The Atheist Thread

[a_ahmed]

[OTHstrong]

So according to the Creationists  are completely wrong.

The Grand Canyon itself displays 2 billion years of the Earth's history and shows all the different layers of soil.

There are even sea shells at the top of Mount Everest, and before you say 'Noah' they are ancient and contain fossil remains.
Mountain ranges are formed by uplifting tectonic plates moving underneath other plates. Some mountain tops were once at the bottom of the sea.

Some mountains and stones have also been formed by compacted shells over a period of millions of years.

The Marianas Trench is also the deepest canyon in the word and is in fact underwater and created by the movement of tectonic plates.
The continents of the world used to be connected and formed a singular land mass.

Africa and South America clearly fit like a jigsaw puzzle. The continents are in fact still moving apart.
But for the land masses to have broken apart and be where they are today would have taken BILLIONS of years.

You are good at keeping to the subject, for that I thank you.

all the worlds leading scientists, archaeologists, paleontologists, geologists, biologists, astronomers, anthropologists and geneticists

I don't think all, but definitely 90% of them and yes given that they all have something in common, they all are dedicated to their field with the pre-conceived notion that the theory of evolution is true


There are even sea shells at the top of Mount Everest, and before you say 'Noah' they are ancient and contain fossil remains.
Mountain ranges are formed by uplifting tectonic plates moving underneath other plates. Some mountain tops were once at the bottom of the sea.

To be honest I find it a lot more convincing that a flood occurred and deposited those shells, in fact I find it absolutely preposterous to suggest a tectonic plate grew upwards and was able to maintain certain artifacts throughout all that momentum and not to mention to have survived for millions of years. Shells are found in every single mountain range.

The continents of the world used to be connected and formed a singular land mass.

There are many scientist who don't believe in the Pangea theory. South America and Africa have continental shelves that fit cause the ocean currents have carved them out that way but underneath the continental shelves there are enormous amounts of land mass that does not line up properly.

[Griffith]

You are good at keeping to the subject, for that I thank you.

all the worlds leading scientists, archaeologists, paleontologists, geologists, biologists, astronomers, anthropologists and geneticists

I don't think all, but definitely 90% of them and yes given that they all have something in common, they all are dedicated to their field with the pre-conceived notion that the theory of evolution is true


There are even sea shells at the top of Mount Everest, and before you say 'Noah' they are ancient and contain fossil remains.
Mountain ranges are formed by uplifting tectonic plates moving underneath other plates. Some mountain tops were once at the bottom of the sea.

To be honest I find it a lot more convincing that a flood occurred and deposited those shells, in fact I find it absolutely preposterous to suggest a tectonic plate grew upwards and was able to maintain certain artifacts throughout all that momentum and not to mention to have survived for millions of years. Shells are found in every single mountain range.

The continents of the world used to be connected and formed a singular land mass.

There are many scientist who don't believe in the Pangea theory. South America and Africa have continental shelves that fit cause the ocean currents have carved them out that way but underneath the continental shelves there are enormous amounts of land mass that does not line up properly.

Everest is almost 9 Kilometers high, that water-level would have not only killed all land animals but also all species of insects.

In regards to the tectonic plates and a once singular landmass, the plates are still moving.
This is after all the cause of tsunamis and earthquakes, due to the friction of moving slabs of rock as the plates move.
The continents are also still drifting apart at the rate of about 5-10 cm per year, in a direction that is away from the other continents.

Other evidence is also of the discovery of the same types of dinosaur bones and fossils on different continents but in areas that would have once been connected. Not only of dinosaurs but also fossils of the same vegetation.

About mountains being made of seashells, the amount of time it must take for these shells to be accumulated in such massive heaps must take an immense amount of time especially if they comprise parts of other rocks such as granite.

The question is then how did the shells get inside the granite or marble...?
These stones do not just take thousands of years to form, it requires millions of years.

[avxo]

There are even sea shells at the top of Mount Everest, and before you say 'Noah' they are ancient and contain fossil remains.
Mountain ranges are formed by uplifting tectonic plates moving underneath other plates. Some mountain tops were once at the bottom of the sea.

