Story of Noah: Who believes it to be real?

[Brian_Millar]

It sure seems to be.

What research have you done that is so damaging to the current theory? When will you be publishing your work?You know, that is not how the Church interprets the Bible. She certainly doesn’t use the bible as a science book.You don’t understand science, so your claim that my position isn’t scientific is meaningless.Yeah, that is inferred from scripture as well. I guess that is one thing you disagree with.

Can you give me a source that says that people were killed by scientists for their beliefs that the earth is not flat?It is true that scientific theories will change over time (evolve, if you will) as new data becomes available. But unless you have a theory that explains the current data, your theory is not going to get any traction. An expanding earth doesn’t explain the observations.

Peace

Tim

I could have published my research 29 years ago if the scientific community could pull their heads out of their arse, unfortunatly it’s going to take nothing short of a patent and a working mechanical prototype to get it through their thick skulls to force them into compliance on this one. I came up with the theory based upon real world observation, it’s not speculation at all, just a way of explaining something which is performing against the laws of aerodynamics, for those laws do not apply to it. I’ve discussed the theory, even have an experiement anybody can do at home to show this happening right in front of them. They as well as you are not qualified to understand it because it’s not endorsed by acadamia. I also later found out, I was not the first to come up with the theory, I’ve learned off of the mistake the original scientist faced when presenting it to the scientific community, I will not repeat that one.

Sometimes I tinker around with stuff on the side just to expand my understanding of how things work. On the last creation, I came to find out MIT ran the same experiement only a few years prior. I take it as a compliment, that I am pushing the boundries in that case at their level, how many things have you done that were mimicked by MIT, yet you came to the same conclusion and experiements?

Along the bible, it’s a living word for a reason, it’s very condensed, much information can be extrapolated from it, in this case, the crossreference to the dinasaurs as described in Job as being something of common knowledge. Also in this case, the story of Noah and Genesis.

Do some research on Galileo, Copernicus, Da Vinci, even Columbus had to convince the powers that be that the earth was not flat. bede.org.uk/flatearth.htm

 

[drpmjhess]

Do some research on Galileo, Copernicus, Da Vinci, even Columbus had to convince the powers that be that the earth was not flat.

Not true at all! The sphericity of the Earth had been common knowledge for thousands of years before Columbus. Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) offered four proofs of Earth’s sphericity, and Eratosthenes (276 BC - 194 BC) measured its circumference to within a respectable degree of accuracy. Learn some history!

 

[Brian_Millar]

I wasted my time posting that link then, for you refuse to click on it and read the truth. We had the steam engine long before it was actually used, we had the battery long before electricity was accepted and used yet again. The pattern of inventions and understandings come into play, they rise up, then for some reason are discarded and we then must start over from scratch. Look at what the greeks taught, then the Romans, before them the atlantians, yes they found out recently that too was a similar culture to the greeks, yet more advanced. The reason they are likely discarded and lost is due to mans struggle for power, to conqure, control, and discard.

 

[Contarini]

Do you see that every post isn’t about you, Edwin?

I merely noted that there are two camps of those who find it difficult to believe The Flood occurred. Isn’t it odd that the religious camp have no trouble believing in the Incarnation or the Resurrection, although their source is the same?

I’m part of the “religious camp.” And I was addressing the objection you made. You have ignored what I actually said, so there’s nothing more to say, is there? Refute my arguments and the conversation can continue. There simply is no such contradiction as you allege, for the reasons which I gave and which you have not tried to address.

All of the above is woolgathering. A God who can create the universe from nothing, which Big Bang cosmology confirms, can make it rain.

I am pretty sure that it’s theologically suspect, if not heretical, to claim that there has been more than one act of creation ex nihilo. Unless perhaps the Virginal Conception could be considered such an act. That would be theologically fitting since the Incarnation is an act of new creation. But it does not seem theologically fitting to posit acts of creation ex nihilo every time the Bible describes a miraculous event, even if the original human authors would never have imagined to involve such an act.

And I’ll take your evidence for the bolded portion, please. This isn’t even Anglican dogma.

It’s not dogma. but it’s good theology. Are you suggesting that God’s will is not ordered by His intellect?

Edwin

 

[drpmjhess]

I wasted my time posting that link then, for you refuse to click on it and read the truth. We had the steam engine long before it was actually used, we had the battery long before electricity was accepted and used yet again. The pattern of inventions and understandings come into play, they rise up, then for some reason are discarded and we then must start over from scratch.

