Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Wakeup Sleeper
Logic and definitions:

"fossils have usualy to be buried rapidly"


On what timescale? Seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months or years?

"mass graves of fossils are usualy what is found"

What is your definition of "mass"? More than one, a dozen, a ...? Graves for animals?

"coal that is millions of years old according to the evo hype/propaganda there shouldnt be any c 14 in it but guess what there is."

Cite your sources. I won't guess there they are. And to get carbon-14 you only need a neutron source. There are natural ones.

"Planation surfaces are abundant on all continents, planation surfaces are not being formed today. Erosion does not explain planantion so dont go there. global flooding explains this very well."

You think because A is wrong B has to be right? What about C? C like glaciers? But I even doubt you can explain why A should be wrong, do you?

"marine fossils in the mountains" ... "whale fossils found high above sea levels"

Same logical error as mentioned above.

"many ancient peoples wrote of a global flood in which eight people survived the odds of this being a coincodence is quite a stretch."

Name one not linked to the ancient near east.

"If you study population growths it is consistant to the population today from arond 4300-4500 years ago."

What do you want to say?

"if you are honest with wanting to know the truth look at ALL of the evidence WILLINGLY!!!! "

Science: sine ira et studio (Lat.: Without anger and eagerness)


You are eager to proof a global flood.
337 posted on 03/14/2007 4:12:56 AM PDT by MHalblaub ("Easy my friends, when it comes to the point it is only a drawing made by a non believing Dane...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies ]


To: MHalblaub

Not eager to prove it, its that the evidence as well as many other subject matters gives great evidence and credibility to the bible. And I could give you a list of thousands of scientists and historians and archeaologists who use to be eager in disproving the bible and later changed their minds because of what? Because of the evidence that so overwhelmingly showed them different to their eagerness of disproval of the bible, and they are well learned with many years of experience and known and very credible professionals, And they denounce evolution something they once was bafooned into being told was true, but they no longer see it that way, because there agenda isnt the eagerness to discredit the bible like yours but they have decided to look at all the evidence and when they did they found a whole lot more that isnt told. Peace.


338 posted on 03/17/2007 1:36:02 PM PDT by Wakeup Sleeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson