We have not yet reached the advancement of Noah's era.

originally posted by: skalla

originally posted by: tsingtao

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Jesuslives4u

Except in the story he clearly did not destroy all living creatures, some got a ticket on a big boat.

ETA: those *cough* depictions of floods that you mention could be from the extremely well known precursor story, or just entirely totally unconnected, yunno?

ok, "cough" how did gilgamesh get all over the world?

and most likely the stories are unconnected from a central copycat story.

Gilgamesh got all over the world after the tablets were excavated, translated and published in the modern era, cough.

And of course the many depictions of floods are unconnected, except representing the commonly occurring phenomena known as flooding.

ETA: The tablets relating to the overall Epic story were excavated in the mid 1800's iirc. The name appeared in some ancient writing known prior to this but not the overall story i believe. The popularisation of the story took longer than this ofc. Personally i came across the story via Robert Silverberg - i was a fan of his books as a teen/pre teen so i came across his "Gilgamesh the King" in this manner.

What was your point?

Except in the story he clearly did not destroy all living creatures, some got a ticket on a big boat.

ETA: those *cough* depictions of floods that you mention could be from the extremely well known precursor story, or just entirely totally unconnected, yunno?

you seemed to suggest that ancient peoples over the world knew about gil's flood.
which was written a long time ago.


i just asked how they all knew about it and why would they copy it.

silverberg was a good writer.

a reply to: tsingtao

My point that you originally replied to was that the Biblical flood story was pretty much copied. I though that it was worth reminding someone that their religious stories had a heritage that they may not have considered, given the point that they were making, ie that a depiction of a flood shows the veracity of biblical tales.

And Silverberg is great, i had just finished reading "Lord Valentine's Castle" when he released "Gilgamesh the King" which i read and then it in turn caused me to purchase a translation of "The Epic of Gilgamesh", Enuma Elish and so forth.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

Apparently so do you since Carbon 14 dating isn't used to date things when it exceeds 100,000 years. Also where is that source from? You just posted a random quote with no sourced information. Not to mention it is incorrect since the half-life of C-14 is about 5730 years which you'll notice is greater than 4000 years, and that's just ONE half-life.

Simple refutation of a global flood:
Pando (tree)

Pando (Latin for "I spread"), also known as The Trembling Giant,[1][2] is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) determined to be a single living organism by identical genetic markers[3] and assumed to have one massive underground root system. The plant is estimated to weigh collectively 6,000,000 kg (6,600 short tons),[4] making it the heaviest known organism.[5] The root system of Pando, at an estimated 80,000 years old, is among the oldest known living organisms.[6][7]

Bold added. As you can see, Pando is 80,000 years old. If there was a global flood, poor Pando would be dead. Thanks to not being able to live under a giant ocean of water. The idea of a global flood is so ridiculous and it is terrifying how many people (Christians) want to pretend it actually happened to legitimize their book of mythologies.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


Dendrochronology can go back 11 thousand years.

Just adding another nail....

a reply to: skalla

Already covered in this thread so you can discuss it there. But the lawsuit is pending by the looks of things, although he was fired for intellectual dishonesty and poor method related to him using such erroneous claims to make money as a creationist speaker by the looks of things..... this is off topic though, the very reason i suggested that Jesuslives4u start a dedicated thread on his Everest claims with sources etc

I must have hit a nerve. I thought I was addressing jonnywhite in a response to his false claim that Mt. Everest was well over millions of years old. Which by the way I have noted that no response to that false claim has been challenged by this thread. Unless of course you wish to be the first.

Trying to denigrate Dr. Mark Armitage is most disingenuous and unbecoming of truthfulness. The Doctor was not fired for intellectual dishonesty nor the need for monetary gain as you have falsely written. I also noted that you did not fail to mention that he was a creationist as though that should matter in the scientific realm. Your statement reveals to me exactly your intent.

If you would do a factual search on Mark Armitage you would find that he is quite wealthy and not in need of speakers fees. He is a professional biologist with as much if not more integrity than most in his field. His religious affiliations should not matter in his biological findings and that was his intent and purpose. The entire matter is a revelation of the good ole boy atheist network which has kept this entire world in ignorance and darkness.

a reply to: Seede

For you info, a post i made today:

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yurp, and the crazy thing is that it is entirely possible (and quite rational imo) to have a belief in god, jesus and salvation without requiring a literal reading of The Bible. Faith does not need facts, and that is fine by me. This just serves to make people's (eta: some people's) faith look extremely shaky.

