The Comeback of Noah's Flood

[Joe Bruno]

http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm


The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

[John Locke]

Most likely some kind of local event that was exaggerated by Biblical
writers. There's some underwater archiological research going on that
indicates a breach of the Balck Sea by the Mediterranean around 5600
BC.

[MarkA]

Floods are as common as dirt, and are hugely important to small, agrarian
communities living near the river. It would be astounding if there
weren't flood-related myths in the pre-history of most every civilization.

--
MarkA

If you can read this, you can stop reading now.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
<johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
><atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>>
>>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>>continue.

It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
that was the then sea level.

There is no debate to continue.

It's frikking fairy story.

>Most likely some kind of local event that was exaggerated by Biblical
>writers. There's some underwater archiological research going on that
>indicates a breach of the Balck Sea by the Mediterranean around 5600
>BC.

It's more likely to have been a local flood. The legend comes from
what is now Iraq, where civilisation grew up in the Tigris and
Euphrates valleys. This area was known as the Fertile Crescent because
the rivers flooded depositing material carried downstream from the
mountains where the rivers originated, during the annual snow-melt.

The Nile's flooding was gentle and benign, but the Tigris and
Euphrates flooding was more catastrophic - in fact so much material
was deposited the land has pushed out several into the sea in recorded
historical times, and what were originally two separate estuaries are
now one with the rivers joining together several miles inland.

All these rivers weren't just the source of fertile agricultural land
but also the primary transport. It is highly likely that the story
started with a heavier than usual flood with a farmer escaping with
his family, a couple of sheep and a goat on a boat he already used for
local travel.

[Joe Bruno]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>
> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>
> ><atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> >>continue.
>
>
>
> It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> that was the then sea level.
>
>
>
> There is no debate to continue.

LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>
>
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>
> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>
> ><atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> >>continue.
>
>
>
> It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> that was the then sea level.

YOu didn't read the link, did you, fool?ROTFL!
>
>
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:01:11 PM UTC-8, MarkA wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
>
>
> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > continue.
>
>
>
> Floods are as common as dirt, and are hugely important to small, agrarian
>
> communities living near the river. It would be astounding if there
>
> weren't flood-related myths in the pre-history of most every civilization.

YOu didn't read the link, either???

[Father Haskell]

On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>

> > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>

> > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > >>continue.
>
> > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> > that was the then sea level.
>
> > There is no debate to continue.
>
> LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
> Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.

It's a fish story, and it's a whopper. True to every fish story,
its details grew with the telling, in this case, for maximum
fright value. Didn't your grandparents ever tell you that "eight
miles through the snow to get to school every morning" tale
in order to motivate you?

[Syd M.]

On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>

> > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>

> > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > >>continue.
>
> > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> > that was the then sea level.
>
> > There is no debate to continue.
>
> LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
> Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>

And real scientist don't gave a flying fuck what a bunch of ignorant,
arrogant fundies want to believe, they know what is false and not.

PDW

[Joe Bruno]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:50:23 PM UTC-8, Father Haskell wrote:
> On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>
> >
>
> > > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>
> >
>
> > > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >
>
> > > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> >
>
> > > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> >
>
> > > >>continue.
>
> >
>
> > > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> >
>
> > > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> >
>
> > > that was the then sea level.
>
> >
>
> > > There is no debate to continue.
>
> >
>
> > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
>
> > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>
>
>
> It's a fish story, and it's a whopper.

You can't read the link?????Lots of evidence there.

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:14533cad-3488-4a49...@googlegroups.com:

> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:01:11 PM UTC-8, MarkA wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>> > absolutely
>>
>> > true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the
>> > debate
>>
>> > continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> Floods are as common as dirt, and are hugely important to small,
>> agrarian
>>
>> communities living near the river. It would be astounding if there
>>
>> weren't flood-related myths in the pre-history of most every
>> civilization.
>
> YOu didn't read the link, either???

All your link says is that the creation of the
Black Sea was the source of the "flood" story, which
was erroneously written up as "world wide".

It that all you have?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article
<f7efd825-fbba-4667...@c28g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,

Don't forget the uphill both ways part.

--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Mike Painter]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno

Both biblical flood stories are absolutely false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis explains that
the original hypothesis is almost certainly not correct.

If you want to talk about big floods you can stay right here in the
Northern Hemisphere.

"the peak flow rate of the largest flood include 17 cubic kilometers
per hour and range up to 60 cubic kilometers per hour. The maximum
flow speed approached 36 meters/second (130 km/h or 80 mph)

Now that's a flood.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods

[Mike Painter]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 21:00:11 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>
>> > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
>> > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>>
>> It's a fish story, and it's a whopper. True to every fish story,
>> its details grew with the telling, in this case, for maximum
>> fright value. Didn't your grandparents ever tell you that "eight
>> miles through the snow to get to school every morning" tale
>> in order to motivate you?
>
>Don't forget the uphill both ways part.

An old cartoon shows a man and his son standing in a field of snow.
It comes up a few inches above his ankles.

"When I was your age the snow came up past my knees", he exclaims.

The little kid, in snow up to his armpits, just glares up at him

[hypatiab7]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:34:54 PM UTC-5, Joe Bruno wrote:
> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm

> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

So, there was a big flood that killed a lot of people and the
survivors spread the story. And each culture that heard the
story changed it to fit their own culture. Historians have
known this for over a hundred years. Where have you been?
Cuneiform writings showing different versions of this story
are in museums.

[Syd M.]

Nope.
Not evidence.

PDW

[Joe Bruno]

I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at face value.

I make no claim to be a scientist, altho I have some education in Physics, Chemistry and Biology.

A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.

That is what I am doing.I refuse to stop looking. I will present what I find for the benefit of those who have open minds.

At this point, I do not take the flood story literally.I am not a fundamentalist who accepts what the bible says without question.

I will continue to search for evidence and present what I find and there is
NOTHING you can do to stop me.

[Devils Advocaat]

On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

An interesting article.

I've always said most myths and legends contain an element of truth.

A catastrophic flood undoubtedly had a big impact over a wide area.

And this flood grew in its telling until it was the worldwide flood
some people believe in even today.

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
>
> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

The article, of course, points out what atheists and skeptics have been saying
for years: that the biblical flood account is merely an account of a localized,
natural flood that occurred in the area, and got recorded as a "worldwide"
flood.

That floods happen is trivially obvious. Finding geologic evidence for a
localized flood at the right time period would be, of course, interesting.
However, it would simply be another nail in the coffin for "biblical
inerrancy".

