there isnt a lack of evidence about the flood, its just that scientists choose not to acknowledge it...
And why do you think that is? Could it possibly be because, oh I don't know, because this evidence of yours is false?
11/18/2006 3:51:31 AM
No, scientists in the 18th century (or was it the 17th?), who initially thought the global flood myth was true, eventually had to junk the idea because all of the evidence they were finding disproved it; and every bit of evidence discovered since then has only confirmed this. The only \"evidence\" ever offered since then contradicting it has been shown to be fake.
Besides, for every scientist who doesn't like to be wrong (and, sure, nobody does), there are hundreds trying to prove him wrong to make a name for themselves. If anyone could present actual, unassailable evidence undermining several key scientific theories at once, he would become a king in his field, making Einstein look like a lucky amateur by comparison.
11/18/2006 4:36:00 AM
Umm no. There is NO evidence supporting the idea of a global flood.
If that had actually happend there would be signs and scars of that one event over every inch of the planet, and guess what? There isn't.
2/3/2007 2:31:03 AM
right, thats why scientist are always arguing about evidence and speaking up when .. oh never mind. stupid stupid people.
2/3/2007 5:02:00 AM
Kind of ironic really. Scientists love to be right, especially when everyone else is so wrong. It means you get lots of publicity, grants, and a chance to show up all your collegues.
3/17/2007 9:33:26 AM
Scientists hate to be wrong, but they love to make some other scientists wrong even more, because that's how you get famous enough to get in the history books. If a theory can be proven wrong, it will eventually have hundreds of scientists clawing at it.
10/9/2010 3:45:31 PM
Not acknowledging evidence is wrong, no scientest knowingly will do it.
Creationists on the other hand knowingly lie even after their claims have been repeatedly debunked. Hovind, Ham and Comfort all repeat 40 year old debunked arguments to this day.
10/10/2010 5:29:10 AM
Wer rite and ur rong get it rite
10/10/2010 5:45:19 AM