...So? Hell, even if the story of Noah had some truth to it, what does a comet have to do with anything?
12/28/2005 3:51:59 AM
Wow, what year was the flood again? This guy is good, real good. I wonder when his paper will be published. Remember the name \"Duane Morse\"--we will be talking about him 200 years from now.
12/28/2005 3:57:37 AM
Ace: my reaction too. What exactly are they getting at? What connection are they positing between Hale Bopp and Noah building his ark?
12/28/2005 4:52:06 AM
I think he's trying to suggest that the water for the flod came from the comet. That's my interpretation at least
12/28/2005 5:47:28 AM
The moon was full 1 month before Noah and his three sons began constructing the ark. Coincidence? HMMMM???!!!
12/28/2005 1:40:37 PM
I went ahead and read through the rest of that thread on Bibleforums.org.
As I've observed in the past (though possibly incorrectly), the modern Christian openly accepts that their religion is based completely in faith.
Initially I have no problem with this. Many people need to believe something in order to bring some sort of purpose to their lives that nature itself cannot. Many people feel the need to attribute life or the universe with a meaning that modern science doesn't directly indicate.
My problem with this reveals itself when we look at the thought process required to make such an assumption.
In order to accept the idea that since modern science cannot explain many things a creator must be present, one must first ignore one of the most fundamental laws of logic: one must accept the false dichotomy of \"current science\" and \"established religion\". The only possible argument is that since science cannot currently explain everything there must be a so-called \"greater power\".
As the Big Bang theory stands we can only estimate the nature of the events following the Big Bang back to one Planck time (10^-43 seconds) after... something. Within this Planck epoch it is theorized that the four fundamental forces were unified and that elementary particles did not exist.
What came before such an event? Science cannot currently provide an answer for that. Why did such an event happen? As science is objective, it cannot provide an answer for that either.
This is where the false dichotomy of the creationist takes over: since science cannot explain it, it must have been the result of the work of a great creator who, by definition and apologetics, cannot be fully comprehended by the human mind. He is permanently out of reach. Thus the creator has planned the universe from the beginning, etc.
Of course the concept continues to fall apart from there (especially in Christianity with the \"free will\"/\"divine plan\" paradox), but that's my main problem with creationist theory. The sheer willingness of those who subscribe to creationism to ignore logic is one of my main reasons for being an atheist.
12/28/2005 2:22:12 PM
The Last Conformist
Noah had three sons within a year? I suppose the implied polygyny could explain where they got the (wo)manpower to get rid of all the manure on the Ark.
12/28/2005 3:33:19 PM
I think this quote is yet another \"Look at the signs! The rapture is nigh!\" quote
12/28/2005 3:56:13 PM
I'd like to see this guy's sources.
12/28/2005 6:13:23 PM
Maybe he's suggesting another flood in 96 years. Everybody check your neighbor's drive for a big, wooden boat being built.
12/28/2005 8:20:23 PM
Is it just me, or does \"Hale-Bopp\" bring up memories of bad 1980s hair bands?
12/28/2005 10:38:42 PM
1) Evidence that there was a flood ~4100 years ago, please?
2) Assuming that there was indeed such a flood, your point is?
12/29/2005 12:13:04 AM
No, but Halley's Comet does:^>
12/29/2005 2:39:42 AM
Shit, guys, y'all're just missing the point, big time!
This yahoo is saying that Noah wore purple Reeboks and a track suit!
12/29/2005 6:04:14 AM