The Earth's magnetic field reverses every couple hundred thousand years.... this is seen in the polarity of the metals in the rock layers themselves. The Earth's magnetic field is fueled by the molten core of the Earth and will not die until the Earth is all cooled.

The reason sediments havent buried us all is that once the sediments pile up on the seafloor, they are compacted. At continental boundaries the tectonic plates subduct under the continents, thrusting the plate and sediments deep into the mantle. It all melts into magma and eventually comes to the surface again in volcanoes. Rock and sediment is neither created or destroyed it is recycled. All sediment goes into the ocean and this occurs. New land is formed through volcanic activity and convergent boundaries. Lakes will eventually all fill with sediment and give way to forest. No one area has been the same climate in the past. They find fossils in Antarctica, where no land animals live.... this must mean Antarctica was once further north (plate tectonics)

How do you explain fossil beds with older creatures always on top of younger? You never find trilobite fossils with dinosaur fossils or human fossils with dinos... people say they do but that is due to folding and bending of rock layers by geologic forces

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

I meant older below younger by the way <br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

Spitfire I relied on facts a lot more than I did on the Bible, I just stated that one can correlate the events of the Bible with the knowledge we have of the universe. The Bible itself does not prove creationism. I believe the Bible because of it's supernatural properties, seeming to have been written supernaturally. The Bible claims to be the Word of God can full of truth, and I believe it. Prophesy predicted events hundreds of years before they happened which is shown in historical records. Surely a God was fully involved in all of this, with Jesus being who he claimed to be. There is plenty of evidence of a global flood including the fossilization of many creatures all over the world, all at the same level. Understand that in order for something to fossilize it needs to be buried quickly. 8,000 land animals would be able of fit on the ark with no problem. As I said, species developed later on, after the flood.

"Man and Tyranosaurs? LOL That Fred Flintstone mentality doesnt sound really intelligent."

You're starting to make assumptions now. How do you know dinosaurs didn't live with people? Were you there? I said that the average dino is the size of a small horse. Plus there was such a thing as a baby dinosaur. They didn't magically burst out of their eggs at full size. They can easily fit on the ark.

"If you continue to believe such dumb, unsupported idealogy, then you will be seen as sad and nieve."

Hmm, what have you done to support your much more "intelligent" theory then? Not much. Show us how you know evolution is right and intelligent design is wrong. Sad and neive? Insults don't help your case. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Dinosaurs on the ark....lol where did they all go after the flood then? You didnt remark on my comment about genetic diversity. It is impossible for a species to survive when reduced to two individuals. They would reproduce alright but soon they would be inbreeding with their brothers and sisters. This would make their gene pool susceptable to disease and all the individuals would die. Plus, what about predation? They didnt have electric fences and tranquilizer guns back then. If one of the animals died for any reason, I guess the species was screwed.

There are millions of species on the planet, there are millions of beetles alone. Millions of species have existed since the beginning of time. There were more than 8000 species of dinosaurs alone. Did you consider my "flood" theory? Could just that area have flooded and the the people considered it to be a "global" disaster. I mean they had no idea about North America, how could they have collected the animals in America and Asia if the event occurred in the MidEast?

What about the sea creatures? They went extinct too.... Noah didnt have fish tanks too did he? The extinctions that occurred at the end of the Cretaceous and Permian and wiped them out. No flood would harm sea creatures.

I didnt mean to sound rude and I am not attacked you personally just the ideas. I mean did you read my posts entirely? How can you doubt that what I am saying is just as possible as yours? At least my idea is supported by facts and is accepted by the whole scientific community.

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

and somehow my argument got lost...

ahh well, onto the new thing...

the reason the earth doesn't erode down is because of the internal forces within--plate techtonics and the like. because of a collision plate, the Himylayas will always push skyward, with india slamming into the eurasian continent. Living out west, on the ring of fire, you need no reminder of how mountains get built.

back onto cycles, the earth is a sphereical one--a dynamic equillibrium. the heat from the center of the earth (ask someone living in hawaii or iceland for proof on that) fuels it. at one time, the appalacians were volcanic (way before any record of human existance--i think a few trilobites may have), then got faulted up like the Himylayas, like the alps will be in about 1 million years, and in about 500 million years (assuming things will continue on their course (like the marianas, the sierra nevadas, the cascades, and the andes will). Now, after about 500 million years, when the pacific closes up and a new pangæa and panthalassa form (all-earth and all-sea, respectively), who's to say if like what happened last time when the Iapetus--proto atlantic ocean collapsed and opened back up? who's to say the pacific reopens? maybe a new plate boundary bisects eurasia and n/s america and pangæa splits--forcing the new continents to the poles? thus the spherical cycle

Also, how's the bible supernatural? No more supernatural than the Necronomicon (anyone that makes a comment about "Army of Darkness" please make like the real slim shady and please shut up), and that's mildly if at best.