To be honest I find it a lot more convincing that a flood occurred and deposited those shells, in fact I find it absolutely preposterous to suggest a tectonic plate grew upwards and was able to maintain certain artifacts throughout all that momentum and not to mention to have survived for millions of years. Shells are found in every single mountain range.

You find it preposterous that a tectonic plate shifted upwards, but what you find a lot more convincing is that enough water poured down to raise the level of the oceans by almost 6 miles.

This calls for math!

Let's let R_EARTH represent the approximate mean radius of the earth, i.e.: 3,956.6 miles. The height of Mt. Everest is almost 5.5 miles so let R_EVEREST represent radius of the earth at the highest point of Mt. Everest. We know that the volume of a sphere is given by the formula: V_SPHERE = (4 * π * R_SPHERE³) / 3.

So the volume of water, give or take a few million gallons, that would be required to raise the water level by 5.5 miles is given to us by this formula:

V_EVEREST- V_EARTH =
(4 * π * R_EVEREST³) / 3 - (4 * π * R_EARTH ³) / 3 =
(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3

We have:

R_EARTH³ = 3,956.6³ = 6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰
R_EVEREST³ = (3,956.6 + 5.5)³ = 6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰

So we calculate R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ easily:
 

R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ = (6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰) - (6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰) = 2.58661506565 * 10⁸ or 258,661,506 cubic miles of water.

Back to our equation from above:

(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3 =
(4 * π * 258,661,506) / 3 =
(1,034,646,024 * π) / 3

For simplicity, let's let π = 3 exactly. This will actually slightly reduce the volume of water that we will calculate as necessary but that's OK. Besides π being equal to 3 is Biblically approved per 1 Kings 7:23

Anyways, to make a long story short, we crunch the numbers and calculate that to raise the water level 5.5 miles, we would need... wait for it...

1,034,646,024 miles³ - or over 1 billion cubic miles of water

Perhaps we could convert this to a figure that we can more easily understand, like gallons?

1,034,646,024 miles³ ≅ 1,101,000,000,000 gallons.

Or, in other words, over 1 TRILLION gallons of water.

Yes. That is perfectly reasonable. A trillion gallons of water rained down on the earth...


Update: I made a typo in these calculations, which I have corrected in a post below. We'd actually need over one SEXTILLION gallons of water...

[Necrosis]

You find it preposterous that a tectonic plate shifted upwards, but what you find a lot more convincing is that enough water poured down to raise the level of the oceans by almost 6 miles.

This calls for math!

Let's let R_EARTH represent the approximate mean radius of the earth, i.e.: 3,956.6 miles. The height of Mt. Everest is almost 5.5 miles so let R_EVEREST represent radius of the earth at the highest point of Mt. Everest. We know that the volume of a sphere is given by the formula: V_SPHERE = (4 * π * R_SPHERE³) / 3.

So the volume of water, give or take a few million gallons, that would be required to raise the water level by 5.5 miles is given to us by this formula:

V_EVEREST- V_EARTH =
(4 * π * R_EVEREST³) / 3 - (4 * π * R_EARTH ³) / 3 =
(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3

We have:

R_EARTH³ = 3,956.6³ = 6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰
R_EVEREST³ = (3,956.6 + 5.5)³ = 6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰

So we calculate R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ easily:
 

R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ = (6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰) - (6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰) = 2.58661506565 * 10⁸ or 258,661,506 cubic miles of water.

Back to our equation from above:

(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3 =
(4 * π * 258,661,506) / 3 =
(1,034,646,024 * π) / 3

For simplicity, let's let π = 3 exactly. This will actually slightly reduce the volume of water that we will calculate as necessary but that's OK. Besides π being equal to 3 is Biblically approved per 1 Kings 7:23

Anyways, to make a long story short, we crunch the numbers and calculate that to raise the water level 5.5 miles, we would need... wait for it...