Human scientific inquiry has debunked most of the fantastical claims of the
bible. What's left is a bit of local history mixed in with some fables.

Hardly anything worth basing a worldview on.

--
__ _ | The human race has one really effective weapon,
(_ |_) | and that is laughter.
__)|_) | -- Mark Twain

[Joe Bruno]

In the ancient world,they knew very little about the world outside their
own communities.They had no means to communicate with the outside world.
They believed that their area was all that was.

The Europeans did not know China existed until Marco Polo found it and told them about it.

They knew nothing of Japan until the 15th century.

North America was first encountered by Europeans in 1000AD, when the Vikings
sailed to it and set foot on it.

If you go back in time to the time of Noah, they didn't know there was any other land.Their flood was a world flood.

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:52:45 AM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.
>
>
>
> The article, of course, points out what atheists and skeptics have been saying
>
> for years: that the biblical flood account is merely an account of a localized,
>
> natural flood that occurred in the area, and got recorded as a "worldwide"
>
> flood.

Where did they say that?EVIDENCE????????????????

>
>
>
> That floods happen is trivially obvious. Finding geologic evidence for a
>
> localized flood at the right time period would be, of course, interesting.
>
> However, it would simply be another nail in the coffin for "biblical
>
> inerrancy".

So?Very few people believe in that anymore.You're beating a dead horse.

>
>
>
> Human scientific inquiry has debunked most of the fantastical claims of the
>
> bible.

Specifics????????????Evidence?????????????????????

What's left is a bit of local history mixed in with some fables.
>
>
>
> Hardly anything worth basing a worldview on.

That's your opinion and nobody is required to agree with you.
Mind your own business.

[Devils Advocaat]

Indeed way back knowledge of elsewhere was extremely limited, but that
doesn't explain why some people today, insist against all evidence to
the contrary, that the flood of the bible story covered the whole
world as we know it today.

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:52:45 AM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:
>> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> The article, of course, points out what atheists and skeptics have been saying
>>
>> for years: that the biblical flood account is merely an account of a localized,
>>
>> natural flood that occurred in the area, and got recorded as a "worldwide"
>>
>> flood.
>
> Where did they say that?EVIDENCE????????????????

From the article you posted:

"The Bible has always been an awkward book. Most of it is historical, of course,
and much of that human history can be independently confirmed. But much of the
Bible is mythical, a record of fundamental stories that shaped an ancient
worldview. Taken literally, Noah's Flood suggests a widespread set of
geological consequences that have not been found. The world is true, therefore
this part of the Word is not. But Ryan and Pitman's hypothesis that the Flood
myth had a historical basis assumes, correctly, that even if Noah's story is
not literally true it is not utterly false. More realistic versions of it can
be checked out and possibly verified."

Did you even read what you posted?

>>
>>
>>
>> That floods happen is trivially obvious. Finding geologic evidence for a
>>
>> localized flood at the right time period would be, of course, interesting.
>>
>> However, it would simply be another nail in the coffin for "biblical
>>
>> inerrancy".
>
> So?Very few people believe in that anymore.You're beating a dead horse.

Lots of people do believe that. Here's just one:

http://www.ecainternational.org/index.cfm/PageID/465/index.html

"We believe that both Old and New Testaments constitute the divinely inspired
word of God, inerrant in the originals."

>> Human scientific inquiry has debunked most of the fantastical claims of the
>>
>> bible.
>
>
> Specifics????????????Evidence?????????????????????

The flood (article you just posted)

Pi is "3"

Bats are birds

The sun stood still in the sky

The Jewish Exodus: 40 years in the desert.

You can look this stuff up; it's been posted before.

> What's left is a bit of local history mixed in with some fables.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hardly anything worth basing a worldview on.
>
> That's your opinion and nobody is required to agree with you.

True.

> Mind your own business.

I am; I'm in alt.atheism. I'm free to post whatever the hell I like. Don't
like it? Don't read it. You don't tell ME what to do, fuckwit.

--
__ _ | As I've said many times: the future is already here;
(_ |_) | it's just not very evenly distributed.
__)|_) | -- William Gibson

[Tim]

"sbalneav" <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote in message
news:kbphm6$ofi$3...@dont-email.me...

>
> Did you even read what you posted?

Of course he didn't, he was taught to repeat the dogma without questioning
it.

[tbee...@aci.on.ca]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:34:54 PM UTC-5, Joe Bruno wrote:

> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

The evidence shows that you are an idiot. The story is either true or it is false, there is no wishy washy middle ground. No evidence for a global flood exists, to the contrary of what your idiot babble claims. Ergo, your myth is just that, a made up story, no flod, no Noah, no arc, no animals two by two, just idiot dupes like you running around believing whatever the child molestors in their dresses tell you to believe. Sucka.

[Fred^72]

This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.

[AmyLeVere]

"Fred^72" wrote in message
news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...

>>^^^
Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.

[Irreverend Dave]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
>
> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
> true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
> continue.

There's geologic evidence for lots of regional floods caused by retreating
glaciers at the end of the last ice age. None for a global flood.

http://hugefloods.com/LakeMissoula.html


--
Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe,
but in proportion to their readiness to doubt - Ambrose Bierce

[Syd M.]

On Dec 30, 4:09 am, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:48:36 PM UTC-8, Syd M. wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>
> > > > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>
> > > > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > > > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > > > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > > > >>continue.
>
> > > > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> > > > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> > > > that was the then sea level.
>
> > > > There is no debate to continue.
>
> > > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
>
> > > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>
> > And real scientist don't gave a flying fuck what a bunch of ignorant,
>
> > arrogant fundies want to believe, they know what is false and not.
>
> > PDW
>
> I am not a fundamentalist.

And yet, here you are, desperately trying to 'prove' Noah really
happened.
Just like a fundy.

PDW

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWan...@bass.gov>
wrote in alt.atheism:

So? Neither one denied reality so they could substitute an indefensible
religious doctrine in its place.

Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.

Noah's Flood never happened. Claiming that it did is a lie, a false
doctrine.

[Gordon]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:11:57 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:

Creationism by means of the process of evolution makes sense, doesn't
it?

[Devils Advocaat]

On Dec 30, 6:11 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>

> wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Fred^72"  wrote in message
> >news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...
>

> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
> >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
> >>absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of
> >>evidence and the debate continue.
>
> >This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.
>
> >>>^^^
> >Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.
>
> So? Neither one denied reality so they could substitute an indefensible
> religious doctrine in its place.
>
> Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.
>
> Noah's Flood never happened. Claiming that it did is a lie, a false
> doctrine.