Besdies, with montheism's track record--i'd have a hard time believing anything they told me. <br> <br><font color="blue" face="times new roman" size="1"><b><i><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jbodynorthwest/"><img src="http://keep-of-the-light.freewebspace.com/images/signature.jpg">
The infamous Keeper of the Light</a><b><br>
<i>I'll get out of <u>YOUR</u> country the minute you get off of <u>MY</u> planet!</i></font>

Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

"This would make their gene pool susceptable to disease and all the individuals would die."

How? I don't see any evidence for this. Let's assume that is true for a moment.... you're talking about the time right after the fall of man. Disease was just starting to become a reality, and wouldn't have affected any creature on the ark. Plus Noah brought 7 pairs of each clean animal and 2 pairs of every unclean animal. They weren't just reduced to two individuals.

"Did you consider my "flood" theory?"

Did you consider my global flood evidence? Adding to that, there's plenty of proof that the flood induced ice age occured in North America along with the rest of the world. A lot of creatures have gone extinct just in the past few years alone. The same would apply back then, for both land and sea creatures.

"At least my idea is supported by facts and is accepted by the whole scientific community."

No single idea is supported by the whole scientific community. Don't try to make it sound like everyone is on your side. I've given so many facts to support my view it's not even funny. As far as the Bible goes, believe whatever you like, the bottom line is that evolution is anything but proven. Saying that there's no proof for special creation is just ludicrous. Where's this "undeniable evidence" that large scale evolution has occcured? Not even the fossil record supports such a crazy idea. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Here's one scientific community which supports my views:

<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org">Answers in Genesis</a>

Articles are published all the time by qualified scientists. Some even write books (one that I've read). <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Thosae arent real scientists. They are brainwashed by religion and try to make science work the way they want it to. All of the biology and physics courses I take in college deal with evolution of both the universe and life. May I ask what school you go to. This could answer many questions as to your bias. I am a junior marine science major and I am well-versed in the sciences. I doubt you understand biology as well as I do if you can look at the evidence and still outwardly reject the theory of evolution. I mean look at all the EVIDENCE for evolution and NONE for creationism.

Global flood...still how could Noah and his friends collect every creature in the world if they didnt even know of half the world? Did you see the word America in the Bible? Australia, South America? The greatest biodiversity in the world is in the Amazon. You still havent answered why all those marine creatures became extinct at the end of the Permian. The fossil record shows 90% of all marine taxa became extinct then. Can a flood explain that. and explain to me scientifically how a flood can cause an Ice Age?How does lots of water cause worldwide global cooling to an extent of an ice age? My localized flood idea makes alot more sense since Noah didnt have to collect EVERYU animal plus geologic history supports a flood in the Mid East at that time.

Uh, if you study biology you know that low populations are not sustainable for long periods. The narrow gene pool created from interbreeding of relatives will make the whole population susceptable to disease. This problem is seen with the remaining California Condors in California. The species may be beyond saving even though there is reproduction. The number of individuals isnt enough to support a healthy population. Even 7 pairs would not be enough.... what the hell is an unclean animal. Were those not worth saving or something?

About evolution I could explain the classic example...the Galapgos finches... An ancestral species millions of years ago that CURRENTLY lives on the mainland colonized the Galapagos (blown in by storm). There were many islands. The finches reproduced and increased in number, spreading from island to island. Now evolution is a gradual thing. You do not notice the change at first, it is gradual. A finch may have mutated and was born with a larger beak. This specimen was able to feed better on hard seeds on one island so it stuck around. It bred with a normal finch and some of its babies had the large beak. Generations later natural selection had left only the big-beaked finches on that island. The same process occurred on the other island. One finch had a thin bill, another a curved bill, and another used a cactus quill as a tool to get grubs. All of these obviously similar birds radiated to fill every available niche in the galapagos until today we have several species, one for each island. These birds did not exist on the islands from the beginning, they arrived later in time and so could not have been "placed" there by God. They must have evolved from this common ancestor.

