read the webpage... those fossils sat around for millions of years before the mountains rose... most animals don't pick the spots where they die, they just die..

First, the whole story of Noah's ark is B.S.

An Ark the size described in the bible could never fit two of each species of animals in the world(not to mention it would take Noah his whole life collecting them IF he knew the world was round not flat). And if your going to use the typical "divine intervention" excuse, then why have Noah build an ark at all. God could just have all the species of animals go to the top of a mountain and be done with it.

Second, WHY would God create a flood?
The very premise of God is that he is perfect, infallible and knows all.
So what you "believers" are saying is somehow God said "geezz I really screwed up here and didn't see this coming, I guess I have to try this over!"
Your "divine intervention" argument just proves you don't believe in God!

An Ark the size described in the bible could never fit two of each species of animals in the world(not to mention it would take Noah his whole life collecting them IF he knew the world was round not flat).

God could just have all the species of animals go to the top of a mountain and be done with it.

Second, WHY would God create a flood?

o what you "believers" are saying is somehow God said "geezz I really screwed up here and didn't see this coming, I guess I have to try this over!

Exactly how do you know this or get this kind of information/thought to think such a thing? Who's to say there was as many different species or animal population in general at that point and time? This time we speak of was before the flood and the flood changed the face of the Earth, thus also afterwards would lead to animals evolving to their new surroundings and such bringing forth new species and subspecies.



What good would that have done? The flood went over all the mountains, the surface of the world was entirely under water.



Because the world had become corrupt and ruined so to speak. The people, the systems set up by man, ect. And they wouldn't listen or change their ways. Would have only continued to get even more coorupt and "evil" from then forth. See how the world is today with the crime, murders, rapes, ect. Well in Noahs time it was about the same if not worse. Imagine if it wouldn't have been flooded, how it is now would be almost 100% more "evil" or corrupt in it's ways in how it's ran or how the people act and behave in this day and age.



No God didn't screw up nor did he say that lol. Man screwed up, and man screwing up has absolutely nothing to do with God himself as we have free will to do that which we wish to do. The blame isn't on God, the blame would be on us, or well them "the people in existence at the time".

If you raise your child "right" or "correct" and it grows up to be a mass murderer, would that in fact be your fault? If so, why do only the murderers go to prison and not their parents? And or even grandparents? Example doesn't fit completely, but you see where I'm going with it. People make their choices, because they choose to make them, not because of someone or something else.

God made man(according to you)and being the perfect, infallible and knowing ALL being, he had to KNOW man was evil and the world would not be paradise.
So God KNOWING he made an imperfect being, and KNOWING they would be sinners and murderers, why would he destroy the very creatures he created.
If he had misgivings about the creatures he created and wanted to start all over, why not make a better creature so he doesn't have to keep "intervening"?
As for your "theory" on what the animal population looked like at the time, there would have been more species then now, because there was millions of years of evolution before the flood and only a few thousand years since the flood.
You haven't answered how Noah could have acquired animals from say South America, Borneo etc when at the time he would not have known about these other worlds.

God made man(according to you)and being the perfect, infallible and knowing ALL being, he had to KNOW man was evil and the world would not be paradise.

So God KNOWING he made an imperfect being, and KNOWING they would be sinners and murderers, why would he destroy the very creatures he created.

If he had misgivings about the creatures he created and wanted to start all over, why not make a better creature so he doesn't have to keep "intervening"?

As for your "theory" on what the animal population looked like at the time, there would have been more species then now, because there was millions of years of evolution before the flood and only a few thousand years since the flood.

You haven't answered how Noah could have acquired animals from say South America, Borneo etc when at the time he would not have known about these other worlds.

Very possibly, I don't know what God knows. And "man" isn't evil. Man is neutral, depending on who he listens to in his conscience brings forth his actions. If he listens to God in his conscience and obeys God, he bares good fruit, loving, non-destructive actions. If one listens to Satan in their conscience they will destroy and hurt. That's why we were in the paradise until man listened to the serpent "Satan" and disobeyed God, thus first steps to leading us into the "evil" world we live in today.



God didn't destroy anything.

Romans 6:23

23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Man destroyed man through sinner and or "disobedience" to God. If man would never have turned their backs on God and turned to their evil ways, the world would never have been flooded.



How would he make a "better" creature, specifically referring to choices in actions, without taking away free will? And or limiting that free will? It's not possible and peoples action's blame isn't to be put on God or Satan, for again we have free will... we choose to do what we wish to do and suffer the consequences good or bad. God has no "baring" on any choice/action anyone takes, unless they allow God to influence their choice of action(s). But then that still relays back on the person in question.



Why speak of evolution as if it were absolutely right or true? Evolution is still a "theory". Which means it hasn't been proven factual. And how would you know that it was only a few thousand years since the flood? What year did the flood happen in? Or where are you getting your knowledge of the time spans?



What animals were specifically in say Borneo that weren't in other parts of the world at that time? Or same for South America, ect.

South America:

jaguars, howler monkeys, poison dart frogs, capybaras...

http://strangeanimalsoftheworld.weebly.com/south-america.html


read a science book at least once a week...

