Why MT doesn't believe in this.

[Darth Crater]

[not a word]

I swear to god...

[not a word]: regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously.

My spellcheck seems to agree that it's a word. (though "spellcheck" apparently isn't. huh.)

[THEWULFMAN]

[not a word]

I swear to god...

[not a word]: regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously.

My spellcheck seems to agree that it's a word. (though "spellcheck" apparently isn't. huh.)

It's not a word, it's just so commonly used it's considered one by spell checkers. "[not a word] is an informal term commonly used in place of regardless or irrespective" -Wikipedia.

Basically the word's existence of redundant and pisses grammar nazis like me and haasd0gg off. I however am a very poor grammar nazi, in that my grammar is not that good either.

[(SWGO)Minas_Thirith]

@Yanny

1- Not really if you had read the statement you would have known otherwise, the statements i made is that there is nothing that indicates they had boats since there sould have been no rain, wich was tested by scientists and was posible, after that i quoted the passage of what the dimencions needed to be and after that i quoted the passage where the ark landed, people say that if the story was true the ark would be found, however the place where it landed is now covered by snow, so unless there is an expidicion to that mountain the ark can't be found.
2- Maybe but remember the cross is 8Miles the odds are much against the Israelites, and the statement of the egyptians not able to swim isn't necesarily true, we are talking about a civlilisation renownd for it's medical advancement compared to the rest of the civilisations at that time, egypte is also renown for the Nile, and i can't believe the people of such a civilisation couldn't swim, now there is another thing, they did wear armour, but have you looked up the salt quantity of the red, aka the dead sea?
The salt quantities are so high that it is quite hard just to go down in the water, drowning there is HARD.

4- I'm sorry but this scientist makes his calculation from believing how much volume the ocean had, while we didn't know how much water the planet had at that time, since besides the sun theory we can't explain how we would have gotten water, we would still assume this kind of volume of sea water? so if this scientist would reduce the odds of a random protein happening he would first need the volume of sea water, and the animo acids in it, increase the odds again.

5- Imagen the odds of a protein being as fast as this profesor sayes, does he have odds for RNA, the chance these 2 are in the same square CM? the chance of these working together? and then still having no proof for a simple cell to get into a complex one, nor having an explination for the missing link, while also decreasing the chances by his asumption on how the earth was.

6- I never said the bible predicts actual events like 9/11, revelations is an interesting book, but it will take much more then what i can quote here to explain it all, since revelations is one of the most difficult bible books to understand.

@Crator

You see that's the problem, i really think NASA hates to reveal the odds since they are "astronomically small" as some scientists say.
This link shows the calculation of Harold Morowitz of the yale univisity who was hired by the NASA, that are his calculations, other then the other link i posted there are no actual odds of proteins forming randomly.
http://ontherightside.wordpress.com/articles/the-odds-against-life/

@Haas

So you do believe in god

@WD

I agree with yanoda, remember we are civilized....i think

MT

[WD-40]

[not a word]

I swear to god...

I honestly thought about Haas when I wrote that word, but 'Irrehaasdoggless' didn't make any sense, so I figured I may as well have a little fun.

[Yanoda]

1- Not really if you had read the statement you would have known otherwise, the statements i made is that there is nothing that indicates they had boats since there sould have been no rain, wich was tested by scientists and was posible, after that i quoted the passage of what the dimencions needed to be and after that i quoted the passage where the ark landed, people say that if the story was true the ark would be found, however the place where it landed is now covered by snow, so unless there is an expidicion to that mountain the ark can't be found.

Boats existed since over 10,000 years (prior to 8000 BC). Longer than what creationists claim is the Earth's age. They even found boats that have been made in the Stone Age. http://oldtiden.natmus.dk/udstillingen/ ... nguage/uk/
You do not need rain to make boats, you just need a body of water to have a use for them. The dimensions of the Ark are may been large for the time, but it would not be able to house that many animals as claimed (which you failed to address with my previous post a few pages back). So, people know the rough location of the Ark, yet they haven't done an expedition yet to find it. These are just claims, unless people find the Ark, the claim that the Ark is there as truth without proof is the very definition of Belief.

Your points are invalid.

2- Maybe but remember the cross is 8Miles the odds are much against the Israelites, and the statement of the egyptians not able to swim isn't necesarily true, we are talking about a civlilisation renownd for it's medical advancement compared to the rest of the civilisations at that time, egypte is also renown for the Nile, and i can't believe the people of such a civilisation couldn't swim, now there is another thing, they did wear armour, but have you looked up the salt quantity of the red, aka the dead sea?
The salt quantities are so high that it is quite hard just to go down in the water, drowning there is HARD.

