













Comments     Threshold


RE: Sounds familiar ...
By drycrust3 on 2/24/2011 3:18:39 PM , Rating: 1
But cute try, trying to tomfoolery some religion into explaining for science...oh wait a sec...I see what you did there...

Do you really see what I did? It seems to me most people don't, because if they did there wouldn't be just 6 comments left here after this length of time, there would be hundreds.
This article contains a very important fact that is easily overlooked: a world wide flood. Like so many other bits of science that confirm what is written in the Bible, this one gets almost no press at all. In fact, it seems to me this fact was mentioned only because it was relevant to another fact: the loss of oxygen in the oceans. What happens if there was a series of massive fissures that leaked water from earth's interior to the surface? The amount of oxygen in the ocean remains the same, but the amount of water has gone up, meaning the concentration of oxygen in the oceans drops!
Since a comet consists of ice, and since comets have a tail, one thought is that if a comet hit earth such that it caused massive fissures and expelled water from the interior, followed by the ice in the comet tail hitting the earth's atmosphere and melting, the result would have appeared to Noah huge geysers appearing around him and as rain, which is exactly what he recorded in the Bible.

I don't expect science to go do research to support my religious views, but so often we are fed this line that there never was a world wide flood and there is nothing in science that supports the claims written in the Bible.
What's wrong with that? What is wrong is the foundation you are building science on is wrong. Why is it that time and time again some evidence turns up that seems to confirm what is written in the Bible, and not seem to support the Theory of Evolution? The most obvious explanation is that the writers of the Bible recorded the facts correctly.
If there was a worldwide flood, why are there land animals alive now that were alive before the flood? Well, obviously they survived the flood. Ok, but how?
Ignoring the answer, because that takes us away from the really important argument: What if what the Bible says is actually correct? Science has adopted the approach of "Evolution = yes, Bible = no", but time and time again the facts tell us "Bible = yes, Evolution = no". Why?

I'm sorry, but this is taking up to much of my time. I'm sure people can fill in the rest of what I would say if they wanted.

RE: Sounds familiar ...
By yxalitis on 2/28/2011 11:01:43 PM , Rating: 2
OK, I'll type slowly for you...
1. The Earth's interior is molten rock
2. The biblical flood is supposed to have taken place a few thousand years ago, not a few 100,000 years ago.
3. Why would this additional water, wherever it came from, have a different level of oxygen?
Comets are small, much much much smaller then the Earth, any Ice would make no difference to the Earth's ocean levels at all, or produce any noticeable or tangible rain.
4. Oh my, why am I bothering, you are clearly in logic-denial, as are all believers in the true word of the Bible.
Have you read Leviticus?