Way back a catastrophic flood covering the land as far as the eye
could see would look like the whole world was covered in water.

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:15:26 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote
in alt.atheism:

Not really, but if that is what it takes for a theist to accept reality,
I can live with it. Theistic evolution offers no reason to add a god to
the mix.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

Not all Christians believe in literal creation.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

It makes just as much sense as this guy.....

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will
create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there
is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we
exist." - Stephen Hawking
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/09/the-universe-exists-because-of-spontaneous-creation-stephen-hawking.html

[Joe Bruno]

You are objective and look at evidence before you draw a conclusion.So am I.
I don't take the history in the bible literally. Not everybody is open minded.
Some refuse to be scientific and objective.

If everyone were objective and logical, there would have been no Holocaust and no massacres in Africa, no Armenian genocide.Many of the wars in human history would never have happened.People are not 100% rational. I'm certainly not 100% rational.

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:26:11 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
<klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

Agreed, but those who do are teaching something that was proven false a
couple of centuries ago.

[Linuxgal]

Devils Advocaat wrote:
> Way back a catastrophic flood covering the land as far as the eye
> could see would look like the whole world was covered in water.

The Flood story says all life was destroyed except that which was aboard
the ark. A limited flood as you describe would not accomplish that.

Genesis 7:

[21] And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of
cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the
earth, and every man:

[22] All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in
the dry land, died.

So you are presented with a dilemma. Either you are lying when you
claim a limited scope for the Flood, or the Scripture is lying when it
claims a universal scope for the Flood. And I don't care which.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

al...@cleanposts.com
http://www.cleanposts.com/

[Gordon]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:25:26 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>

Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion. Random chance
evolution doesn't explain it. A guiding intelligence in control is a
much better explanation. Gordon
>

[Christopher A. Lee]

The earliest civilisations grew up in places that got flooded because
that's where the land was most fertile, with the floods replenishing
it by depositing material washed down from upstream.

This was alongside rivers, which also provided transport so as well as
being early farmers they were also early boat builders.

Sometimes these were relatively benign, like in the Nile valley.

Other times these were more catastrophic, like in the Tigris and
Euphrates valleys where the legend started.

[Gordon]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
<manky...@gmail.com> wrote:

After the last period of glaciation had ended, about 12,000 years ago,
and the polar ice was melting rapidly the ocean level raised enough to
cause the land barrier at what is now the Strait of Gibraltar to give
way and let the Atlantic Ocean water rush into the Mediterranean
Basin. It is also likely that this surge of ocean water into the
Mediterranean Basin triggered some very intensive rain storms for
several weeks. This did really flood all those low lying areas and was
a situation that was talked about and passed along down through the
following generations. Gordon

[Andy W]

On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?

[Mike Painter]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 01:09:32 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
<atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at face value.
>
>I make no claim to be a scientist, altho I have some education in Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
>
>A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.
>
>That is what I am doing.I refuse to stop looking. I will present what I find for the benefit of those who have open minds.
>
>At this point, I do not take the flood story literally.I am not a fundamentalist who accepts what the bible says without question.
>
>I will continue to search for evidence and present what I find and there is
>NOTHING you can do to stop me.


Why bother to look for evidence of a biblical flood?
Even with high school levels of Physics, Chemistry and Biology you
should realize that either a huge part of what they teach is wrong or
the flood stories are.

Look for evidence of anyone being able to survive a partial pressure
of O2 in excess of two atmospheres if you want to defend a biblical
flood.
Find out what happens in terms of temperature rise when it rains a
biblical amount.

How high would the atmosphere have to extend to hold five miles of
water in vapor form?

>

[Linuxgal]

Gordon wrote:
> Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion. Random chance
> evolution doesn't explain it.

Why not?

> A guiding intelligence in control is a
> much better explanation.

Why?

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:14:14 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote

Evolution is not "random chance". There is no need for a guiding
intelligence.

[Joe Bruno]

The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain in Turkey.
It's dimensions match those of the ark.

I'm not an expert on Archaeology.I will wait for more evidence before I decide what I think is true about the story.I am pleased to see that scientists are continuing to investigate.

In any event, as I have said before, I am not a fundamentalist and do not take all of the bible literally.However, enough evidence has been found to make it
highly likely that much of the bible is historical fact.It's all over the Internet and I try to read all of it.Maybe you should, too.

[Don Martin]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:15:26 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>

wrote:

>>Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.
>>
>Creationism by means of the process of evolution makes sense, doesn't
>it?

Only if the existence of a creator is first established by evidence.

--

aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/

[Don Martin]

These civilizations also grew in subtropical climates where the
river's water in the summer was more important than its silt in the
spring.

>This was alongside rivers, which also provided transport so as well as
>being early farmers they were also early boat builders.
>
>Sometimes these were relatively benign, like in the Nile valley.
>
>Other times these were more catastrophic, like in the Tigris and
>Euphrates valleys where the legend started.

[Don Martin]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:14:14 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>

wrote:

>>>Creationism by means of the process of evolution makes sense, doesn't
>>>it?
>>
>>Not really, but if that is what it takes for a theist to accept reality,
>>I can live with it. Theistic evolution offers no reason to add a god to
>>the mix.
>>
>Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion. Random chance
>evolution doesn't explain it.

Read Nick Lane's _Life Ascending: The Ten Great Inventions of
Evolution_ for a clearer explanation of the Cambrian explosion than
you have probably seen. Evolution is not just random chance, except
in the minds of people who do not comprehend it.

[Joe Bruno]

[Joe Bruno]

Yes, and what about that big meteor that destroyed the dinosaurs.
Meteors that size are rare and they don't hit the Earth.
>
> >

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:00:22 -0500, Don Martin
<drdon...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:14:14 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
>wrote:
>
>>>>Creationism by means of the process of evolution makes sense, doesn't
>>>>it?
>>>
>>>Not really, but if that is what it takes for a theist to accept reality,
>>>I can live with it. Theistic evolution offers no reason to add a god to
>>>the mix.
>>>
>>Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion. Random chance
>>evolution doesn't explain it.
>
>Read Nick Lane's _Life Ascending: The Ten Great Inventions of
>Evolution_ for a clearer explanation of the Cambrian explosion than
>you have probably seen. Evolution is not just random chance, except
>in the minds of people who do not comprehend it.

