This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Shtal on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
Moons,
I know you don't like Kent Hovind, but here he shares his input in this video about the ark.
I know you don't like Kent Hovind, but here he shares his input in this video about the ark.
by Carlin on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
Honestly, the Ark is of little importance to me. I know that if its discovery were to be confirmed and accepted, it would raise more questions than it would answer, accomplishing very little in terms of the big picture.
by Two Moons on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
Should we have public schools?...... your right I don't like the man or his twisted mind, his tainted information.
So....in other words you don't know where the Ark is?
Little importance Carlin?
Also,
after the flood receded, where did the water go?
So....in other words you don't know where the Ark is?
Little importance Carlin?
Also,
after the flood receded, where did the water go?
by Two Moons on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
We'll have to wait for another video I'm sure.
by Carlin on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
... because as I see it, you have two sides of an argument who are far more interested in agendas and propaganda than they are in whatever truth is to be had. Minds are already made up, and all the info is simply molded to fit the corresponding point of view. What makes this possible is the fact that we "know" so little for sure, in terms of the larger conversation. Lots of room to hide, wiggle, connive, cheat... I highly doubt the discovery of any artifact is going to provide an answer everyone agrees on.
by Two Moons on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
No doubt there will be those who deny anything that contradicts their programming, even if they could touch it.
And who really has an agenda here?
And who really has an agenda here?
by Shtal on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
Look around you moons, look at the large oceans that we have, you are assuming the pre-flooded world was the same as it is today, I believe the original creation had more dry land than water, I also think frozen ice in Antarctica is where the rest of water that is. Don't hunt me for this that is just my assumptions not a fact.
by Two Moons on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
I assume nothing, the fact is the numbers would not add up no matter what the earth was like at that time.
(Don't hunt me for this that is just my assumptions not a fact.)
What in the hell does that mean?
Now about that Ark, where is it?
(Don't hunt me for this that is just my assumptions not a fact.)
What in the hell does that mean?
Now about that Ark, where is it?
by Shtal on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
I mean I was not there at the time of creation and pre-flooded world.
by Two Moons on 31 July 2013 - 14:07
Not to over load your circuits but what about plant life, what do you think happens when salt water covers land other than coastal regions.
It kills it.
So...... all plants and tree's that we have today what?
Evolved from a palm carried on the Ark?
These are nice stories the Ark and such but where's the beef?
Where is any evidence what so ever?
A wooden ship in a mountainous region would not decay, and what, Noah forgot where he left it?
And this place, was there no one there ahead of Noah, no one found high ground in forty days and forty nights?
Were you really (forced) to go to school?
It kills it.
So...... all plants and tree's that we have today what?
Evolved from a palm carried on the Ark?
These are nice stories the Ark and such but where's the beef?
Where is any evidence what so ever?
A wooden ship in a mountainous region would not decay, and what, Noah forgot where he left it?
And this place, was there no one there ahead of Noah, no one found high ground in forty days and forty nights?
Were you really (forced) to go to school?
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top