the water itself, One translation say "the water rose more than 20 feet, and the mountains were covered." According to the paper you linked to, to much water would result in a very problematic atmosphere. The water might have been simply summoned by God, but science is slowly revealing that he doesn't like to work that way. I'll need to do more research, unfortunately. It would not work without miraculous intervention, or something we haven't thought of or overlooked. I don't have a perfect answer for you at the moment, but I still believe it was a wonderful work of God.
  12. Luck
    September 15th, 2009 3:30 PM
    Luck
    Just thought I'd tell you, a flood cannot put the layers in those sediments, it is impossible. And please don't use the Grand Canyon as an excuse; I have seen too much people using that as an excuse. Oh right, and many other religions used major floods.
    *Click*
    And for the hell of it, problems with a global flood.
    *Click*
  13. Åzurε
    September 15th, 2009 2:16 PM
    Åzurε
    I'm not 100% sure what you mean, but I'll do what I can to clear it up.
    The Flood had little hidden meaning, simply, out of my thoughts, what to expect for the end of Earth. The people who aren't on the boat, so to speak, will be left behind in the flood. A straightforward purpose was to clear the planet of people the Lord deemed too immoral, and refresh Earth. There is actually good evidence for a massive flood happening in various areas all around the globe. For an example I'm familiar with, there are large limestone deposits scattered about the eastern half of Texas. If you know how limestone forms, you'll understand the relevance. Same thing goes for all the oil that was found here. Some people think the Flood may have been the cause of an ice age, but I don't know much of that.

    And Sci, where exactly are you getting the fumes from because I'd like to join?
  14. Luck
    September 15th, 2009 12:53 PM
    Luck
    But there isn't any reason to think that a global flood happened as well, seeing as how it doesn't have any other meaning. If animals made after their own kind, then my source wouldn't exist.
  15. Åzurε
    September 15th, 2009 12:02 PM
    Åzurε
    Just an afterthought: The things that happened the Bible (obviously my belief) all happened, but some things simply have a second meaning. In places like Proverbs (a collection of, guess what, proverbs,) the scriptures use "as" and "like", to indicate an obvious metaphor. Most, if not all things which are metaphorical either point it out, or were stories or dreams. There's no reason to translate things like "God created" or "Jesus wept" metaphorically.