He won't. He's a brainwashed moron incapable of grasping that people
outside his religion don't already believe in his hypothetical
creator.

[Linuxgal]

Joe Bruno wrote:
> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain in Turkey.
> It's dimensions match those of the ark.

Yeah, and every time a "researcher" takes pictures of this huge ancient
vessel that somehow wasn't piece parted out for firewood by goat herders
over five thousand years, the Turkish authorities confiscate their
camera. Funny, that.

[Uncle Vic]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:20f7b913-2af9-4964...@googlegroups.com:

>
> If you go back in time to the time of Noah, they didn't know there was
> any other land.Their flood was a world flood.
>

And early society thought this was the work of their god expunging the evil
in their society, systematically taking out everyone else too. We don't
believe in volcano gods any more. Or lightning gods. Or earthquake gods.
Gods who control the natural forces of the earth, using them to fight evil
like using dynamite to hunt mosquitos.

Apparently there are some who still believe the natural forces of our
environment are controlled by their god and used to fight evil. They're
the same people who believe in Noah's Flood as a historical event, and
cannot be taught otherwise.

--
Uncle Vic
aa# 2011
The meaning of life is to find your gift.
The purpose of life is to give it away.

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[Syd M.]

On Dec 30, 3:03 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:22:58 AM UTC-8, Andy W wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.
>
> > So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
>
> > the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?
>
> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain in Turkey.
> It's dimensions match those of the ark.
>
>

That figures; Your also a fan of the "Noah's ark on a mountain in the
Middle East" claims.
No amount of evidence will work with this one, it seems.

PDW

[Syd M.]

On Dec 30, 3:06 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:40:10 AM UTC-8, Mike Painter wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 01:09:32 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>

> > <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at face value.
>
> > >I make no claim to be a scientist, altho I have some education in Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
>
> > >A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.
>
> > >That is what I am doing.I refuse to stop looking. I will present what I find for the benefit of those who have open minds.
>
> > >At this point, I do not take the flood story literally.I am not a fundamentalist who accepts what the bible says without question.
>
> > >I will continue to search for evidence and present what I find and there is
>
> > >NOTHING you can do to stop me.
>
> > Why bother to look for evidence of a biblical flood?
>
> > Even with high school levels of Physics, Chemistry and Biology you
>
> > should realize that either a huge part of what they teach is wrong or
>
> > the flood stories are.
>
> > Look for evidence of anyone being able to survive a partial pressure
>
> > of O2 in excess of two atmospheres if you want to defend a biblical
>
> > flood.
>
> > Find out what happens in terms of temperature rise when it rains a
>
> > biblical amount.
>
> > How high would the atmosphere have to extend  to hold five miles of
>
> > water in vapor form?
>
> A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.

That's right.
And you lot have NO evidence to offer, so the scientist do not look at
your evidence.

PDW

[Uncle Vic]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:41d5546f-0ae8-4283...@googlegroups.com:

> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:22:58 AM UTC-8, Andy W wrote:
>> On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>> > absolutely
> true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
> continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
>>
>> the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?
>
> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain
> in Turkey. It's dimensions match those of the ark.

Its dimensions match those of a fictional vessel? I'll bet it matches
the dimensions a lot of real ones too. Did you look into it? I found an
article by National Geographic where the author states he knows of no
"expedition" to find the Ark that haven't found it. The one you cite
here was headed by an Evangelical Christian group. The bias smells of
elderberry farts.

http://tinyurl.com/396n5yh

>
> I'm not an expert on Archaeology.I will wait for more evidence before
> I decide what I think is true about the story.I am pleased to see that
> scientists are continuing to investigate.
>
> In any event, as I have said before, I am not a fundamentalist and do
> not take all of the bible literally.However, enough evidence has been
> found to make it highly likely that much of the bible is historical
> fact.It's all over the Internet and I try to read all of it.Maybe you
> should, too.
>
>

Wait a minute. It's all over the internet? Shit, it MUST be true, then.

Bwaaaahahahahaha!

[Uncle Vic]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:41d5546f-0ae8-4283...@googlegroups.com:

> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:22:58 AM UTC-8, Andy W wrote:
>> On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>> > absolutely
> true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
> continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
>>
>> the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?
>
> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain
> in Turkey. It's dimensions match those of the ark.
>

<http://mysteriesunsolvedstory.blogspot.com/2010/04/noah-ship-found-in-
turkey.html>

http://tinyurl.com/bcy6cst

Take a look at the two pictures at the top of the page. Tell me how the
one designated as Noah's Ark doesn't look like the rock formation at the
top of the mountain. That must be another Ark from a previous flood, eh?
If it is another boat, why wasn't it included in the group's findings?
Because they thought they found what they were looking for, and looked no
further. Yeah, REAL scientific.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:15:47 -0800 (PST), "Syd M."
<pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Dec 30, 3:06�pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:40:10 AM UTC-8, Mike Painter wrote:
>> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 01:09:32 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
>>
>> > <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at
>> > >face value.

Why even give them a thought?

Non-fundamentalist Christians have no problem seeing them as
allegories.

>> > >I make no claim to be a scientist, altho I have some education
>> > >in Physics, Chemistry and Biology.

It doesn't show.

>> > >A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps
>> > >looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new
>> > >discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.

Noah's flood is only an issue for fundamentalist Christians who
stupidly imagine it should be an issue for everybody else too.

>> > >That is what I am doing.I refuse to stop looking. I will present
>> > >what I find for the benefit of those who have open minds.

Is the moron equally open-minded about the Greek myths?

>> > >At this point, I do not take the flood story literally.I am not a
>> > >fundamentalist who accepts what the bible says without question.

Yet he takes the Bible and its flood myth seriously enough to lie
about those who recognise Genesis as myth and legend, not being "open
minded".

>> > >I will continue to search for evidence and present what I find
>> > >and there is NOTHING you can do to stop me.

Translation: he will continue to wipe his stupid bullshit in our
faces.

>> > Why bother to look for evidence of a biblical flood?
>>
>> > Even with high school levels of Physics, Chemistry and Biology you
>> > should realize that either a huge part of what they teach is wrong or
>> > the flood stories are.
>>
>> > Look for evidence of anyone being able to survive a partial pressure
>> > of O2 in excess of two atmospheres if you want to defend a biblical
>> > flood.
>>
>> > Find out what happens in terms of temperature rise when it rains a
>> > biblical amount.
>>
>> > How high would the atmosphere have to extend �to hold five miles of
>> > water in vapor form?

