posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:08 AM
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
I see two major logical flaws in your thinking:
How do you account for the geological and archelogical proof that the world is older that 6000 years? The sheer amount of fossils we have would
indicate that they all couldn't have lived in the span of 6000 years... So all of the dinosaurs just forgot to get on the ark? How do you reconcile
Second, your time line doesn't make since because we have major sites based that can be traced back to through history to a firm date. For example the
Great Pyramid of Giza was completed in 2560 BCE. We know this because we can go back through Egyptian history and verify this, and cross reference
with other ancient civiliations. If your graph of holy old dudes is correct then the Great flood happened in 2452, 108 years after the completion of
the Great Pyramid of Giza. Yet the Great Pyramid and the rest of the structures on the Giza plateau are still there. There is no record in Egyptian
history of a great flood that wiped out their entire civiliations. Please help me understand how this could have happened.
As a side note, I am not arrogant. I am not looking to fight... understand yes. fight no. debate yes. question yes.
But If you define me as arrogant because any of the following:
I don't buy youtube clips of people citing the bible
I don't believe in a book about god that was written by men,
I don't believe in a 6000 year old world because of a graph of holy old dudes,
I don't use fuzzy math,
I don't reject solid and accepted science and history,
I don't believe everything I am told.
Then yes, I am arrogant.
The fact that you won't defend your position means you position isn't defendable.
edit on 9/15/2011 by TheHistorian because: (no reason given)