Yep, creationism and a literal reading of the bible is downright stupidity and wilful ignorance. I have no issue with faith though.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
There is almost complete agreement among the hundreds of flood legends found among nearly all the nations and tribes worldwide.

The simple fact that so many of these accounts agree in so many vital points makes it very obvious that they could not possibly have originated from separate events.

originally posted by: FatherLukeDuke
And here is the clincher that is unarguable proof of the great flood: Petrified clams in the closed position (found all over the world) testify to their rapid burial while they were still alive, even on top of Mount Everest.

originally posted by: CherubBaby
Native global flood stories are documented as history or legend in almost every region on earth. Old world missionaries reported their amazement at finding remote tribes already possessing legends with tremendous similarities to the Bible's accounts of the worldwide flood. H.S. Bellamy in Moons, Myths and Men estimates that altogether there are over 500 Flood legends worldwide. Ancient civilizations such as (China, Babylonia, Wales, Russia, India, America, Hawaii, Scandinavia, Sumatra, Peru, and Polynesia) all have their own versions of a giant flood.

originally posted by: Sun Matrix
It's hard to find a culture without a flood story........Noah is the real deal.

originally posted by: lonewolf19792000
I hate to burst your bubble of self delusion but it must be done. Archeaology has already proved the "great flood" in fact has happened. Archeaology has also proved Jericho did exist and in the spot the bible said it did and that it was also razed and burnt to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Troy actually did exist and that it too was razed to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Herodium in fact did exist and many ancient cities in Israel that are in the bible actually did exist like Caesaria and even the Temple of Herod and jewish coins from the first century A.D. were in fact discovered at the base of the Mt. Moriah with maccabee inscriptions on them. Archeaology is a well established and well respected science by the world scientific community world wide, it is hardly "psuedo-science".

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
Flood myths are almost universal, and the one of the Miao people in China has preserved the names of all the patriarchs of Genesis PHONETICALLY for all those centuries. Yes, they got the names of Noah, his wife, and his sons all correct, sounding more than merely recognizable. I can't buy the local flood theories - I mean there were and are local floods, but the big one is preserved in the entire sedimentary layers around the world. You can interpret them as laid down during millions of years if you want, but I think rapid deposition is at least a valid an interpretation.

"And the odds become even longer that Noah's Flood is not an historical fact when one considers the hundreds of tribes from around the world that have ancestral knowledge of the global Flood. And yet, we are expected to ignore this overwhelming evidence because it contradicts current mainstream science and archaeology.

Hundreds of tribal legends and ancient accounts from Egypt, Babylon, and the Indus confirm the account of Noah's Flood from the book of Genesis. These tribes and ancient cultures obviously had no interest in copying a Hebrew account about a global Flood, therefore, all of these accounts must have been independently derived by the various people-groups' ancestors from the eight who were on the vessel that endured the global Flood. When the eight reproduced and spread out across the Middle East, and soon thereafter, much of the world (as some were demonstrably excellent mariners), the memory of the worldwide Flood was retained, and to a not-surprisingly great degree."

The Ancients Knew of the Global Flood

What is the significance of the various flood legends? The answer seems obvious: (a) we have well over 200 flood legends that tell of a great flood (and possibly more than 500); (b) many of the legends come from different ages and civilizations that could not possibly have copied any of the similar legends; (c) the legends were recorded long before any missionaries arrived to relate to them the Genesis account of Noah; and (d) almost all civilizations have some sort of flood legend. The conclusion to be drawn from such facts is that in the distant past, there was a colossal flood that forever affected the history of all civilizations.

Preserved in the myths and legends of almost every people on the face of the globe is the memory of the great catastrophe. While myths may not have any scientific value, yet they are significant in indicating the fact that an impression was left in the minds of the races of mankind that could not be erased.

Legends of the Flood

I have a new pet peeve. Ty for that.

a reply to: skalla

TextYep, creationism and a literal reading of the bible is downright stupidity and wilful ignorance. I have no issue with faith though.