I’ve studied that link before, and you either didn’t read it yourself, or were not able to understand what the words meant. Columbus did not have to argue against a Church that believed the earth to be flat. The sphericity of the earth was common knowledge in 1492!

 

[Brian_Millar]

If it was common knowledge, then why the debate to travel from one side to the other?

Also, just to let you guys know, I used to believe in evolution, that’s actually the natural stance most people take these days because they are forced to learn about it in school, through the media, and through current acadamia. I was able to make that leap forward once I realized that the word of God was infallable, that every single thing written was true, that there were not parts in it that were only there to appease feable minds. After I came to that realization, I took a very hard look at what I’ve been taught and I did so with scrutiny for what I learned went against what I’ve been told.

 

[drpmjhess]

If it was common knowledge, then why the debate to travel from one side to the other?

What debate are you talking about?

 

[Orogeny]

I could have published my research 29 years ago if the scientific community could pull their heads out of their arse, unfortunatly it’s going to take nothing short of a patent and a working mechanical prototype to get it through their thick skulls to force them into compliance on this one.

Ah, the old geology conspiracy, eh?

What are you going to patent? I’m talking about a scientific theory, not a piece of equipment.

I came up with the theory based upon real world observation, it’s not speculation at all, just a way of explaining something which is performing against the laws of aerodynamics, for those laws do not apply to it. I’ve discussed the theory, even have an experiement anybody can do at home to show this happening right in front of them.

Heck, why not publish the experiment right here?

They as well as you are not qualified to understand it because it’s not endorsed by acadamia.

Well, I guess it is not as easy as you claim. Why don’t you try me?

I also later found out, I was not the first to come up with the theory, I’ve learned off of the mistake the original scientist faced when presenting it to the scientific community, I will not repeat that one.

So you copied someone. That’s ok. Did they publish their “theory”?

Sometimes I tinker around with stuff on the side just to expand my understanding of how things work. On the last creation, I came to find out MIT ran the same experiement only a few years prior. I take it as a compliment, that I am pushing the boundries in that case at their level, how many things have you done that were mimicked by MIT, yet you came to the same conclusion and experiements?

You know, none. You are clearly something special.

Along the bible, it’s a living word for a reason, it’s very condensed, much information can be extrapolated from it, in this case, the crossreference to the dinasaurs as described in Job as being something of common knowledge. Also in this case, the story of Noah and Genesis.

So you don’t take it literally? You can extrapolate information?

Do some research on Galileo, Copernicus, Da Vinci, even Columbus had to convince the powers that be that the earth was not flat. bede.org.uk/flatearth.htm

Sure they did.

Peace

Tim

 

[Philipp]

This is just a poll. No debate here. I’m simply interested in the statistics of who believes it is real and who thinks it was just a story.

By Christian i mean all people that follow the teachings of Jesus. I’m obviously not including Islam in this even though they acknowledge Jesus.

But i would be interested for Jewish and Islamic people to post their religion and what they voted for. Although being put into the non Christian category.

Philipp: I came in a little late on this “poll” but since you initiated it I thought I’d bring you up to speed with this little link on the probability that the Deluge did indeed occur on a global scale and that there was a need for an Ark as provided in the writings of Moses and revealed to him by God.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=211211&goto=newpost

I’ve posted data on C-14 dating of dinosaur bones and other fossils, fossil human footprints with dinosaurs in a flood environment and even provided evidence for dinosaur depictions by man on a global scale.

Indeed the above link which I just read supports the dinosaur and human footprint evidences along the Paluxy River near Glen Rose TX where I’ve helped uncover fossil human footprints with dinosaurs in a flood environment. Thanks for asking for this “poll”.

I’ve been searching for truth in science for many years and have been on 12 or more expeditions. I’ve arranged RC dating of many fossils. . I’ve been a reserach chemist all my life and this is my contribution to the advancement of science within the Catholic Church where I make my religious home. Needless to say basic research is my avocation.

 

[Brian_Millar]

Ah, the old geology conspiracy, eh?

What are you going to patent? I’m talking about a scientific theory, not a piece of equipment. Heck, why not publish the experiment right here?Well, I guess it is not as easy as you claim. Why don’t you try me?So you copied someone. That’s ok. Did they publish their “theory”?You know, none. You are clearly something special.So you don’t take it literally? You can extrapolate information?
Sure they did.

