B
buffalo
Guest
Why are you placing scientists on such a pedestal?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Noahic flood interpretation under a non-fundamentalist view
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A
Atreju
Guest
Y adam is just a nickname. It does not mean that Y adam was the only person alive at that time. It is just the most recent person on the strictly paternal line. We have other lines of ancestry going through that period, which by the way, is over 200,000 years ago. So that’s actually evidence against a global flood, because why don’t we have a most recent ancestor on the male line only a few thousand years ago? Why do we have to go back 200,000 years to find someone who we are all related to in that way?
Just to illustrate this y-chromosomal adam thing, because I constantly see people confused by it. Y chromosomal Adam is the name we give the person for whom every living man can say “He is my father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s (and so on ) father’s father.” That does not mean he was the only person alive at that time or that he is our only ancestor living at that time. He has a father and siblings and cousins who also have descendants, he is just the most recent person who has that very specific relationship with everyone.
Just to illustrate this y-chromosomal adam thing, because I constantly see people confused by it. Y chromosomal Adam is the name we give the person for whom every living man can say “He is my father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s (and so on ) father’s father.” That does not mean he was the only person alive at that time or that he is our only ancestor living at that time. He has a father and siblings and cousins who also have descendants, he is just the most recent person who has that very specific relationship with everyone.
H
humbleseeker
Guest
The church would agree if you used my entire quote:
“The Bible is not a science textbook nor should it be viewed as a historical document as we’ve come to understand them in the last 500 years”
as described in Church documents such as Divino Afflante Spiritu and Dei Verbum.
“The Bible is not a science textbook nor should it be viewed as a historical document as we’ve come to understand them in the last 500 years”
as described in Church documents such as Divino Afflante Spiritu and Dei Verbum.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
Y Adam would be Noah and yes other men were alive at the time. They died.Y adam is just a nickname. It does not mean that Y adam was the only person alive at that time. It is just the most recent person on the strictly paternal line. We have other lines of ancestry going through that period, which by the way, is over 200,000 years ago. So that’s actually evidence against a global flood, because why don’t we have a most recent ancestor on the male line only a few thousand years ago? Why do we have to go back 200,000 years to find someone who we are all related to in that way?
The mutational clock needs recalibration. http://www.dnai.org/teacherguide/pdf/reference_romanovs.pdf
M
MarlboroMan
Guest
Exactly. Now of we are given knowledge through various methods, which would be the surest and best method to be given knowledge?
Observational knowledge would be the lowest form of knowledge (and least sure). Divinely Inspired knowledge would be the highest and best and consequently the most sure. Where do we get Divinely Insipred knowledge? From the Church and from Sacred Scripture. Hence, when something is written in Sacred Scripture then we know it to be true more surely than if we simply observe it.
Observational knowledge would be the lowest form of knowledge (and least sure). Divinely Inspired knowledge would be the highest and best and consequently the most sure. Where do we get Divinely Insipred knowledge? From the Church and from Sacred Scripture. Hence, when something is written in Sacred Scripture then we know it to be true more surely than if we simply observe it.
A
Atreju
Guest
No, we are descended from other men who were alive at that time. And that recalibration would only halve the time.
B
buffalo
Guest
I wonder how some Japanese feel about that.Why are you so dismissive of them? Your life would so much harder without the achievements of scientists.
B
buffalo
Guest
Proof you did not read the source I gave.And that recalibration would only halve the time.
B
buffalo
Guest
Provisional science limited to our 5 senses, 3 dimensions and time that has cast off the formal and final causes, only keep the material and efficient and not let the “divine foot in the door” does not give me confidence.You can argue that it’s the most important if you want, but it’s still not science and certainly not “the most sure.”
B
buffalo
Guest
I apologize. It is not a game.Didn’t realize this was a game to you.
B
buffalo
Guest
Yes. You might like IDvolution!Exactly. Now of we are given knowledge through various methods, which would be the surest and best method to be given knowledge?
Observational knowledge would be the lowest form of knowledge (and least sure). Divinely Inspired knowledge would be the highest and best and consequently the most sure. Where do we get Divinely Insipred knowledge? From the Church and from Sacred Scripture. Hence, when something is written in Sacred Scripture then we know it to be true more surely than if we simply observe it.
Information flow.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
A
Atreju
Guest
Buffalo, it is a troubling theme here that everything you’re saying is not accurate. You don’t seem to actually understand the sources you’re linking to because they don’t actually support what you’re trying to say they support.
A link to someone saying he has evidence of a big flood to say that’s evidence of a worldwide flood.
A link to a documentary talking about geological evidence for some flooding in Washington that goes into great detail exactly what caused that flood and it’s not a worldwide flood.
A link to a 20-year old article on recalibrating mitocondrial DNA by about half as evidence that 3-year old research on Y-chromosomal ancestry should be recalculated by 4,000%
Not good, man.
A link to someone saying he has evidence of a big flood to say that’s evidence of a worldwide flood.
A link to a documentary talking about geological evidence for some flooding in Washington that goes into great detail exactly what caused that flood and it’s not a worldwide flood.
A link to a 20-year old article on recalibrating mitocondrial DNA by about half as evidence that 3-year old research on Y-chromosomal ancestry should be recalculated by 4,000%
Not good, man.
B
buffalo
Guest
As in a home run everytime. These are base hits. They add up to runs.Buffalo, it is a troubling theme here that everything you’re saying is not accurate. You don’t seem to actually understand the sources you’re linking to because they don’t actually support what you’re trying to say they support.
B
buffalo
Guest
We should ignore all your supporting links older than 20 years too?A link to a 20-year old article on recalibrating mitocondrial DNA by about half as evidence that 3-year old research on Y-chromosomal ancestry should be recalculated by 4,000%
B
buffalo
Guest
We are looking for evidence to support a global flood. Ballard shows evidence of a big flood around the same time as Noah’s. He does not call it a global flood, Why? Because he would need more evidence outside this to do so. Maybe he or someone else will.A link to a documentary talking about geological evidence for some flooding in Washington that goes into great detail exactly what caused that flood and it’s not a worldwide flood.
A
Atreju
Guest
When exactly are you placing the flood?
B
buffalo
Guest
If you watch the Megaflood you will see how fast features that we see today can be formed by huge volumes of water.A link to a documentary talking about geological evidence for some flooding in Washington that goes into great detail exactly what caused that flood and it’s not a worldwide flood.
J Harlen Bretz was ostracized from the geologic society because he claimed the Scablands were created quickly. This did not conform to the uniformatarianists. He was vindicated some 50 years later.
The potholes are amazing and water drilled these holes in 24 hours in solid rock. The power of water to carve features we have been taught took millions of years was overturned. Cataclysm is now accepted as it was before.
B
buffalo
Guest
I do not know.When exactly are you placing the flood?
Consider though that the various large local floods that we see evidence of could have actually been the very same one.
A
Atreju
Guest
Yes, the power of water to carve features is great. And we would see that carving everywhere. But we don’t. Because there was no global flood. This is conspiracy theory thinking, taking bits and pieces that don’t actually say what you think they do and putting together the narrative you want, while ignoring all the evidence that contradicts you.
A
Atreju
Guest
I saw a video of flooding in Houston this year and a video of flooding in New Orleans ten years ago. That doesn’t mean they were the same flood and it covered the entire world.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.