1,034,646,024 miles³ - or over 1 billion cubic miles of water

Perhaps we could convert this to a figure that we can more easily understand, like gallons?

1,034,646,024 miles³ ≅ 1,101,000,000,000 gallons.

Or, in other words, over 1 TRILLION gallons of water.

Yes. That is perfectly reasonable. A trillion gallons of water rained down on the earth...

HAHAHAHAH, this is a quality post.

[OTHstrong]

You find it preposterous that a tectonic plate shifted upwards, but what you find a lot more convincing is that enough water poured down to raise the level of the oceans by almost 6 miles.

This calls for math!

Let's let R_EARTH represent the approximate mean radius of the earth, i.e.: 3,956.6 miles. The height of Mt. Everest is almost 5.5 miles so let R_EVEREST represent radius of the earth at the highest point of Mt. Everest. We know that the volume of a sphere is given by the formula: V_SPHERE = (4 * π * R_SPHERE³) / 3.

So the volume of water, give or take a few million gallons, that would be required to raise the water level by 5.5 miles is given to us by this formula:

V_EVEREST- V_EARTH =
(4 * π * R_EVEREST³) / 3 - (4 * π * R_EARTH ³) / 3 =
(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3

We have:

R_EARTH³ = 3,956.6³ = 6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰
R_EVEREST³ = (3,956.6 + 5.5)³ = 6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰

So we calculate R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ easily:
 

R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ = (6.2197982480061 * 10¹⁰) - (6.1939320973496 * 10¹⁰) = 2.58661506565 * 10⁸ or 258,661,506 cubic miles of water.

Back to our equation from above:

(4 * π) * [ R_EVEREST³ - R_EARTH³ ] / 3 =
(4 * π * 258,661,506) / 3 =
(1,034,646,024 * π) / 3

For simplicity, let's let π = 3 exactly. This will actually slightly reduce the volume of water that we will calculate as necessary but that's OK. Besides π being equal to 3 is Biblically approved per 1 Kings 7:23

Anyways, to make a long story short, we crunch the numbers and calculate that to raise the water level 5.5 miles, we would need... wait for it...

1,034,646,024 miles³ - or over 1 billion cubic miles of water

Perhaps we could convert this to a figure that we can more easily understand, like gallons?

1,034,646,024 miles³ ≅ 1,101,000,000,000 gallons.

Or, in other words, over 1 TRILLION gallons of water.

Yes. That is perfectly reasonable. A trillion gallons of water rained down on the earth...

You should know that I was taught in school, from grade 1 all the way through to university that if the glaciers in the north pole and the glaciers in the south pole melted, the entire surface of the planet would be covered in water. Same teachers that believe in Darwinian evolution and same teachers who do not believe in God. The glaciers are huge, there compositions and dimensions, the north pole glaciers are bigger then the US and they are tall as well. Also the height of the tallest mountain today may not have been as tall as it was in the time of the flood

[OTHstrong]

Everest is almost 9 Kilometers high, that water-level would have not only killed all land animals but also all species of insects.

In regards to the tectonic plates and a once singular landmass, the plates are still moving.
This is after all the cause of tsunamis and earthquakes, due to the friction of moving slabs of rock as the plates move.
The continents are also still drifting apart at the rate of about 5-10 cm per year, in a direction that is away from the other continents.

Other evidence is also of the discovery of the same types of dinosaur bones and fossils on different continents but in areas that would have once been connected. Not only of dinosaurs but also fossils of the same vegetation.

About mountains being made of seashells, the amount of time it must take for these shells to be accumulated in such massive heaps must take an immense amount of time especially if they comprise parts of other rocks such as granite.

The question is then how did the shells get inside the granite or marble...?
These stones do not just take thousands of years to form, it requires millions of years.