The Red Sea is not the Dead Sea. Salinity of the Red Sea on average is 40 parts per thousand, (4%). Oceans' salinity are 35 parts per thousand (3.5%). The Dead Sea has a Salinity of 33.7%. Vast differences MT. Swimming was not a daily activity at the time and many soldiers drowned in naval battles. These events (water receding) take time, with an average walking speed of 3 miles/hour, would give them 2.5 hours to cross. Enough time to cross before the tides shift and water starts to flood the area again.

Your points are invalid.

4- I'm sorry but this scientist makes his calculation from believing how much volume the ocean had, while we didn't know how much water the planet had at that time, since besides the sun theory we can't explain how we would have gotten water, we would still assume this kind of volume of sea water? so if this scientist would reduce the odds of a random protein happening he would first need the volume of sea water, and the animo acids in it, increase the odds again.

Sure, he may have over estimated the volume (his statement was 10^24 liters, today's oceans are 1.5^21 liters). If one would still take that to account, it will still be very likely for self-replicating peptides to form, don't forget that he also used a very low concentration of Amino Acids. Studies have shown that Oceans (made out of H2O) have existed since 4.4 Gyrs (4.4 Billion years) in Earth. Out gassing of particles from the Earth's Atmosphere is negligible and accounting the amount of asteroids/comets that entered the Earth's Atmosphere, so we can say that the amount of water the Earth has in the past is roughly the same we have today.http://www.geology.wisc.edu/zircon/Wilde_et_al.PDF

5- Imagen the odds of a protein being as fast as this profesor sayes, does he have odds for RNA, the chance these 2 are in the same square CM? the chance of these working together? and then still having no proof for a simple cell to get into a complex one, nor having an explination for the missing link, while also decreasing the chances by his asumption on how the earth was.

Chemical reactions do not happen randomly as you and many Creationists claim. You keep talking about demanding the missing link etc. yet cannot provide any better proof to support your argument. This is a very simple page explaining the 'Evolution of Cells': http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/ ... rganelles/

6- I never said the bible predicts actual events like 9/11, revelations is an interesting book, but it will take much more then what i can quote here to explain it all, since revelations is one of the most difficult bible books to understand.

Page 11:

3- So the bible is being writen right now? or was the bible finished over almost 2000 years ago?
Mathew 24: 6,7 YOU are going to hear of wars and reports of wars; see that YOU are not terrified. For these things must take place, but the end is not yet.
“For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another.
Ecclesiastes 8:9 "All this I have seen, and there was an applying of my heart to every work that has been done under the sun, [during] the time that man has dominated man to his injury."
Aren't we seeing this things?

Page 10:

3.3 Iv'e already posted some bible passages on how the bible predicted what would happen in the future and you cannot deny they are happening.
MT

Seems like you're contradicting yourself. I never stated the Bible predicts/predicted 9/11, that was about Nostradamus. This is what I said:

Ever heard of Nostradamus? Apparently some claim he predicted 9/11. Again, it was only after the event happened already. His statement were vague and could be interpreted in many different ways. If there is a prediction in the Bible that clearly states what will happen & when, those knowledgeable in the Bible give it public before the event actually occurs, then the specific event happens at that time, that is when the Bible is valid. What you gave were just vague passages that could have been interpreted in many different ways.
Yanoda

Again, if something is hard to understand. Why do you (including Creationists) make assumptions of something that can be interpreted in different ways, say it as truth then once their assumptions have been disproved, they say it was a misunderstanding or like you say

revelations is one of the most difficult bible books to understand

You see that's the problem, i really think NASA hates to reveal the odds since they are "astronomically small" as some scientists say.
This link shows the calculation of Harold Morowitz of the yale univisity who was hired by the NASA, that are his calculations, other then the other link i posted there are no actual odds of proteins forming randomly.
http://ontherightside.wordpress.com/articles/the-odds-against-life/
MT

Stop saying BS MT. The entire article/column was made by an English Teacher, conservative and definite Creationist. On top of that, he misinterpreted the data.
This articles discuses the misinterpreted data: http://akawinston.hubpages.com/hub/Defe ... Propaganda
Direct quote from the article:
In the quote from Dr. Morowitz, he was not talking about abiogenesis or the possibility of the most simplistic life occuring on earth. He was actually demonstrating the impossibility of initiation of life in a system that has reached thermal equalibrium. As Richard Carrier points out, "these are not the odds of the first life forming, but the odds of enough energy being available for any life to grow at all, in an environment which has reached an effective state of thermal equilibrium--a condition which has never existed on Earth....Morowitz was demonstrating a fact about the effects of maximized entropy on a chemical system, not the unlikelihood of life originating in a relatively low entropy environment like the early or even current Earth"

I have said it before and will say it again: Do some proper research!

Yanoda

[(SWGO)Minas_Thirith]

@facepalm

1- That's another problem, you see many univisities even with the same fossils claim a diffrent age then the other, and yes you do need a body of water, but like i said before from the creationist point of view the ark would have been the first boat to endure such a long time on water, if there wasn't any tar the ark could have been on the water for almost a month, after wich it would have sunk.
The dimencions of the ark: Its length; 135M it's width 22.5M it's hight 13.5M, The total cubic volume would have been 462,686.4 cubic metersthat would be equal to the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars.
Now the quantities of species would make it imposible for them all to go in the ark However, the vast majority of these are capable of surviving in water and would not need to be brought aboard the ark. Noah need make no provision for the 21,000 species of fish or the 1,700 tunicates (marine chordates like sea squirts) found throughout the seas of the world, or the 600 echinoderms including star fish and sea urchins, or the 107,000 mollusks such as mussels, clams and oysters, or the 10,000 coelenterates like corals and sea anemones, jelly fish and hydroids or the 5,000 species of sponges, or the 30,000 protozoans, the microscopic single-celled creatures.
In addition, some of the mammals are aquatic. For example, the whales, seals and porpoises. The amphibians need not all have been included, nor all the reptiles, such as sea turtles, and alligators. Moreover, a large number of the arthropods numbering 838,000 species, such as lobsters, shrimp, crabs and water fleas and barnacles are marine creatures. And the insect species among arthropoda are usually very small. Also, many of the 35,000 species of worms as well as many of the insects could have survived outside the Ark.

Doctor Morris states that no more than 35,000 individual animals needed to go on the ark, add on some more to satisfy even the most skeptical. Let’s assume 50,000 animals, far more animals than required, were on board the ark, and these need not have been the largest or even adult specimens.
Remember there are really only a few very large animals, such as the dinosaur or the elephant, and these could be represented by young ones. Assuming the average animal to be about the size of a sheep and using a railroad car for comparison, we note that the average double-deck stock car can accommodate 240 sheep. Thus, three trains hauling 69 cars each would have ample space to carry the 50,000 animals, filling only 37% of the ark. This would leave an additional 361 cars or enough to make 5 trains of 72 cars each to carry all of the food and baggage plus Noah’s family of eight people. The Ark had plenty of space.
Your argument is invalid

2-Then please tell me how the Israelites walking at 3miles an hours could outrun chariots.

3-However there is no data on the quantities of amino-acids that "could have been" on the earth at that time, some scientists even claim there weren't enough amino acids to fill in the odds of this being able to happen.

4-I stated that bible passages predict the future, not events, yet the future don't have to be events, there is a diffrence then stating that men will keep dominating men to their
disadvantage if this isn't happening please slap some sence into me, and please check revelations whenever you can before doing another "your points are invalid" it gets tired of reading them because i can already predict your response

5-So your excuse is "get us a better argument" however i did state a better argument, yet there are those who try and yet fail to exploit posible errors in this argument, unless science can PROOVE me that a simple cell can get into a complex one, untill science can proove that, then they will just have to rely on "faith" that a simple cell naturally evolved into a complex one

6-7Okay then yanoda, assuming your right and i'm just ignorant, please post me actual odds of just the random creation of a simple cell, since besides your statement of something made in the year 1998 before scientists even knew RNA could happen randomly, since all the links i provide wich are the only ones on the net i can find with the actual numbers are made of "radical creationists" and not scientists.
So please if they exist, if they have been released, and since i'm too ignorant to know otherwise please post:

1- Odds of a random protein
2- Odds of a random RNA
3- Odds of these randomly appearing together on 1square CM of our approximately 508.45 million square kilometers sized earth
4- Odds of these working together after appearing together, remember if this would fail then 1,2 and 3 would have to beat the odds again.

And if all this would happen you just need a little faith on the part were science can't get a simple cell to be a complex one, but wait aren't the scientists saying they don't rely on "faith" but facts?

MT

[Darth Crater]

1. So you suggest that 8 people managed to round up 35,000 animals of different species, keep them all together without them attacking one another, running off, or dying from disease or other conditions, cram them incredibly closely together (the available area would have been far less than you suggest, since the hull was presumably curved and you allocated no room for structural elements), and keep this situation going for the length of the flood on top of all the time they were rounding animals up? I wasn't aware that we were taking that story literally. I'm just going to ignore the part where you mention dinosaurs and pretend you didn't say that so I can keep some semblance of faith in humanity.