I made no such claim that I have a literal understanding of any bible and you are very well misinformed as to exactly what all creationist subscribe to. I must have hit your nerve once more. Of course you are inferring that you are well above reading classical literature of which most bibles contain and your particular faith is the true matter of all intelligence. This would embrace your inferred rational that the literature of the Hebrew and Greek literature is absolutely without facts. That in itself is total stupidity to say the least.

You as well as all people are entitled to your version or visions of faith without slander or repercussions but that seemingly does not apply to your own assumed superiority. I have no quarrel with what ever faith you may embrace and I would have hoped that you would have had the same attitude but can see that you are the king with no clothes.

The subject matter of my post was the dating of Mt. Everest by the proof of secular biology that dinosaurs were not extinct millions of years ago and have recently (within 5,000 years) existed with mankind. I admitted that it was then logical that Mt. Everest was not millions of years old by the same reasoning as the fabled demise of dinosaurs.

What does that show the world? It shows the common man that the fields of science do contain untruthful and assuming scientists who tag some facts with a lot of fiction. I stand by that posting that you nor anyone can factually state that Mt. Everest is millions of years old. Where are your credentials to show that Dr. Armitage is wrong in his biological discovery and that the assumed biology, which is taught as fact, does not contain speculation and propaganda? Did Dr. Armitage use the same biology that any biologist would use? Absolutely he did regardless of his theological differences with his colleagues. Fact is fact unless Dr. Armitage is wrong and cannot prove his biological discovery. The law suit is not the authenticity of the discovery but the attempt to suppress the discovery which in turn exposes fraud in the world of biology.

a reply to: Seede

Considering my love of classical literature (i have not long returned from Syracuse, spurred on by my reading of Polybius) i stopped reading at your first paragraph. If you want to discuss the doctor, go to the thread on that subject like i suggested.

a reply to: Seede

Mark Armitage was fired for being intellectually dishonest with his findings.

Mark Armitage – Creationism and Bad Science

He was fired because he showed a completely lack of intellectual honesty and was misrepresenting discoveries in order to make a personal profit as a speaker of creationism. And in this law suit? Mark has won no matter what.

Either Mark wins and so allows the usage of real science to make fallacious claims by protecting it as freedom of religion. Or Mark loses the cases and becomes a poster child for the expelled trope of creationists where he profits from travelling about claiming that he is the creationist science tried to silence.

Here's the abstract of the paper:
Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus

I'm going to quote a fellow ATSer, BiffTurkenton, about this situation from this thread

The basis of his claim is this: He found a triceratops horn. There was still soft tissue in the horn. The horn is real, the find is real, the soft tissue is real. Next, he claims that no way could soft tissue survive millions of years. So that this horn must not be millions of years old, it must only be 4,000 years old. Thus, proving the Earth is only 6,000 years old. He used a couple of realisms to push a falsehood. You know what they say, the best lies have a bit of truth to them.

Technically he was wrong in a few areas, the "soft tissue" was covered with mineral deposits and had to be de-mineralized, leaving a spongy cell structure that looked like cells, but what's the big deal, as other dinosaur bones have been found with soft tissue. There is nothing that says everything inside a fossilized bone has to be replaced by minerals. Deep down inside it were bits made up of carbon making up a cell-like texture. Carbon does not change into anything else, not even after millions of years. This was carbonaceous material that has a spongy texture. It does not contradict evolution or defy the true age of dinosaurs millions of years ago.

He misled by claiming carbonaceous material could not possibly that old and thus could only be 4,000 years old, which is proof the earth is only 6,000 years old.

He's a creationist fraudster who got fired for intellectual dishonesty. He needs to go back to his fake university with his creationist degree and quit pretending to be a real scientist.

By the way, he NEVER radiometric dated the fossil. He just found the soft center and said that because there is a soft center it is therefore only 4000 years old. The man is a fraudster who tried to push bad science to "prove" young earth creationism.

This man hurt his cause more than one paper.could ever have possibly helped it.

Unless his dishonesty (which isn't very Christlike ) brings the attention of proven scientific researchers into this subject, he set the creationist a larger blow than anyone against his cause ever could have.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

"And the idea that sea creatures were just there before everest was a mountain should then mean that sea creature evidence should be all over the place, or do they only migrate to where they think mountains will be in the future? "

Stop letting your emotions cloud your judgement.

And yes, that DOES mean sea creatures evidence is all over the place, IT IS.

The great pyramid is built with stones, guess what those stones contain? SEASHELLS! TONS of them!