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

Plus think about the water required to flood the Earth...imagine how much water must evaporate to create that much rain. The Earth would have to run into the orbit of Venus to evaporate that much water...LOL... there is no records in the rock layers of any such event. There is not enough water frozen at the poles to cover the continents, maybe half of the land area but not global Waterworld. and water cannot just be dropped out of nowhere it must be evaporated from the oceans themselves and precipitated. and where did it all go after this "global flood" Did God pull the plug on the tub....haha

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

"Thosae arent real scientists. They are brainwashed by religion and try to make science work the way they want it to."

Just like you're brainwashed into thinking there's evidence for evolution. Are you aware that your teachers base their ideas on the major book <i>Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science</i> by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the same people who lobbied for the ban of the Bible in public schools in the 1960's (which then caused society to begin falling apart immediately thereafter)? That book is refuted many times over, yet it remains the foundation of science teaching in today's classrooms. If that's not brainwashing then nothing is.

You seem to think pangæa never existed. The world was one continent before the flood. The Flood was a tremendous tectonic and volcanic event. Anyone who's studied volcanoes know that major eruptions cause global climate changes for quite a long time due to all the aerosols emitted. Large amounts of volcanic aerosols remain in the atmosphere following the Flood for a long time, generating a large temperature drop over land by reflecting much solar radiation back to space. Volcanic aerosols would likely be replenished in the atmosphere for hundreds of years following the Flood, due to high post-Flood volcanic activity, which is indicated in the Pleistocene (sp?) sediments.

Disease, didn't we discuss that already? You're talking about a time right after the fall of man. Diseases don't remain constant over time. One can't expect that just because things happen a certain way now (especially in biology) means that it was the same thousands of years ago! You're basing your ideas on an unreliable plain.

The Galapgos finches... again, an original population of finches had a wide variety of beak sizes. When a drought occurs, the birds with insufficiently strong and wide beaks can't crack nuts, so they are eliminated, along with their genetic information. Another example of natural selection, NOT EVOLUTION. Let's make this clear, the idea of natural selection was founded by a creationist 50 years before evolution ever surfaced. These finches show that it doesn't take long for new species to arise, which is exactly what I said earlier. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Magnetic field reversals cause the field energy to drop. It is clear that the field is decaying rapidly, even your fellow evolutionists know that. The field would have vanished in a world millions of years old.

KOTL, I already know about the Geologic ideas that go along with evolution, and I think most others do too. There's no need to layout those ideas. It still doesn't explain anything. Evolutionists have stretched the facts to make their ideas work, including dating methods. The acceptance of these concepts is an amazing example of a scientific revolution, which occurred roughly between 1960 and 1970. However, this revolution did not go far enough, because the earth science community neglected and suppressed the evidences for catastrophism; large-scale, rapid change, throughout the geological record. They're only telling you want they want you to know. But of course, if you want to buy into what the media has to tell you you can just assume that the popular ideas of billion year old Geology are correct without looking into it further. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Well, I'll throw my 2 cents into the middle of all this....


The collection of atoms that make up a single cell organism, is so astounding that it's very hard for me to believe that an explosion of some sort put them in their specific order to be able to function and live. It would be more believable to take apart a rolex watch, put the pieces in a paper bag, throw in an M80 and have the force of the M80's explosion put all of the pieces back together and working! There are millions of atoms in a single strand of DNA, and that's only one part of a cell. I think living beings adapt, but I don't think humans came from a fish, or any of that. <br> <img src=http://www.j-body.org/registry/jbeier/jbeiersig1.JPG>

Jarrett: All of that did not happen quickly. The organization of galaxies and formation of stars happened over the first few billion years of the universe's existence. The concept of a speck of matter turning into the universe is hard to believe, but believing that God put it there is just an easy way out. You have no proof that he did. But we do have proof that the entire universe is expanding from a CENTRAL point and one day it will begin to collapse back on itself. We know this by astronomy, they can track the movement of everything from stars to galaxies. Plus, looking deep into space is looking back into time because even light takes billions of years to cross the universe (the neares star is a few LIGHT YEARS away from us, imagine the next galaxy). Looking at a quasar billions of light years away is showing what a galaxy looked like in the early universe, it is a proto-galaxy.

I suggest you creationists read an astronomy magazine, nothing but proof of star formation by nebula and the huge age of the universe...