2. Chariots may not have made good time over the incredibly wet ground they were crossing. The Egyptian force could not have consisted entirely of chariots, and their commander might not have been willing to deploy those troops, unsupported, ahead of the main force. The Israelites may have had sufficient armaments or numbers to beat back, scare off, or simply weather any chariot skirmishes that did occur.

3. If there's no data, how can those scientists claim there were not enough amino acids?

6-7 Remember that the size of the earth works the other way - that is, for each square centimeter, there's a possibility of things arising. I don't think the numbers you're looking for exist, though. There are enough variables that I'd be skeptical of anyone who claims to know the actual odds within anything less than 3 orders of magnitude or so. However, the evidence I have has satisfied me that it is possible.

[Yanoda]

I don't know whether to cry, laugh or even consider a proper answer anymore...
1. 135m x 22.5m x 13.5m is 41,006.25 m^3. Vastly smaller than your claim of 462,286.4 m^3, a factor of at least 11 times smaller than your claim. Revise your argument. I'm not even going to try to debunk the rest. (Anyone else willing to do it? I'll give you a cookie.)
2. Then how did they escape from them in the first place? They had to walk 2.5 hours regardless.
3. I have given many sources backing up my claim (amino acids within asteroids and formation from common compounds (H2O, NH3, CH4 & H2)) that amino acids can easily be formed. All your criticisms on amino acid formation are based on odds and probability, which I have shown were baseless, false and misconstrued.
4. 2000 years ago people have been fighting and dominating each other, today people are dominating each other, nothing has changed and using this as a way to claim the Bible foretells the future is bogus.
5. Science explains the process, I even gave you a link for you to read that simplifies the process for one to give one a vague idea of how it went.
6. Again, Chemical processes are not random as you or the Creationists make it seem to be. I posted several examples/sources and I'm getting tired of posting them again and again, let alone searching for sources for you to understand (but it seems you don't even bother reading half of them).

When I have more time I'll make a more thorough answer of how baseless your assumptions are.
Maybe someone else wants to take my place for a while. (I'll give you cake if you do!)

Yanoda

Thx Crater for having a go at it.
Hi Narg! Enjoying the Topic so far?!

[(SWGO)Minas_Thirith]

@crator

1- Well it wouldn't have happened from one day to the other, as far as i recall he worked 40 years, idk but people don't get married so long nowadays, what i mean is 8 men 40 years.
also about taming animals, there is a refrence for another thing:
Isaiah 11:6-8
And the wolf will actually reside for a while with the male lamb, and with the kid the leopard itself will lie down, and the calf and the maned young lion and the well-fed animal all together; and a mere little boy will be leader over them. And the cow and the bear themselves will feed; together their young ones will lie down. And even the lion will eat straw just like the bull. And the sucking child will certainly play upon the hole of the cobra; and upon the light aperture of a poisonous snake will a weaned child actually put his own hand.

2- As far as i recall from all the research on chariots and horses they wouldn't slow that much, and do remember the distance, 2.5Hours as of yannies calculation and just having the odds of the tide rising

3- Well it seems science will once again has to rely on faith rather then facts

4- The odds we were talking about are the odds that this ocures in the world, so the odds as in yannies theory before the "quantity" of water and the posible aka assumed amino acids in it, so these odds are the posiblity of this happening on the globe, not in the square CM.
So basicly the scientist yanoda quoted on reduces the 1 to 10^40 theory of JUST THE PROTEIN to something based on the odds of having the quantity of water and the odds of having a certain ammount of amino acids in this water, and this is just talking proteins, wait till we get to random RNA and the chances of left handed molecules randomly binding.

[Mandalore]

Chariots can not operate on even moderately wet or uneven terrain. The chariots in the Egyptian army were their version of knights, only a small percentage of their force would have been mounted on chariots. I'm just going to leave the science to Yanoda since A. He knows it better and B. He knows it better. :)

I think someone was talking about WW1/2 in reference to how revelations must be coming true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll
Some of the numbers for the older wars have some pretty large discrepancies but that's due to many states not having censuses (however the Chinese states did and they were usually pretty complete even by today's standards). The An Shi Rebellion took place in China (during the Tang dynasty if I'm not mistaken) and claimed a reported 35 million lives (this number most likely compiled by comparing census data between dynasties, this being a cause for discrepancy as the census system was constantly changing). This would surpass WW1 by 15 million if the numbers are correct. Also the high estimates for the mongol conquests place it in the vicinity of the deaths from World War 2. And if we want to be nit picky the Mongol conquests encompassed more land than WW2 ever did.