Not just these - what would the volume of all this extra water be?
Where did it come from and where did it go to?

Floods recede because water drains from a higher level to a lover one
- but if the world were completely covered there would be nowhere for
it to drain to.

>> A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.

However there is no issue outside the fantasies of deluded
religionists in denial about reality.

>That's right.

When there is an issue in their field.

>And you lot have NO evidence to offer, so the scientist do not look at
>your evidence.

How many times does this need explaining to the idiot?

>PDW

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:34:39 -0600, Uncle Vic <so...@noway.com> wrote:

>Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:41d5546f-0ae8-4283...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:22:58 AM UTC-8, Andy W wrote:
>>> On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>>> > absolutely
>> true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>> continue.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
>>>
>>> the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?
>>
>> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain
>> in Turkey. It's dimensions match those of the ark.
>
>Its dimensions match those of a fictional vessel? I'll bet it matches
>the dimensions a lot of real ones too. Did you look into it? I found an
>article by National Geographic where the author states he knows of no
>"expedition" to find the Ark that haven't found it. The one you cite
>here was headed by an Evangelical Christian group. The bias smells of
>elderberry farts.

That good?

[Linuxgal]

Uncle Vic wrote:
> Take a look at the two pictures at the top of the page. Tell me how the
> one designated as Noah's Ark doesn't look like the rock formation at the
> top of the mountain. That must be another Ark from a previous flood, eh?
> If it is another boat, why wasn't it included in the group's findings?
> Because they thought they found what they were looking for, and looked no
> further. Yeah, REAL scientific.

There's a geological feature on Mt. St. Helens called Dog's Head, looks
like the back of a giant beagle. Face on Mars. How come this ark
ain't on Google Maps? Oh, that's right, THEY don't want people to know
the Bible is true.

[Uncle Vic]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in news:99b80320-be60-4cb5-b05e-
669dbf...@googlegroups.com:

> Yes, and what about that big meteor that destroyed the dinosaurs.
> Meteors that size are rare and they don't hit the Earth.

They do, and they have. Come on, dolt, there is physical evidence of this.

<http://www.lpi.usra.edu/science/kiefer/Education/SSRG2-
Craters/meteor_crater.gif>

http://tinyurl.com/67ckom

[Devils Advocaat]

On 30 Dec, 19:16, Christopher A. Lee <chrislee95...@comcast.net>
wrote:

I'm not unaware of such things as you describe.

But thanks for pointing them out.

[Christopher A. Lee]

As much as anything they were for the flood advocates in the thread,
not the devil's advocaat :-)

[Mike Painter]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:06:02 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
<atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> Look for evidence of anyone being able to survive a partial pressure
>> of O2 in excess of two atmospheres if you want to defend a biblical
>> flood.

>> How high would the atmosphere have to extend to hold five miles of
>> water in vapor form?
>
>
>A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.
>>

There is no evidence to support a global flood.
There is massive evidence to show that such an event could not have
happened unless the subjects you claim some knowledge of were wrong.

A real scientist would try to falsify current theory before being able
to argue for a flood.

An eight grader could do the math on the two questions I did not snip.

There is a huge difference between an open mind and one where your
brains fallout.

[Mike Painter]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:35:17 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno
<atan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>If everyone were objective and logical, there would have been no Holocaust and no massacres in Africa, no Armenian genocide.Many of the wars in human history would never have happened.People are not 100% rational. I'm certainly not 100% rational.

And no religion.

[Father Haskell]

On Dec 30, 12:00 am, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <f7efd825-fbba-4667-b69b-2b81aa745...@c28g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>  Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>
> > > > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno

>
> > > > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > > > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > > > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > > > >>continue.
>

> > > > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> > > > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> > > > that was the then sea level.
>
> > > > There is no debate to continue.
>
> > > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
> > > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>
> > It's a fish story, and it's a whopper.  True to every fish story,
> > its details grew with the telling, in this case, for maximum
> > fright value.  Didn't your grandparents ever tell you that "eight
> > miles through the snow to get to school every morning" tale
> > in order to motivate you?
>
> Don't forget the uphill both ways part.

While fighting hostile Indians.

[Father Haskell]

On Dec 30, 4:09 am, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at face value.

You're a proselytizing christian masquerading as a jew
to further your agenda.

[Father Haskell]

On Dec 30, 3:06 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.
> He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always
> ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his
> conclusions.

Garbage and noise are not evidence, and should be
discarded.

[Joe Bruno]

> >> > How high would the atmosphere have to extend �to hold five miles of

>
> >> > water in vapor form?
>
>
>
> Not just these - what would the volume of all this extra water be?
>
> Where did it come from and where did it go to?
>
>
>
> Floods recede because water drains from a higher level to a lover one
>
> - but if the world were completely covered there would be nowhere for
>
> it to drain to.
>
>
>
> >> A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.
>
>
>
> However there is no issue outside the fantasies of deluded
>
> religionists in denial about reality.
>
>
>
> >That's right.
>
>
>
> When there is an issue in their field.
>
>
>
> >And you lot have NO evidence to offer, so the scientist do not look at
>
> >your evidence.
>
>
>
> How many times does this need explaining to the idiot?
>
>
>

I will continue to search for evidence and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

[Joe Bruno]

I will continue to search for evidence and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

[Joe Bruno]

Actually, I'm Leif Erikson and I worship Odin and his son Thor.
Last week I was Napoleon Bonaparte, a Roman Catholic
Next month, I'll be Ivan the Terrible, the Russian Orthodox Czar.

I'm strongly considering the worship of moldy sweatsocks for 2014.

[Smiler]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:20:27 -0600, Gordon wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
> <manky...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 30, 6:11 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
>>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>
>>> >"Fred^72"  wrote in message
>>> >news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...
>>>

>>> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm The
>>> >>evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>>> >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the
>>> >>debate continue.
>>>

>>> >This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.
>>>
>>> >>>^^^
>>> >Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.
>>>
>>> So? Neither one denied reality so they could substitute an indefensible
>>> religious doctrine in its place.
>>>
>>> Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.
>>>
>>> Noah's Flood never happened. Claiming that it did is a lie, a false
>>> doctrine.
>>
>>Way back a catastrophic flood covering the land as far as the eye could
>>see would look like the whole world was covered in water.
>>

> After the last period of glaciation had ended, about 12,000 years ago, and
> the polar ice was melting rapidly the ocean level raised enough to cause
> the land barrier at what is now the Strait of Gibraltar to give way and
> let the Atlantic Ocean water rush into the Mediterranean Basin. It is also
> likely that this surge of ocean water into the Mediterranean Basin
> triggered some very intensive rain storms for several weeks. This did
> really flood all those low lying areas and was a situation that was talked
> about and passed along down through the following generations. Gordon

Quite possibly, but that's nowhere near to a 'worldwide flood' that
supposedly occured about 5000 years ago. The biblical story is a lie from
start to finish.

