Originally posted by NosracNot quite sure what your argument is about the Earth's axis. Solar system dynamics though is just a nice little working of Newton's laws, applied to a number of gravitationally interacting objects.
The old and new testaments, contained in the Bible, are TRUE.
Nothing is from mythology, nor is anything a myth.
What is a myth is how long y'all have been going on about a FALSE theory made
by a ludicrous person: Darwin.
You believe that what is around us was created naturally?????????
Explain how the earth sits on its axis, in an orbit which ...[text shortened]... is:
IT EXPLAINS CREATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not quite sure what you're asking me about galaxies either.
Galaxy formation is based on a couple of competing models but either way, we have a decent natural explanation for them.
Why complicate explanations unnecessarily?
God is irrelevant.
Originally posted by NosracYou make very little sense. In respect to the comment above, perhaps you should look into Milankovitch cycles; you;ll see that the earth's rotation isn't perfect, as you seem to suggest.
The old and new testaments, contained in the Bible, are TRUE.
Explain how the earth sits on its axis, in an orbit which once moved even an 1/8 of an inch
can be so???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
Originally posted by 7ate9I know of no scientific study that has specifically tested whether a worldwide flood, such as that depicted in the bible, actually occurred. The reason for this lack is simple, no evidence for it having occurred whatsoever. I know that studies have looked at the inundation of the black sea, such as this paper
i ain't a fool to go where so many people have searched on vain.
what i'm saying is that the flood if true would have clearly visible signs within the earth. i'm pretty sure people who have studied noah's ark would have enough intellect to look in these areas. nobody jumps up on the mountain declearing the changes that happened, so i ask why?
i do not ...[text shortened]... science to be poisioned.
i am interested in PROOF of the flood, either for or against.
"Black Sea deluge may have helped spread farming," Science Feb. 20, 1998, p. 1132.
I also know of studies looking at the raising of the sea level associated with ice melting and to a greater degree the subsequent increase in mean sea temperature (a warm sea is a big sea, since the density of water is related to its temperature). This was important in both the colonisation of the USA by native peoples facilitated by the Bering land bridge (as was), and the recolonisation of britain by plants and animals after the last glacial event.
It's nothing to do with science not looking because we don't want to find, it a case of not looking because the premise is bloody stupid.