Very valid points and yes I am fully aware of all the supporting evidence behind continental drift, but do not agree with it,it is a matter of perspective, after all it is only a theory

[Necrosis]

You should know that I was taught in school, from grade 1 all the way through to university that if the glaciers in the north pole and the glaciers in the south pole melted, the entire surface of the planet would be covered in water. Same teachers that believe in Darwinian evolution and same teachers who do not believe in God. The glaciers are huge, there compositions and dimensions, the north pole glaciers are bigger then the US and they are tall as well. Also the height of the tallest mountain today may not have been as tall as it was in the time of the flood

It would, However, again there is no evidence of this ever occuring, I also, don't understand why you think that earth was always much hotter. It was, but not then, humans wouldn't be able to live. It would have to be rain and 1 trillion gallons of rain seems absurd.

[OTHstrong]

It would, However, again there is no evidence of this ever occuring, I also, don't understand why you think that earth was always much hotter. It was, but not then, humans wouldn't be able to live. It would have to be rain and 1 trillion gallons of rain seems absurd.

 

Much hotter 

I think there is tons of evidence for this world wide catastrophe

[avxo]

You should know that I was taught in school, from grade 1 all the way through to university that if the glaciers in the north pole and the glaciers in the south pole melted, the entire surface of the planet would be covered in water. Same teachers that believe in Darwinian evolution and same teachers who do not believe in God. The glaciers are huge, there compositions and dimensions, the north pole glaciers are bigger then the US and they are tall as well.

You were taught incorrectly. If all the ice melted, the total rise would be about 250 feet... compare that to 5.5 miles to get to the top of Mount Everest.

Also the height of the tallest mountain today may not have been as tall as it was in the time of the flood

Oh, so after the flood, the mountains could have grown and you're OK with that, but before the flood, they couldn't?

[OTHstrong]

You were taught incorrectly. If all the ice melted, the total rise would be about 250 feet... compare that to 5.5 miles to get to the top of Mount Everest.


Oh, so after the flood, the mountains could have grown and you're OK with that, but before the flood, they couldn't?

250 feet, wow just wow, now you are smoking crack 

[OTHstrong]

I do not have a problem with mountain formation  before or after the flood, What are you talking about?

[avxo]

250 feet, wow just wow, now you are smoking crack  

Don't take my word for it. The amount of rise, give or take a few inches, should be trivial to calculate based on the volume of ice currently on the ice caps. It's basic high-school level mathematics.

Also check out http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/2004-11-21-melting-polar-ice_x.htm.

I hope this helps.

I do not have a problem with mountain formation  before or after the flood, What are you talking about?

Of course not. You just consider a sextillion gallons of water raining down on the earth to be a more plausible of why fossils of sea creatures can be found on mountains that are far from the sea.

[Necrosis]

 

Much hotter 

I think there is tons of evidence for this world wide catastrophe

there is roughly 323 trillion gallons of water on earth, it could conceivable cover the majority of land masses, however, avxo just countered that and it appears I am wrong. sorry bro can't help ya.

[avxo]

By the way, in my haste to leave for work this morning, I made a typo in my calculation. And I was off by orders of magnitude... So let's pick up where we left off, shall we and let's correct my "small" mistake.

We know that we would need 1,034,646,024 miles³ - or over 1 billion cubic miles of water - to raise the water level on the earth by 5.5 miles. That part is correct. So let's try converting things from cubic miles to gallons one more time. We know that 1 cubic mile is approximately equal to 1.10111715 × 10¹² gallons. Let's just say that it's 1 x 10¹² = 1,000,000,000,000 to keep the numbers nice and tidy and we'll call it even.

So we have:

1,034,646,024 miles³ * 1,000,000,000,000 gallons per mile³   ≅ 1,034,646,000,000,000,000,000 gallons. Let's put the change in the penny jar - what's a few hundred quintillion gallons between friends? - and just say that we'd need:

1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 gallons

Let that sink in for a moment... that's 1 followed by 21 zeroes. It's over ONE SEXTILLION gallons. It's over ONE THOUSAND BILLION BILLION gallons.

According to Wolfram Alpha, it's more than 3 times the amount of water present today in all of the earth's oceans combined, which add up to "just" 3.519×10²⁰ = 351,900,000,000,000,000,000 gallons.

Any questions?