--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Smiler]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:10:51 -0800, Syd M. wrote:

> On Dec 30, 3:03 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:22:58 AM UTC-8, Andy W wrote:
>> > On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>
>> > > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>> > > absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence
>> > > and the debate continue.
>>
>> > So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
>>
>> > the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?
>>
>> The remains of a huge ancient vessel have been found atop a mountain in
>> Turkey. It's dimensions match those of the ark.
>>

<PIGGYBACKING>
Bwahahahaha! You _believe_ Ron Wyatt! Bwhahahaha!

>>
>>
> That figures; Your also a fan of the "Noah's ark on a mountain in the
> Middle East" claims.
> No amount of evidence will work with this one, it seems.
>

It's one of the liar, Ron Wyatt's 'discoveries'.

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 8:01:46 PM UTC-8, Smiler wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:20:27 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
>
> > <manky...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>On Dec 30, 6:11�pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> >>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
>
> >>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>
> >>>
>

> >>> >"Fred^72" �wrote in message

How would anyone benefit from such intentional deception?That's what a lie is.

[Joe Bruno]

HA!Jews are a tiny minority, 0.2% of the Earth's population. We know that
the huge majority of humanity does not accept our beliefs.We haven't let that bother us for 3,000 years.

[Father Haskell]

Tell us something we don't know.

[hypatiab7]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 4:09:32 AM UTC-5, Joe Bruno wrote:

> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:48:36 PM UTC-8, Syd M. wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
> > > > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:

> >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno

> > > > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm

> > > > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
> > > > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
> > > > >>continue.
>

> > > > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
> > > > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
> > > > that was the then sea level.
>
> > > > There is no debate to continue.
>
> > > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
> > > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.

> > And real scientist don't gave a flying fuck what a bunch of ignorant,
> > arrogant fundies want to believe, they know what is false and not.

> I am not a fundamentalist. I do not accept bible stories at face value.

> I make no claim to be a scientist, altho I have some education in Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
>

> A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his conclusions.

>
> That is what I am doing.I refuse to stop looking. I will present what I find for the benefit of those who have open minds.
>

> At this point, I do not take the flood story literally.I am not a fundamentalist who accepts what the bible says without question.
>

> I will continue to search for evidence and present what I find and there is
> NOTHING you can do to stop me.

We wouldn't want to stop you from accidentally actually learning something.

[Father Haskell]

Whatever you say, Mr. Nimoy.

[hypatiab7]

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 9:38:16 PM UTC-5, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in

> news:14533cad-3488-4a49...@googlegroups.com:
> > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:01:11 PM UTC-8, MarkA wrote:

> >> On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800, Joe Bruno wrote:
> >> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> >> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
> >> > absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence
> >> > and the debate continue.
>

> >> Floods are as common as dirt, and are hugely important to small,
> >> agrarian communities living near the river. It would be astounding if there weren't flood-related myths in the pre-history of most every civilization.
>
> > YOu didn't read the link, either???

> All your link says is that the creation of the
>
> Black Sea was the source of the "flood" story, which was erroneously written up as "world wide".
>
> It that all you have?

As ever when you bring up this topic, I will suggest a book I know
you will not check out - The Flood Myth edited by Alan Dundes.

[SkyEyes]

On Dec 30, 12:14 pm, Gordon <gordo...@swbell.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:25:26 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:15:26 -0600, Gordon <gordo...@swbell.net> wrote
> >in alt.atheism:
>
> >>On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:11:57 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> >>wrote:
>

> >>>On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
> >>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>

> >>>>"Fred^72"  wrote in message
> >>>>news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...

>
> >>>>Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
> >>>>>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
> >>>>>absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of
> >>>>>evidence and the debate continue.
>

> >>>>This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.
>
> >>>>>>^^^
> >>>>Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.
>
> >>>So? Neither one denied reality so they could substitute an indefensible
> >>>religious doctrine in its place.
>
> >>>Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.
>

> >>Creationism by means of the process of evolution makes sense, doesn't
> >>it?
>
> >Not really, but if that is what it takes for a theist to accept reality,
> >I can live with it. Theistic evolution offers no reason to add a god to
> >the mix.
>
> Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion.

Which, start-to-finish, took about 20 million years. Don't let the
word "explosion" fool you into thinking it was anything like
instantaneous. It was a 20 million year period in which organisms
heretofore soft-bodied began developing hard body parts that would
fossilize, hence the "explosion" in fossils that date from that
period.

> Random chance evolution doesn't explain it.

It certainly does, because there's only *one* element of evolution
that's random, and that's mutation. Everything else proceeds in a
very predictable manner. It *is*, after all, chemistry and physics,
two subjects about which we know quite a bit.

> A guiding intelligence in control is a
> much better explanation.  Gordon

Only if you don't know dick about evolution and how it *really* works,
or of the kind of time spans involved.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com

[hypatiab7]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:01:46 PM UTC-5, Smiler wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:20:27 -0600, Gordon wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
> > <manky...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>On Dec 30, 6:11 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
> >>> wrote in alt.atheism:
> >>> >"Fred^72"  wrote in message
> >>> >news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...
> >>> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm The
> >>> >>evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
> >>> >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the
> >>> >>debate continue.
>
> >>> >This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.
>

> >>> >Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.

If they say they are Christians, they are Christians.

[hypatiab7]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 8:37:40 AM UTC-5, Joe Bruno wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:39:01 AM UTC-8, Devils Advocaat wrote:

> > On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
> > > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

>

> > An interesting article.

> > I've always said most myths and legends contain an element of truth.
>
> > A catastrophic flood undoubtedly had a big impact over a wide area.
>
> > And this flood grew in its telling until it was the worldwide flood
> > some people believe in even today.
>
> In the ancient world,they knew very little about the world outside their
> own communities.They had no means to communicate with the outside world.
> They believed that their area was all that was.