How did the Egyptians get stone with seashells imbedded in them? They cut it from a quarry, that used to be a sea floor.

If you want to ignore observable facts that's your choice, but don't attack others because they look at the available information to formulate their ideas.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

TextMark Armitage was fired for being intellectually dishonest with his findings.

You are misinformed and do not have the facts. You sound like the paid parrots of trolls who never get facts but only attempted opinions.

"According to the suit, the supervisor stormed into the lab, shouting, “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!” and berating Armitage for his “creationist” views. Armitage informed the biology department chair and the head of technical services that what the supervisor said was a “clear example of religious discrimination.” Both of them assured Armitage his views would “not be a problem” and to “forget about the confrontation.” But they took no action to correct the supervisor or prevent future discrimination in the department, the suit claims."

That my friend is the true matter of the suit. Mark Armitage is a biologist for well over thirty years and I wold have the tendency to believe his findings rather than those of you and your sources.

Quote "Armitage published his findings in February 2013 with a peer-reviewed article for Acta Histochemica, a journal dedicated to the structural biochemistry of cells and tissues. His findings mirrored other recent discoveries of soft tissue in dinosaur bones. Two weeks later, CSUN fired Armitage, claiming his contract was temporary and the school lacked funding to continue the position."
"On July 22, Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court on Armitage’s behalf, declaring he was fired due to his “perceived” religious views and, contrary to the school’s claim, his position was not temporary nor was funding an issue in the department. Armitage’s contract defined his position as “permanent part-time” and he was enrolled in the university’s benefits package. On the job for three years, he held progressively increasing responsibilities, received numerous commendations from co-workers and supervisors, and was told by his supervisor via email there were “big plans” to increase his lab, “complete with it’s own building(!)”

carl • a day ago
"It's been 25 days since this article was posted and still NO EXPLANATION with SUPPORTING EVIDENCE to show how soft tissue, transparent blood vessels, and blood cells can remain preserved while buried in dirt with bacteria, ground water, and other forces of decay for 65 MILLION years! All we have from evolutionists/long-agers so far is UNTESTABLE ASSUMPTIONS, tons of 'ideas' on how dino tissue 'may', might', 'could', 'should' survive for 65 MILLION years...plus BLIND FAITH in their long-age BELIEFS."

"Jesse • 4 days ago
Shame on you, CSUN. CSUN is clearly lying and trying to play down what Mr. Armitage's job actually was because the University said he was an electron microscopy technician which is not consistent with the fact that he was at the excavation site and made the discovery of the triceratops horn and published a peer reviewed article about it. Microscope technicians don't dig up dinosaur bones and publish scientific papers."

"carl Jeremy McReynolds • 6 days ago
If you faithfully believe with all your heart that soft tissue, transparent blood vessels, and red blood cells buried in the dirt with bacteria, ground water, and other forces of decay, can remain preserved for 65 million years, your dogmatic belief has NO PART IN SCIENCE, especially with NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE!
Sure, you have the right to BELIEVE whatever you wish, but WHERE IS THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE???"

"carl • 9 days ago
DNA disintegrates faster when it is in contact with water. In commenting on the remarkably old DNA in a supposedly 17-million-year-old magnolia leaf, Svante Pääbo remarked, “The clay [in which the leaf was found] was wet, however, and one wonders how DNA could have survived the damaging influence of water for so long.” Also see Svante Pääbo, “Ancient DNA,” Scientific American, Vol. 269, November 1993, p. 92."

The peer review will eventually be accepted as fact by some and bogus by others but that was not the entire issue at what is at stake here. What is at stake here is trying to silence scientists who are not in the atheists circle that control the scientific fields. You know very well the charge and the ramifications of the law suit. This dark age is about to be exposed for what it truly is.

The fact is many base their perception of reality on their “faith” in their religion and all of those beliefs are “colored by that faith.The issue is …..will a person or scientist of “faith (Christianity) who “believes” in creationism going to “color” their belief of facts by their faith or deny their faith in favor of facts…it will 99.999999999% of the time be their faith they believe in.

For example the majority of everyones perception of the way their “ perception of the world is literally “colored”.The majority of everyone (meaning those without a physical or mental deficiency of some kind) sees thing like a lemon as yellow or a cherry as red or grass as green yet none of those things are in fact that color.The fact is all of those objects are every color but that color a person sees them as because their seeing “perception” filters out the true colors of those objects and reflects the color that it isn’t.

