Yep, we're all dead and the world was destroyed 4000 years ago. It was all Noah's fault, his ark was too big.
3/8/2007 12:43:47 AM
According to BiblelogicTM, evolution doesn't have to account for it. Noah brought two of EVERY creature on the ark. So the animals didn't have to evolve FROM that point; they evolved TO that point.
3/8/2007 1:34:33 AM
3/8/2007 1:37:03 AM
I find it staggering that someone this dim spells 'exponentially' correctly.
3/8/2007 2:04:48 AM
The world was distroyed 4000 years ago? Now why didn't I get the memo? Or anybody else for that matter?
3/8/2007 2:17:49 AM
You know maybe China or India or one of the other dozen or so civilizations existing 4000 years ago would have mentioned the world being destroyed.
9/10/2008 1:56:39 AM
Now work forward from there...
9/10/2008 2:22:55 AM
Noah is a myth for stupid people.
7/21/2011 9:01:34 AM
or an ark exponentially bigger than the Bible speaks of.
Right. The ark would never have fit two of all of the earth's land , and fresh water animals, not to mention plants, that would need protection from a global catastrophe like that. Two major boo-boos. The Bible is flawed. Keep this train of thought going.
7/21/2011 9:35:46 AM
"According to BiblelogicTM, evolution doesn't have to account for it. Noah brought two of EVERY creature on the ark. So the animals didn't have to evolve FROM that point; they evolved TO that point."
And the largest wooden vessel to date was the Rochambeau
, in 1871; so unseaworthy was it (it even had metal supports in it's wooden hull), that it sailed only once
to it's new owners in France. It never sailed again.
To hold at least two of every species that exists today (what about Labradoodles, which didn't
exist until 1988 CE
?!), said wooden
-hulled Ark would have had to have been far larger than the current biggest ocean-going (and steel
-hulled, natch) vessel on the planet, the Jahre Viking.
Must've been fun for Noah & co. on the world's biggest ship-cum-submarine
, eh Rom831? Nope, no mention of metal supports to said Ark's hull (one word: Rochambeau
), and the concept of Structural Integrity Fields didn't exist until Gene Roddenberry had created "Star Trek" in the mid-late 60s (again, CE
); nor is there any mention in the Bible about God invervening in keeping said Ark afloat. PROTIP: If it isn't
mentioned in the Bible, it never happened.
Oh, one more thing. Two words: ancient China. Their civilisation existed, before, and after
the business with said 'Ark'. They were sticklers for record-keeping (ergo, we know so
much about them today. QED.), yet, there's not one
mention of any so-called cataclysmic, civilisation-annihilating 'Flood'. And the ancient Chinese certainly existed during said so-called 'Flood'.
Funny that eh Rom831? And not in a 'Funny-ha-ha' way, neither.
I guess that accounts for some fundies resorting to using the excuse of a 'local Flood' (T**y B****s, I'm looking at you
). But that's okay, fundies. Just keep moving the goalposts, just as you always do when more gaps are filled.
But one day, there'll be no more gaps for you to put said goalposts into.
Creationism cannot account for it's unjustifiable existence. And I've not even started; let me introduce you to Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Rom831...:
7/21/2011 11:34:59 AM
> I find it staggering that someone this dim spells 'exponentially' correctly.
Spellchecker. Sadly there's no such thing yet as a truthchecker.
7/21/2011 11:38:00 AM
The size of the Ark is one of the few details provided in the Bible. We know what a Cubic measurement is so the size in three dimensions of the Ark are established.
Why would you question that? Why wouldn't you question the concept of a 6000 year old Earth that the Bible NEVER established?
Why won't you read that thing?
7/23/2011 7:56:13 AM
PROTIP: If it isn't mentioned in the Bible, it never happened.
Same with if it IS mentioned.
7/23/2011 8:15:36 AM