>
> The Europeans did not know China existed until Marco Polo found it and told them about it.

The Europeans knew China was there from learning about it from
other Asians like the Indians and the Middle East. They heard
tales of spices and other riches and finally Marco Polo went
to check it out.

> They knew nothing of Japan until the 15th century.

That I can believe.
>
> North America was first encountered by Europeans in 1000AD, when the Vikings
> sailed to it and set foot on it.
>
> If you go back in time to the time of Noah, they didn't know there was any other land.Their flood was a world flood.

There were other civilizations all around them that started
around the same time - the Egyptians, Nubians, Ethiopeans,
and plenty others. But at the time of the Black Sea Flood,
there may have just been small tribal groupings little above
Cro Magnons. To them, the small area they lived in was the
entire world. The surviviors could have joined other tribes
further south spreading the story until it became a myth.

[hypatiab7]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 8:40:35 AM UTC-5, Joe Bruno wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:52:45 AM UTC-8, sbalneav wrote:

> > Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
> > > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.

> > The article, of course, points out what atheists and skeptics have been saying for years: that the biblical flood account is merely an account of a localized, natural flood that occurred in the area, and got recorded as a "worldwide" flood.
>
> Where did they say that?EVIDENCE????????????????
>
> > That floods happen is trivially obvious. Finding geologic evidence for a
> > localized flood at the right time period would be, of course, interesting.
>
> > However, it would simply be another nail in the coffin for "biblical
> > inerrancy".
>
> So?Very few people believe in that anymore.You're beating a dead horse.
>
> > Human scientific inquiry has debunked most of the fantastical claims of the
> > bible.
>
> Specifics????????????Evidence?????????????????????

Oh, wow! More question marks. Yummy!
>
> What's left is a bit of local history mixed in with some fables.
>
> > Hardly anything worth basing a worldview on.
>
> That's your opinion and nobody is required to agree with you.
> Mind your own business.

Why should he or any of us? You come to our newsgroup spouting nonsense and try to tell us what to do. Sorry, little goy, ain't gonna happen.

[hypatiab7]

Not so much a lie as a story that grew into a myth or two or three or....
Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who believe that myths are true.

[hypatiab7]

On Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:22:58 PM UTC-5, Andy W wrote:

> On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.
>

> So apart from "there was a big flood in the middle east" what part of
> the whole Noah tale do you think is not utterly false?

There were people involved, many of whom died. And, as it passed
from culture to culture various changes and additions were made
and lots of exaggerations and cultural symbolism. The story changed
as it passed from the Sumerians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Canaanites
to the Hibirus.

[Devils Advocaat]

On 30 Dec, 22:50, Christopher A. Lee <chrislee95...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Which is why I thanked you :)

[Virgil]

In article
<9ab7bd8d-77a6-4912...@u16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,

Father Haskell <father...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Dec 30, 10:10�pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:46:33 PM UTC-8, Father Haskell wrote:
> > > On Dec 30, 3:06�pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.
> >
> > > > He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always
> >
> > > > ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his
> >
> > > > conclusions.
> >
> > > Garbage and noise are not evidence, and should be
> >
> > > discarded.

The garbage and noise you theists post to alt.atheism certainly should
all be discarded and its authors plonked!
--

[%]

says who

[John Smith]

"Virgil" <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote in message news:virgil-88B499....@BIGNEWS.USENETMONSTER.COM...

Real scientist looks at garbage,
for evidence and new discoveries.

Whit out garbage there would be no evidence...

[Devils Advocaat]

On 30 Dec, 18:35, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 6:01:21 AM UTC-8, Devils Advocaat wrote:
> > On 30 Dec, 13:37, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:39:01 AM UTC-8, Devils Advocaat wrote:

>
> > > > On Dec 29, 9:34 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > > > > The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate continue.
>

> > > > An interesting article.
>
> > > > I've always said most myths and legends contain an element of truth.
>
> > > > A catastrophic flood undoubtedly had a big impact over a wide area.
>
> > > > And this flood grew in its telling until it was the worldwide flood
>
> > > > some people believe in even today.
>
> > > In the ancient world,they knew very little about the world outside their
>
> > > own communities.They had no means to communicate with the outside world.
>
> > > They believed that their area was all that was.
>
> > > The Europeans did not know China existed until Marco Polo found it and told them about it.
>

> > > They knew nothing of Japan until the 15th century.
>

> > > North America was first encountered by Europeans in 1000AD, when the Vikings
>
> > > sailed to it and set foot on it.
>
> > > If you go back in time to the time of Noah, they didn't know there was any other land.Their flood was a world flood.
>

> > Indeed way back knowledge of elsewhere was extremely limited, but that
>
> > doesn't explain why some people today, insist against all evidence to
>
> > the contrary, that the flood of the bible story covered the whole
>
> > world as we know it today.
>
> You are objective and look at evidence before you draw a conclusion.So am I.
> I don't take the history in the bible literally. Not everybody is open minded.
> Some refuse to be scientific and objective.
>
It's often difficult for people to see the point of view of others.
Using one's imagination helps.

> If everyone were objective and logical, there would have been no Holocaust and no massacres in Africa, no Armenian genocide.Many of the wars in human history would never have happened.People are not 100% rational. I'm certainly not 100% rational.

Nor am I.

[Tim]

"Joe Bruno" <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b2698d28-e91d-4ef9...@googlegroups.com...

>
>
> You are objective and look at evidence before you draw a conclusion.So am
> I.

No you are not! You claimed above that "The evidence suggests that, although

the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The
gathering of evidence and the debate continue."

If you were objective you would see that the flood story is true or false,
but not both, to claim such is illogical, you can't have your cake and eat
it too. You claim evidence yet present none. Geological evidence shows no
global flood, yet you ignore that and still claim to be objective. You're
either a liar or an idiot, maybe both, but you aren't objective.

> I don't take the history in the bible literally. Not everybody is open
> minded.
> Some refuse to be scientific and objective.

So why are you looking for literal evidence? And why do you ignore the
scientific evidence that shows the impossibility of a global flood?

>
> If everyone were objective and logical, there would have been no Holocaust
> and no massacres in Africa, no Armenian genocide.Many of the wars in human
> history would never have happened.People are not 100% rational. I'm
> certainly not 100% rational.
>

Well there's one truth.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:16:20 AM UTC-8, Tim wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" <atan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b2698d28-e91d-4ef9...@googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You are objective and look at evidence before you draw a conclusion.So am
>
> > I.
>
>
>
> No you are not! You claimed above that "The evidence suggests that, although
>
> the flood story is not absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The
>
> gathering of evidence and the debate continue."
>
>
>
> If you were objective you would see that the flood story is true or false,
>
> but not both, to claim such is illogical, you can't have your cake and eat
>
> it too. You claim evidence yet present none.