Mans perception of the world is accurately “reflected” in that fact of how they see things…not as they really are but through the filter of faith…their Belief System.That is the only logical and reasonable explanation why someone who is seemingly sensible would believe that the whole of the universe was made in six 24 hour periods because they believe that’s what a “book” means when it say “ six days”.They form their perception through their belief filter yet it is false.The scriptures account of the “creation” is not a record to base “fact" on especially since the statements made are not literal facts.This is the main symptom of “faith”….it perceives things through the filter of faith as fact when it is not true at all.

The “fact” is the creation of the universe did not happen approximately 6 thousand years ago in a 6 day 24 hour period.The fact is there was not a “worldwide” flood for 40 days and nights.It break all natural laws of physics and there is no conclusive evidence in favor of it.The burden of proof is all on the claimee which they can not even approach proving yet they insist they have by isolated unsubstantiated claims.There is no “conspiracy” to cover up the true facts the fact is they haven’t been presented in a plausible proof.If it was so conclusive it could never be covered up yet the “faithful” continue to be blinded by their faith in unreality.

Their claims are not denied because of their abundance of faith but because of their lack of facts.In their zealousness to “prove” their agenda they have denied all that matters..... Truth.In their efforts to be “credible” they have proved their lack of credibility.It is no wonder so many “can not” believe in the God they believe in and propagate.They base their belief on the same type of evidence…lack of fact and an abundance of unsubstantiated claims based on faith in something that is not reasonable.

Those “facts” are not enough to convince the “faithful” their methods are no viable.They not only make the God they believe in not credible but also themselves which does not have to be the case.Unfortunately (or fortunately) the die has been cast for the majority and not only can their reliability not be recovered they won’t recant because..they can’t!They cannot HELP but see a cherry as red even though scientific FACT of physics states it is not red at all.

Unfortunately nothing can be done to help them.They can ONLY perceive/see”life” through their faith.That is their nature and character.They can no more be to blame of their condition as they can’t perceive a cherry another color that isn’t red because that is how they perceive no matter how incorrect it is….and that is the crux of ALL the conflict in the world between “man”.Most of them can agree on the color of a cherry(and be wrong) but things they “believe” as a whole are in conflict with someone (everyone) else.The old saying “lets agree to disagree” sounds benevolent but it’s just another imperception.No one wants to “agree” with anyone else’s belief in ANY form because they can’t….it is against their nature.

That is the perennial conundrum.Welcome to my world … now go home…The beginning of the end of imperception is the “destruction” of a persons “Belief System religion” their coveted B.S.The fact is it will be destroyed…completely….and when it is then that person will “know” the Truth and THEN that person will be freed from the untruth of their false beliefs…and it will all be experienced in reality in another realm…not of “this world”.

originally posted by: edward777

The Nephilim taught humans how to mix with animals and also how to mix all other species. Seems to me such biotechnology would have meant the cities were more like ours, not something primitive. So are we close to a revival of this ancient civilization? Will the results be the same?

This all was not to far in our distant past, it is too bad that the only thing that survived was raw stone, wood, hemp etc. All those wonders seem to have just dissolved into nothingness leaving only the things that man could do with basic physics and human labor...what a shame.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u
Mount Everest is over 29,000 (twenty nine thousand) feet above sea level. On the top was various sea creatures found along with large salt deposits. Can you explain this?

So if Mount Everest was covered in water what land on this planet would not have been covered in water?

That would be a valid argument if the Earth were a static, dead planet, but its not. The Earth is very much alive and active, geologically speaking. The oceanic fossils found on the peaks of Mount Everest are far, far older than the mountain itself, ie. it wasn't a mountain when they were deposited there. I hate to sound derisive, but seriously, they teach basic Earth sciences in middle school....

Sure they do , what a laugh and a crock that statement is, as bad as believing all the fairy tales in the Bible.

a reply to: Rex282

And science is one of the worst examples we could hope to follow, a system that is designed for limitation, small in scope and restricted in thought as any religion.

In fact it is controlled entirely by the same exact thought processes, it starts and ends in highly illogical patterns all too often.

I feel this is on purpose, and that the same Controllers run it all, if you CANNOT see that, then continue your faith that it will all be revealed ,,,,,,lol