[a_ahmed]

[Radical Plato]

For someone who claims to not Insult other peoples faiths or beliefs, you sure do a good job of being a hypocrite.

[Radical Plato]

 

[Man of Steel]

I know everyone is arguing about the absurdity of the volume of rainfall in regards to the flood, but according to scripture the flood waters had two sources: rainfall and underground fountains.

Genesis 7:11
English Standard Version (ESV)

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.

[Necrosis]

I know everyone is arguing about the absurdity of the volume of rainfall in regards to the flood, but according to scripture the flood waters had two sources: rainfall and underground fountains.

Genesis 7:11
English Standard Version (ESV)

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.

the number is still impossible, flat out impossible.

[Man of Steel]

the number is still impossible, flat out impossible.

Saying it won't make it so

[Necrosis]

It's not the same, the proof is in the math directly above. How much water is on earth, roughly 323 trillion gallons, now look at that number, it would have to be an insane amount. It would have to be more water then three times what we currently have, do you not realize how absurd that is? the fact that I'm arguing this makes me feel retarded to be honest, even if it was possible noahs story is beyond reason.

[Man of Steel]

It's not the same, the proof is in the math directly above. How much water is on earth, roughly 323 trillion gallons, now look at that number, it would have to be an insane amount. It would have to be more water then three times what we currently have, do you not realize how absurd that is? the fact that I'm arguing this makes me feel retarded to be honest, even if it was possible noahs story is beyond reason.

And how much water came from under the ground?  "...all the fountains of the great deep burst forth...".    Two sources of water, not just one.  I'm just tellin ya what it says cause the focus has been on rainfall as the only source.  When the flood is debated everyone tends to focus only on rainfall, "...for 40 days and 40 nights...".

[Necrosis]

And how much water came from under the ground?  "...all the fountains of the great deep burst forth...".    Two sources of water, not just one.  I'm just tellin ya what it says cause the focus has been on rainfall as the only source.  When the flood is debated everyone tends to focus only on rainfall, "...for 40 days and 40 nights...".

well where does rain come from? obviously that would deplete the reserves, also there is no way the aquafers of the earth have more water then the oceans. Also, it's silly, that's the only point I think needs to be made, it did not happen, it is impossible, the math makes no sense nor does the logic or reasoning. You have to bend logic and suspend rationale to believe what you believe. We know how it happened, it's not a debate, it is occuring as we speak, the universe corroborates the earths age so not only would all of dating have to be wrong regarding geology and chemistry but all of cosmology and astronomy also. It is silly, just look at the evidence it is clear, the data all make sense as a whole, nothing has ever contradicted this. Sure there are percent errors but from billions of years to 6000 no, we would have to be retarded.

[a_ahmed]

lol i am not hypocrite. I am returning due where its due. I don't respect any of these atheists on here as they were sinister, rude, disrespectful, cyinical and sarcastic while boasting of their own self glorifying superiority. The picture was quite fitting. They showed not one ounce of respect in any of the threads relating to religion or God. They always come off as the supreme holders of 'evidences' against theists, yet when their beliefs are confronted they have nothing and are far more into lala land just angry and filled with hatred of those who believe in God. If some of them had the ability they would kill off all theists. Didn't one of them say those who believe in God are mentally diseased?

I had no intent of even talking to atheists on here as I know how they behave in 'debates' or discussions. However when they started being derogatory in theist threads I started responding.

Secondly I am disappointed in you man of steel. I guess the truth of what you believes comes out of you finally as well. I guess it angered you that I said that God is not a man and that God is not male in the God thread?

See unlike you, I would not ridicule Jesus as I believe in Jesus. I get angry and upset whenever someone ridicules Jesus, such as Israelis while no one here feels any remorse about that ironically. Atheists ridicule everyone who believes in God or anything related. So you are far more on their level than you think.

In the end, it changes nothing about Muhammad (pbuh) and who he was and what he did. Your lies and ridicule only show who you truly are.

My picture is a realistic reflection of what atheists are like on this forum subsection.