Alright, first off you need to use some common sense and STUDY the
Bible and history. The Flood may not have been the only world-wide
catastrophe! Think about it: the reason the Flood is really mentioned
is because God was getting rid of all of the sinners. Because there
was so much sin on the Earth. Now, there could have been other natural
disasters, but they may not have been recorded in the Bible in the
same way as the Flood.
When you think about it, truly think about it, it takes truly more
faith to believe in evolution than in creation. How come the
evolutionary theory changes every couple of years? How come they never
found the "missing link?" These questions have never been answered.
Also, evolution defies physics. The laws of thermodynamics do not
agree with evolution. The second law (law of entropy) states that the
more time passes the greater disorder gets. Yet scientists say the
more time passes the more orderly things become.
Remember Dr. Hoyle: he stood up in front of many scientists, I believe
it was at some sort of banquet, said, "let us be realistic. The chance
of life evolving is the same as rolling sixes on dice six million
times in a row. And let's be scientific, in that the chances of
intelligent life evolving are the same as a tornado going through a
junkyard and coming out the other end with a 747." Now he said this in
front of evolutionists, he himself being an evolutionist when he said
it. Basically the reason you believe in evolution is because if you
don't then you have to admit there is a God.
In kindergarden, we are taught that a prince coming from a frog is a
fairy tale. Now, in high school, we are taught that a prince coming
from a frog is science.
From: Dawn and Tommy
Date: UnknownThank you for writing to the Skeptic Friends Network. We appreciate all comments and criticisms. I apologize for not answering your letter sooner, but I’ll try to respond to your questions as briefly as possible.
All right first off you need to use some common sense and STUDY the Bible and history. The Flood may not have been the only world-wide catastrophe!I don’t understand what your statement implies here. First, I have studied the Bible and history. Second, I don’t understand why that refutes other world-wide catastrophes, which are rather numerous in the geologic record.
As for Noah’s Flood, most scientists have long believed that this story (along with its predecessors) first originated when the Black Sea overflowed its banks 7,600 years ago. For more information, read the book Noah’s Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event That Changed History by Walter C. Pitman and William B. F. Ryan, published in 1998.
Here’s a summary of the book from Kirkus Reviews:
In a rare marriage of science and myth, two geologists draw on their worldwide oceanographic expeditions in search of evidence of the biblical flood. The authors first trace attempts to establish the historicity of the flood back to the work of archaeologists and scientists in the 1820s and ’30s. Then, looking at the physical evidence, according to Ryan and Pitman (both geology professors at Columbia University), indicates that the cataclysm actually occurred 7,600 years ago; it consisted of the Mediterranean rising in Marmara and crashing through the natural dam of the Bosporus, raising the Black Sea 280 feet in 12 months.But back to your comments, Ryan:
The archaeological evidence, according to the authors, is that the resulting dispersion of the populace led to the spread of farming skills, languages, and cultures to new settlements in southern Europe, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Asia. The archaeological record is supported by DNA studies that reveal genetic connections between modern peoples of these regions and remains found around the flood region.
But Ryan and Pitman don’t draw only on science, they study as well the flood stories of various cultures, from Sumer to India, contending that they remain remarkably similar despite local coloring and storyteller’s embellishments. These tales tell of the destruction of the world as it was then known, but they universally also offer hope of salvation, regeneration, and divine forgiveness.
The authors offer clear explanations of the scientific techniques involved in gathering evidence of the flood, and couch it in a historical narrative that preserves for readers the sense of discovery and wonder experienced by scientists through the 19th and 20th centuries (somewhat oddly, in keeping with this narrative, they relate their own research in the third person). An impressive marshalling of geophysical and archaeological evidence to reconstruct the truth behind an ancient myth.
When you think about it, truly think about, it takes truly more faith to believe in evolution than in creation.That’s an argument from personal incredulity. When you think about it, truly think about it, it takes more faith to believe in talking serpents and donkeys than in evolution.
How come the evolutionary theory changes every couple of years?Why does medical science change every year? Why are automobiles redesigned every year? Why is computer software rewritten every year? Why is the Hubble Space Telescope revising astronomy and cosmology texts every year?
Because unlike the Bible, which is considered divine revelation invincible to revision, science is a process that thrives on change. Otherwise, it would never progress. If science didn’t change, you’d still be wearing animal skins and pissing in the creek.
How come they never found the “missing link?” These questions have never been answered.Can you be more specific about “missing links?” If you’re interested in a summary of transitional fossils, you can find an excellent one at the Talk.Origins Archive.
Also, evolution defies physics. The laws of Thermodynamics do not agree with evolution. The second law (law of entropy) states that the more time passes the greater disorder gets. Yet scientists say the more time passes the more orderly things become.That’s not what the second law says at all. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that energy always flows from order to disorder unless there is “work” being performed to decrease the entropy, or disorder. If you’re boiling water in a pot and then turn off your stove, the boiling water will cool to room temperature until you apply more heat energy to boil the water again. Otherwise, matter and energy seek a state of inert uniformity.
When you do work, you’re locally decreasing the entropy of one particular system while increasing the entropy of its surroundings due to expended heat. Likewise, the Earth is gaining enormous energy input from the Sun which allows life processes to grow and flourish, yet at the same time the sun is increasing its own entropy and will eventually exhaust its fuel because no engine runs at 100-percent efficiency. And evolution, like life itself, thrives on “work.”
Remember Dr. Hoyle: He stood up in front of many scientists, I believe it was at some sort of banquet, said, “let us be realistic. The chance of life evolving is the same as rolling sixes on dice six million times in a row.”Fred Hoyle is an astronomer, not an evolutionary biologist, but Hoyle is considered a nut even among other astronomers. For example, Hoyle believes that our universe conforms to a steady-state model (where the universe creates matter and energy from “nothing” between galactic voids). He also believes that life originated from interstellar bacteria that seeded Earth billions of years ago. But instead of later evolving through natural selection, Hoyle suggests that extraterrestrial viruses periodically fell to Earth to mutate this same bacterium.
Hoyle was also involved in a controversy where he claimed that Archaeopteryx was a forged reptile-to-bird specimen. Scientists later proved him wrong. You can read more about that controversy at the Talk.Origins Archive, as well.
Now he said this in front of evolutionists, he himself being an evolutionist when he said it. Basically the reason you believe in evolution is because if you don’t then you have to admit there is a God.Evolution is completely silent about the topic of God. Curiously, it’s always the creationists that make absolutist religious, metaphysical assumptions about Darwinism, not evolutionists, and then accuse us of buying into their religious distortions.
In Kindergarden we are taught that a prince coming from a frog is a fairy tale. Now in high school we are taught that a prince coming from a frog is science.Hmmmm. Did you borrow that goofy analogy from Duane Gish?
Again, thank you for your comments. My brother Tommy and I sincerely appreciate them.