Lancer: no matter how much science i pound you with you still remain stubborn and brainwashed. You can't even admit evolution is just as possible as creation (even though there is only proof for mine). You you realize that the percentage of your "scientists" is only a minute fraction of the scientific community. They are not taken seriously. You see any scientific journals or Discovery Channel programming about creation. NO, because they can't prove anything. They can only try what you are doing, try and disprove evolution.... assuming things like the magnetic field will only last a million years or whatever...how the hell do they know? The magnetic field is generated by the Earth's core, which is molten and kept so by the Sun. Ever heard of Io, the moon of Jupiter? The moon is volcanically active even though it is out near Jupiter(colder) and the size of the Moon. It is volcanic because of the gravity of Jupiter, which flexes and pulls on Io, making it hot inside and causes intense volcanic activity.

The global flood crap.... does the Bible say anything about volcanism in the account of the flood? Nope... how can a flood trigger volvanic activity? Only plate tectonics, which is SLOW, cause volcanism, and it doesnt need a damn flood to affect life. The eruption of Krakatoa w2as the largest explosion of a volcano in recent times and it dropped global temps. Not enough to cause an ice age though by far, it only lasted one year.

Alright, there is a crater in the Yucatan Peninsula that they found, and dated, to 65 million years. This was the last date that dinosaur fossils were found. There is also a layer between Cretaceous and Cenozoic rock layers that is a layer of dust and meteorite material. This, combined with the crater, almost proves that a major impact occured then on Earth and effected the entire planet. What about the other craters on the Earth, does the Bible give accounts of meteorite impacts? There are the same fossils all over the Earth.... that how people correlate the layers. Sea creatures lived worldwide so they would be found in layeres worldwide. Sea levels rise and fall so sea creature fossils are found on land sometimes. Notice that Tyranosaurs are only found in N. America, not anywhere else on the planet...

Lancer: You still havent answered my question as to your school... I'm looking forward to a _____ Christian College where their science program is a joke. good luck getting a reputable science job today thinking like you do. i know Baptists and your type, and it just makes me wonder. Also, I suggest you watch Walkjing with Dinosaurs, or Prehistoric Creatures, or any program on the Universe WITHOUT BIAS. You'll see that "our" scenario makes plenty of sense.

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

Dinosaurs and other prehistoric fossils are fossilized.. This means that the organic material has been replaced by inorganic minerals over time, called permineralization. On the other hand, we have found MUMMIES that are around 6000 years old. Far from fossilized. How do you account for the billions of years of biological history to occur in 2000 years? Realistically, do you the tiny length of the flood was enough to fossiize all of that?

C-14 dating...we know the half-life of C-14 and taking the percentage of C-14 remaining in matter, we can determine the age. it is simple math, we already KNOW the half life, so all the scientist has to do is count the half-lives and multiply and we know the age...

I'm beginning to think I am wasting my time on all this typing. i will not change your mind and you are sure not to change my mind with all this outrageous mumbo jumbo. When you eventually do prove evolution, I hope to come on the .org and say I told you so, cuz you sure cant prove the existence of creation..

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

I wasn't talking about the galaxy, I was talking about LIFE. <br> <img src=http://www.j-body.org/registry/jbeier/jbeiersig1.JPG>

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2


Here, read that... I admit there are some holes in evolutionary theory, and scientists are still trying to iron it all out. I just read a PRO-CREATION article and they bring up the same arguments as in the above link. Of course they can take the unknowns in evolution and turn them against it. But no where do they provide evidence for their side. I can play their game and use all the unknowns of creationism against them, and completely negate it, since alot of religion is not testable, it is a matter of faith.

This varies in extent. None of the creation stuff I've read says anything about the Earth being thousands of years old... they all say that it is billions but ONLY question evolution of life on EARTH. That is the only part of evolution questioned. I havent found any good arguments online about the world being 8000 years old or stars and planets forming any different from the way I said.

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

Whatever, man, I still don't believe in the big bang. That's that. <br> <img src=http://www.j-body.org/registry/jbeier/jbeiersig1.JPG>

http://www.apologeticspress.org/docsdis/2002/dc-02-usnews.htm

There's the creationists article.... just so you dont assume I'm looking at it from one side.... all they do is turn the unknowns or holes in evolutionary theory against it. Just becuase they havent found it doesnt mean it doesnt exist. I don't see evolutionists saying that the unknowns of the Bible meant it didnt happen. The Bible is a holy book, a Hindu or Buddhist will say it is fake, and we think their texts are not the "truth". How do we know who is right? As scientists, no one assumes things. It must be proven with experiments and factual evidence. That is why religion cannot ever be proven true since it is supernatural.

