Originally posted by paul:
first off, you would have to have the bible proven as reliable to science before you can use it as proof that something exists.
by who, to whom? show me the proof that has been given to science to prove that the bible is infact completely correct. Show me where the evidence is that proves there were giants in the time of eve.
has science proven that man has never lived below sea level , has he dredged the ocean floor for evidence , the silt that would cover such evidence might be as thick as 10 - 20 meters.
or do scientist just say we have examined what we have to examine and by this we find ourselves correct.
here is the two ways how science works
1) someone finds something that has never been seen before, and a scientist will look at it and begin to ask, where, when, how, what and who. when they have all the answers they can find, they begin to forumlate a hypothesis. when they have this, they go to the second one.
2) either after 1) or sometimes when some thing happens to make the scientist think about something, they make a hypothesis. when they have it, they start testing that hypothesis. "If this is true, then x must be true. so they test x." if this is true, y must be false." so they test y.
if x is true and y is false then they have a theory. they they tell others, who also test it. If they can disprove it, then either the theory is abandoned as disproved or it is taken back to prehyposthesis level and reworked with the new evidence added.
you have a idea, that is man lived near the sea 1 million years ago or longer. so what is your evidence? what is the evidence against it?
the evidence against it is that there is no evidence of anything like modern man that far back anywhere in the world. the evidence is that the sea levels did not stay that low for long (geologically speaking) so man would have had to adapt to the lower levels or moved to higher ground. If he moved to higher ground, then where is the evidence that he existed then.
then tell me what a computer is..
I know all i need to know about a computer. if our society was to be destroy, a computer would hardly help survival.
remember I have no knowledge of one , and you have nothing you can show me
and will I remember it so that I can pass it on to the generations to follow?.
why would you. you would never need to see one, you would never need to use one. it would not help in your day to day survival. it would be useless information.
If i were going to teach the next generation about something, and they had no way of ever having known what a computer was, or even anything of our society, what i would teach is what they would need to survive. I would teach about fishing. i would teach about how to use the sun and stars to know what time of day it was, and to know what time of year it was, and to know how to find your way in a trackless ocean.
now theres a mouthfull..
I wonder just how much information has been lost by people who thought like you do.
what information could have been lost. let me tell you, the greeks had something simular to napam called greek fire. no one knows to this day what it was exactly, but it is very possible that it was napam. the greek libray was destroyed with a lot of information that was had there. why do you think this information was lost. because it was not needed. you dont need greek fire to farm. you dont need it to build cities. you dont need it for a lot of things. much of what was lost has been refound.
and yes there have been a lot of civilizations that were destroyed and much of their knowledge was lost. How many of those do you think had computers. how many of them had planes. how many of them had cars that ran on gasoline rather than pulled by ox. So far the only one that possibly could have was atlantis, except they have found it, and it did not have car, computer, planes, ships like ours, or anything else. You see the think is, science can figure out what other civilizations had. if ours is destroyed, many generations from now, another civilization will have the power to discover the remains of our civilization and will be able to peice together many of the things we know. how? because they will have the same sciences that we have.
so now if people who think as you do , thought that way then , why dont we have that information now.
If there was another civilization that existed since the last snowball earth, then we would know about them. we might not know everything about them, but we would know about them.
what if those people who lived along the continental shelf had to suddenly move up hill to avoid being washed into the oceans.
would they take with them anything except their lives , knowing they would be battling rivers of water as it flowed downhill.
and when they got to stable land it was probably ice cold not hardly any food and no shelter.
first off there has never been evidence that the oceans rose that fast. If they had, there would have still have been lots of room between them and the ice. like hundreds of miles if they were around Houston, or if they were near new york, they would have had dozens of miles to go before then. the land between would not have been much colder than it was near the sea. there would have been a lot of area farther inland that would have had places to grow crops or places to raise cows, or places to pick fruit off trees and vegis off plants.
what would they teach their children , would they even go as far as to burry their dead in the oceans where their relatives are burried?
If the sea had risen that fast, then they would not have the capicity to bury their dead in the same places. they would have had to find new places to bury them. they would in reality have had centuries to move their stuff. the only way they would not is if they had tried to build dikes to keep out the sea and they busted and flooded very quickly. If they had, there would have been evidence of the systems of dikes. any civilization that has the capacity to build dykes is going to spread very far away from the ocean.
so you have a theory that man lived below sea level. there are two ways you can go. prove it, or ask people to disprove it. the people you ask will ask you how did they live, so that they can disprove that the people live like that. then they will ask you where did these people come from, so that they can disprove that. then they will really get into finding questions for you to answer for them to disprove.
unless you can come up with some answers no one is going to bother with disproving it because it is self disproving. you will have to prove it yourself. otherwise its only a hypothesis, and only one that you believe.