Not denying theirs different species of different animals and what not through the world now, not one bit. But the world in how it is now is not how it was before the flood. The flood even changed the face of the Earth in from how it is now. Does your science book speak of the animals and it's habitat area before the flood? If not your point is mute and your science book is useless in this discussion, for again the flood changed the entire face of the Earth.

Why speak of evolution as if it were absolutely right or true? Evolution is still a "theory". Which means it hasn't been proven factual. And how would you know that it was only a few thousand years since the flood? What year did the flood happen in? Or where are you getting your knowledge of the time spans?

Evolution is not a theory, it is fact. That does not mean that "man came from apes" but all species evolve. Just look at humans over the last 1000 years, we are much taller then in Medieval times and we see a much wider range of colors(most were color-blind)now.
As for when the flood happened, there is evidence in the soil layers as to when and where it occurred.
Geologic and Archaeologic evidence supports a great flood, but it did not cover the mountains and the whole earth as you purport.

As for when the flood happened, there is evidence in the soil layers as to when and where it occurred.
Geologic and Archaeologic evidence supports a great flood, but it did not cover the mountains and the whole earth as you purport.

the reason i keep telling you to read a science book is because there was no world wide flood... the only reason anything is mute here is because you won't read a science book...


doesn't god want you to expand your intelligence level? or are you just happier believing everything you were told about god is true? i personally believe if there is a god, it would want you to expand your mind instead of living in a ignorant bliss... isn't that the whole point that god wants you to grow and learn? why else would have it have created everything? just for you to pray to it and nothing else?

that makes no sense to me whatsoever..

the reason i keep telling you to read a science book is because there was no world wide flood... the only reason anything is mute here is because you won't read a science book..

K, you say there was no world wide flood... then the very next post, someone claims there is in science known to be a world flood. And he mentions not enough water to cover the mountains entire, which I responded with the fact that mountains grow over time. And that the face of the world was entirely different before the flood.... so with that, the mountains may not have been as tall at that point and time, with this being before the flood, and the fact that mountains grow over an extreme period of time in which we're speaking of at the very least over 2000 years ago.

K, you say there was no world wide flood... then the very next post, someone claims there is in science known to be a world flood. And he mentions not enough water to cover the mountains entire, which I responded with the fact that mountains grow over time. And that the face of the world was entirely different before the flood.... so with that, the mountains may not have been as tall at that point and time, with this being before the flood, and the fact that mountains grow over an extreme period of time in which we're speaking of at the very least over 2000 years ago.

And furthering what I said, yes one or two whales could have happened this way. But what are the odds of the whole whale fossil doing this including sea shells and other various sea "creature" fossils in the same location?

General observation:

in most of the more common religions, the leadership quietly discourages followers/believers from getting caught up in PROVING the existence of God, or of PROVING the scriptures. This is especially true throughout the history of Judeao Christianity.

The reason they do this is NOT because they are running a scam, as their opponents might pretend, it is more subtle and important than that.

The reason why it is actually a bad idea, and even destructive of a religious belief, to declare that earthy proof for it exists, is being illustrated in the arguments here, and more importantly, requires some very important assumptions be made by the people proffering said "proof."

Here, we see that if you declare that science supports your faith directly, you open the door to anyone who has read all the science, or even most of it, to show you that you are wrong.

Much more important than that, is the subtle reason. That is, that in order for YOU to prove that GOD exists, you have to assume that God is something that YOU PERSONALLY can thoroughly know and understand. Essentially, you have to declare that you are as smart and all knowing as your god.

Further, and more significantly, you have to assume that your God is SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF NATURE AS DESCRIBED BY THE SCIENCE THAT YOU CITE AS PROOF. We see an example here, in the argument of the person who declares that there must have been FAR fewer animals around at the time of Noah, because there had to be, in order to make the Ark feasible.

This is why Christianity especially, tends to emphasize FAITH over memorizing passages in the Bible.

Another general Observation is this:
Some try as they may to separate science from religion which can't be done.
The whole premise of religion is based on "bad science".
Religion itself came about by man trying to explain natural phenomenon that they didn't understand.

In ancient times(before organized religion) people used gods of sun, water, fire etc(Greek mythology) to explain floods, lightning, and lunar eclipses.
Everything that man was ignorant about was inferred as "an act of the gods".
Sodom and Gomorrah is a perfect example of a plain old meteoroid strike that wiped out two cities but the people back then had no concept of what a meteoroid is, no clue on the solar system and what lingers out there, so they attribute all these natural things to a God that is unhappy with sinners living there.

As our knowledge of science expands we see how these stories of God's "vengeance" is all based on ignorance of those that lived back then.

I am one who actually studied the history of mankind extensively, and you are mistaken. You have only ONE facet of the reasons why religions came in to being. You will find no holy book that contains ONLY attempted explanations of natural events. And further, the explanations that religions give, are not primarily designed to simply answer such mundane questions as you ascribe to them.

You could do with a bit more study of human history.

I am one who actually studied the history of mankind extensively, and you are mistaken. You have only ONE facet of the reasons why religions came in to being. You will find no holy book that contains ONLY attempted explanations of natural events. And further, the explanations that religions give, are not primarily designed to simply answer such mundane questions as you ascribe to them.

You could do with a bit more study of human history.