I am a scientist, I take both sides and weigh the truthfullness of the arguments and evidence for each. Right now I believe the evolutionists to have a better argument plus better evidence. The creationists use things that havent been found yet as evidence to disprove something. Or they just make assumptions without testing first.

and I'm spent.... anyone else on this forum have any opinions besides Jarret, Lancer, Keeper and me?

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

first off, lancer...never say that i'm "brainwashed by the media" i'm probably the only one here that isn't. Why? maybe because my average hours i watch TV per week is .01.

Second...you still haven't proven the supernaturality of the bible. Why is that tome of text more authorataive than, say the Qoran, the Torah, etc.?

Now, i will concede, and do that cataclysmic events do happen--tonguska blast, the metorite that killed the dinosaurs--the ripping apart of plates and the fissures that go with them, but catastrophysism is PART of all that, not the whole...you say our arguments explain nothing...how do they not? they explain about as much as your argument explains. We're at least trying to back our postitions up with theory (plate tectonics--my proof--Nisqually basin, 2001), whereas you're just saying we're wrong...where' YOUR proof. The claims you make are backed up by what? And don't quote me scripture. I want something that i can see and experience. plus, your theory of pangæa and panthalassa ripping into the way they are in 40 days? you know hoe much force that would require? While i admit that natre is strong enough to bitchslap humanity right off this planet, i don't think the eath itself has that kind of energy, nor could some supernatural being--deity if you will, could have kept the planet intact and things surviving on it.

Further, 7 pairs of every clean specie and 2 pairs of unclean species...now, consider this.

how much space would you need for all those animals?! The ark would have to be the size of Alaska! <br> <br><font color="blue" face="times new roman" size="1"><b><i><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jbodynorthwest/"><img src="http://keep-of-the-light.freewebspace.com/images/signature.jpg">
The infamous Keeper of the Light</a><b><br>
<i>I'll get out of <u>YOUR</u> country the minute you get off of <u>MY</u> planet!</i></font>

Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

"no matter how much science i pound you with you still remain stubborn and brainwashed. You can't even admit evolution is just as possible as creation (even though there is only proof for mine)."

Your ignorance has been showing since the beginning of this thread. You asked so many questions that an open minded person should have already known the answers to from both sides of the argument. I answered so many of your questions, given you so many facts that you've evaded for whatever reason. After all of that you're going to sit here and talk so big as to state that evolution is true without any doubt at all!? Then you try to shut me out of the debate all together because you know everything and know that I'm wrong? Stop playing god, you don't know anything for certain, neither do I.

"You can't even admit evolution is just as possible as creation"

What did I say earlier? Do you even read it? I said that it's a matter of faith for both sides. I'm here to make you a smarter, wiser person by letting you know how the ideas of intelligent design are more than just a joke or afterthought, and induce positive thinking instead of developing a slew of closed-minded assumptions. Stubborn? Hardly. Brainwashed? You'll have to explain that one if you want that insult to hold up. If you're going to start getting childish on me then you might as well quit now before you make yourself look real foolish.

I go to College of DuPage, a local community college. Whoops, it looks like your Christian college assumption is wrong. That's what happens.

"You can't even admit evolution is just as possible as creation (even though there is only proof for mine)."

LOL, I love this. Talk about contradicting yourself. Let me rephrase this, which explains your way of thinking perfectly: You can't even admit creation is just as possible as evolution.

"Also, I suggest you watch Walkjing with Dinosaurs, or Prehistoric Creatures, or any program on the Universe WITHOUT BIAS."

Without bias means a piece of media that quotes the other side, considers the other side, even makes assumptions in favor of the other side, then blows them away with facts, yes facts, all with numerous citations from many scientific works. What's even funnier is, I've watched videos and read books where evolutionists contradict themselves and prove each other wrong, helping the case for creation without even knowing it! Have you ever watched a video or read a book where both sides are considered so closely? That's what "without bias" means. Videos that take on a dogmatic view in favor of evolution are hardly without bias.

"i know Baptists and your type, and it just makes me wonder."

Well I guess that can go both ways I guess. I know evolutionists and your type and wonder. But I respect their beliefs and let them believe what they want. It's ultimately your choice not mine. Show me where I said you have to believe in creation?