Peace

Tim

I don’t publish it here because you are too stupid to understand it in the first place to be blunt.

 

[buffalo]

I don’t publish it here because you are too stupid to understand it in the first place to be blunt.

Wow - no personal attacks guys.

A couple of the posters have a way of getting under the skin. Don’t let it bother you.

 

[Brian_Millar]

It’s not a personal attack, he’s been doing that to several people at once here and nobody said anything. The fact of the matter is, it’s too advanced thinking wise for him to wrap his pea brain around, I will not place it on the table for debate, I’ve already gone that route with suto intellectuals before, the results are always the same. They break aerodynamical and gravitational principals to provide a root for their stance and in the end, shrug their shoulders because they cannot formulate a logical conclusion upon the observation that actually fits.

 

[Orogeny]

I don’t publish it here because you are too stupid to understand it in the first place to be blunt.

Nice. Well, you are right about one thing, that was blunt!

If you are concerned about my mental capacity, why don’t you publish it here for the smart ones to evaluate? I promise won’t look at it if that will make you feel better.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

It’s not a personal attack, he’s been doing that to several people at once here and nobody said anything. The fact of the matter is, it’s too advanced thinking wise for him to wrap his pea brain around, I will not place it on the table for debate, I’ve already gone that route with suto intellectuals before, the results are always the same. They break aerodynamical and gravitational principals to provide a root for their stance and in the end, shrug their shoulders because they cannot formulate a logical conclusion upon the observation that actually fits.

Suto intellectuals aside, how can you expect to be taken seriously if you refuse to present your ideas and defend them against questions?

Peace

Tim

 

[Brian_Millar]

Becaue I’ve already gone down that road with the likes of your kind, I know the result before I even post it, so why bother…

 

[Orogeny]

Becaue I’ve already gone down that road with the likes of your kind, I know the result before I even post it, so why bother…

As long as you are ok with not being taken seriously, I agree - why bother.

Peace

Tim

 

[drpmjhess]

It’s not a personal attack, he’s been doing that to several people at once here and nobody said anything. The fact of the matter is, it’s too advanced thinking wise for him to wrap his pea brain around, I will not place it on the table for debate, I’ve already gone that route with suto intellectuals before, the results are always the same. They break aerodynamical and gravitational principals to provide a root for their stance and in the end, shrug their shoulders because they cannot formulate a logical conclusion upon the observation that actually fits.

(1) What is a “suto” intellectual? (My Japanese is a bit rusty)

(2) What is an “aerodynamical principal”? Is that a principal who can fly off the roof of the school building?

 

[Crumpy]

Whoops, I voted incorrectly, as the non-Christian who believed it happened exactly as stated in the Bible.

I think it’s substantially real, but I don’t know what the actual historical circumstances were.

I read the entire OT for the first time in my life this year. This account of Noah is CRUCIAL for understanding the OT.

Why?

Because God makes a covenant that he will never destroy mankind in this way again. As I continued reading the OT, I see that God was keeping that pledge, no matter how bad the apostacy of the Israelites was.There was always a remnant that survived and kept alive the promises of Genesis for a savior and the promises to Abraham for many descendents, etc.

 

[drpmjhess]

I read the entire OT for the first time in my life this year. This account of Noah is CRUCIAL for understanding the OT…

No, the flood story is not crucial, even if illuminating. The core of the Hebrew Bible is the Exodus/Sinai narrative, substantiated by the stories of the Abrahamic covenant and the settling of the promised land, and by periodic warnings in the prophetic books of chastisement for failure to live up to the covenant. The creation and flood stories were rather later additions to the Exodus/Sinai core.

Petrus

 

[Brian_Millar]

(1) What is a “suto” intellectual? (My Japanese is a bit rusty)

(2) What is an “aerodynamical principal”? Is that a principal who can fly off the roof of the school building?

My field of expertice is not grammer, too bad that’s the only thing you can point out as a valid debate here, I’ll be sure to avoid you in the spell checking forums… You are proving my point here, you are not able to grasp concepts I consider childs play.

There is another thread I started, there was an excellent point made on it:

“That science tends to ridicule people right up to the point at which they have the smoking gun. Then they give them a Nobel prize.”