Read the link, stupid asshole.

[Mitchell Holman]

hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:36cab889-6c53-4e3f...@googlegroups.com:

Just showing how Bruno's own site says
he is wrong. A minor source of amusement on
a slow day...........;)

[sbalneav]

Joe Bruno <atan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, December 30, 2012 8:01:46 PM UTC-8, Smiler wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:20:27 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
>>
>> > <manky...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >>On Dec 30, 6:11ï¿??pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>
>> >>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
>>
>> >>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>> >>>
>>

>> >>> >"Fred^72" ï¿??wrote in message

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/israel/Jewish_Thought/Biblical_and_Rabbinic/In_the_Bible/Rights_and_Obligations/Tithing.shtml

Ever heard of tithing?

--
__ _ | Everything existing in the universe
(_ |_) | is the fruit of chance and necessity.
__)|_) | -- Democritus

[SaPeIsMa]

"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:gs61e8h1e123mqcm7...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:14:14 -0600, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote

> in alt.atheism:

>
>>On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:25:26 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>

>>Except for things like the Cambrian Life Explosion. Random chance
>>evolution doesn't explain it. A guiding intelligence in control is a
>>much better explanation. Gordon
>
> Evolution is not "random chance". There is no need for a guiding
> intelligence.

So evolution is based on stupid rules ??
Amazing the stupid shit that atheists will swallow..

[harry k]

On Dec 29, 6:32 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:50:23 PM UTC-8, Father Haskell wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 7:33 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:28:51 PM UTC-8, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:45:45 -0800, John Locke
>

> > > > <johnnydemon...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 13:34:54 -0800 (PST), Joe Bruno

>
> > > > ><atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>
> > > > >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not absolutely
>
> > > > >>true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of evidence and the debate
>
> > > > >>continue.
>

> > > > It is obviously utterly false. There simply isn't all that water to
>
> > > > flood higher than the highest mountain and then to run off because
>
> > > > that was the then sea level.
>
> > > > There is no debate to continue.
>
> > > LOLOL!It will continue and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
>
> > > Nobody outside this newsgroup gives a damn what you think about it.
>

> > It's a fish story, and it's a whopper.
>
> You can't read the link?????Lots of evidence there.

The second paragraph says it never happened, only the local Black Sea
flood.

Harry K

[SaPeIsMa]

"Gordon" <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:kl41e8tjl80mhs4lo...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:21:37 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
> <manky...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>>On Dec 30, 6:11 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>>> On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:29:06 -0500, "AmyLeVere" <TheWander...@bass.gov>
>>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> >"Fred^72" wrote in message
>>> >news:cfqdnWKp2OQ66n3N...@posted.sonicnet...
>>>

>>> >Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>http://geology.about.com/od/flooding/qt/floodcomeback.htm
>>> >>The evidence suggests that, although the flood story is not
>>> >>absolutely true, it is not utterly false.The gathering of
>>> >>evidence and the debate continue.
>>>

>>> >This is your brain on Republicanism, folks.
>>>
>>> >>>^^^
>>> >Obama said he was a Christian. So did Clinton.
>>>
>>> So? Neither one denied reality so they could substitute an indefensible
>>> religious doctrine in its place.
>>>
>>> Creationism that denies evolution is a lie, a false doctrine.
>>>
>>> Noah's Flood never happened. Claiming that it did is a lie, a false
>>> doctrine.
>>
>>Way back a catastrophic flood covering the land as far as the eye
>>could see would look like the whole world was covered in water.
>>
> After the last period of glaciation had ended, about 12,000 years ago,
> and the polar ice was melting rapidly the ocean level raised enough to
> cause the land barrier at what is now the Strait of Gibraltar to give
> way and let the Atlantic Ocean water rush into the Mediterranean
> Basin. It is also likely that this surge of ocean water into the
> Mediterranean Basin triggered some very intensive rain storms for
> several weeks. This did really flood all those low lying areas and was
> a situation that was talked about and passed along down through the
> following generations. Gordon

And let's not forget that in those days, "the world" to most people meant
what they could reach

[harry k]

On Dec 31, 3:28 am, "John Smith" <some...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> "Virgil" <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote in messagenews:virgil-88B499....@BIGNEWS.USENETMONSTER.COM...
> > In article
> > <9ab7bd8d-77a6-4912-b763-8dc070c54...@u16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,

> > Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:46:33 PM UTC-8, Father Haskell wrote:
> >> > > On Dec 30, 3:06 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.
>
> >> > > > He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always
>
> >> > > > ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his
>
> >> > > > conclusions.
>
> >> > > Garbage and noise are not evidence, and should be
>
> >> > > discarded.
>
> > The garbage and noise you theists post to alt.atheism certainly should
> > all be discarded and its authors plonked!
>
> Real scientist looks at garbage,
> for evidence and new discoveries.
>
> Whit out garbage there would be no evidence...

And when they discover that what they are looking _is_ nothing but
garbage is is discard. Thats one of reasons religions are losing
ground.

Harry K

[osugeography]

On Dec 31, 5:28 am, "John Smith" <some...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> "Virgil" <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote in messagenews:virgil-88B499....@BIGNEWS.USENETMONSTER.COM...
> > In article
> > <9ab7bd8d-77a6-4912-b763-8dc070c54...@u16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,

> > Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, December 30, 2012 3:46:33 PM UTC-8, Father Haskell wrote:
> >> > > On Dec 30, 3:06 pm, Joe Bruno <atandy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > A real scientist looks at ALL the evidence for an issue.
>
> >> > > > He keeps looking for all of it his entire life. He is always
>
> >> > > > ready to use new discoveries of evidence to modify his
>
> >> > > > conclusions.
>
> >> > > Garbage and noise are not evidence, and should be
>
> >> > > discarded.
>
> > The garbage and noise you theists post to alt.atheism certainly should
> > all be discarded and its authors plonked!
>
> Real scientist looks at garbage,
> for evidence and new discoveries.
>
> Whit out garbage there would be no evidence...

John Smith wrote, above: "Whit out garbage there would be no
evidence..."

GIGO, John.

Garbage In, Garbage Out


Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com