"I havent found any good arguments online about the world being 8000 years old or stars and planets forming any different from the way I said."

You look online for all your information? There is so much more in books than you'll ever find on the internet. Why would someone go through all the hard work of producing a piece of work to put it on a webpage where the author will make no money? If you really want to be an open minded person, you'll go to a bookstore and see all the creation science books, some that are basic and others extremely technical. Once I understand the basics I'll purchase some of the more technical books. I have debated with many like you in the past and have gained a lot of information from the other side, and I thank you for that. Perhaps you'll come out of this being a more knowledgable person too, whether you'd like to admit it or not.

"You you realize that the percentage of your "scientists" is only a minute fraction of the scientific community. They are not taken seriously."

Then explain why evolutionists are trying so hard to prove their hypothesis? If it was already proven, there would be a lot more relaxation within the scientific community. They try so hard to shut up creationists because they have something to hide, not because they know they're right. I have a 25 page list of quotes from all the scientists who have realized evolution is nothing more than a guess of which is lacking foundation. I believe evolution would fade away if there was a better theory atheists can rely on, since they refuse to look outside of the physical universe and accept a creator. I talked about random chance and universal origins already but of course you evaded that topic.

Just because more scientists are evolutionist doesn't mean they're right. It's no suprize really, I mean they've been successful in taking over the public school system. Of course more people are going to automatically assume it's right. The idea of humans knowing everything is a nice concept, the idea of us being gods. In the end I feel it's just rebellion against the real one who is the giver of life.

All I'm trying to do is have an intelligent debate, and instead get a bunch of insults. When that starts happening there is no need to continue. The useful life of this thread has just ended unless other people get involved. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

KOTL, the ark contained the volume of 522 standard American railroad stock cars, each of which can hold 240 sheep. That's plenty of room for the required animals (insects didn't need to be on the ark).

"Second...you still haven't proven the supernaturality of the bible. Why is that tome of text more authorataive than, say the Qoran, the Torah, etc.?"

I already told you about prophesy, lack of any contradictions, etc. If you don't believe that, read any of the books out there about the alleged Bible contradictions and why they're misinterpretations. Muhammed commited many sins that were said to be forbidden in the Koran, yet people still worship him. I haven't read too much about the Koran and other books, just quotes from various sources about the major problems of these other texts.

"i don't think the eath itself has that kind of energy, nor could some supernatural being--deity if you will, could have kept the planet intact and things surviving on it."

Well that's totally up to you. Personally I would rationalize that the very God who made this planet could do whatever he wants with it. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

Just keep in mind that I'm not here to prove Christianity, rather to point out the potentially fatal flaws of evolution. After all, the topic of this thread is not Christianity vs. evolution. Until evolutionists come up with something better, I'm not interested in their ideas, but will continue to look at the facts which are independant of any theories or hypothesis'. That's the only way to remain unbiased. <br>

<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/lancer/sunsetsig.jpg">

could this all mighty and all powerful god create a rock so large that even he could not lift it? <br> ......................................................

Alright Lancer: give me a list of these "facts" that I have evaded and I will address them right now. There is just so much to read on this topic that I may have overlooked something. I highly doubt I am the ignorant one since I have explained many examples of evolution and have made the Ark hypothesis sound stupid (so did Keeper). Please state your "facts" to support creationism and I'll do my best to counter them.

Evolutionists are trying so ahrd to prove evolution because they are still in the process of filling in the holes. They have to continue studying it since it is still a theory. Who, knows maybe they will find another process similar to evolution, but I am SURE that science won't say "ok, guys you were right, God did create everything". Talk about an easy way out. The fossil record, geologic processes, and space show us that it is a little more complex than Poof! there you go.

I have never called YOU anything, the only insults I have used are directed at your foolish theories, not you yourself. So stop trying to push me down a level because I have debated with facts.

So I was wrong about your college, what's your major?

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">

I mean "without bias" not pertaining to the show, but you when you watch it. Watch one of those shows with an open mind...have you watched those? Or are you afraid that it might make you wonder if what the bible teaches you may not be meant to be taken literally... yeah 90% of the Bible may be true, but many stories you have to believe were made up as a moral guide. What about other creation stories? Are you going to say to a Buddhist or Shintoist that they are all wrong? The evolutionist theory at least is constant for all races and peoples. You dont see versions of evolution for every part of the world do you?

<br> <img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/spitfire/Sig1.JPG">