|
Finally! Noah's Ark discovered! (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kadomony |
| quote: | Originally posted by yukii
I believe it. In fact, I had an apparition of the flying spaghetti monster, his holiness told me to carry out his work.
I need the last 5 winners of Mr Universe, duct tape, and a bottle of Nutella. This is the prophecy I was told and must carry out :o |
:nervous: |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I wanna know how the loonies explain the existence of all the creatures that never made it onto the ark. Like kangaroos. |
seems like a wild experiment the Australians carried out with no regard for animal rights |
|
|
| yukii |
| quote: | Originally posted by kadomony
:nervous: |
DO NOT QUESTION THE PROPHECY!!!!1 |
|
|
| Palladium |
| i wonder what the 0.1% consists of to make sure is in fact the ark |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
No sarcasm, just trying to point out the problems with either the myth or reality hypothesis (within the context of this thread topic).
If the ark story is true, you’d need to explain why plenty of animals (not to mention people) survived the great flood of 7000 years ago who never had a chance to “all aboard”.
If the story is a myth, based upon a regional flood and some guy who built a boat, then it would have to explain how the boat managed to get up a mountain 4000m (i think that was the rough height, someone correct me if im wrong) high, if it was merely a flooding of a region. I would’ve thought a water level that high would be a tad bigger than a regional flooding.
Either way, I call bollocks! :) |
You're splitting hairs. If the tale says God had his hand in everything occurring, then everything is entirely plausible including the fact that all species did make it and fit into the ark. Of course IRL science proves everything otherwise and lists 1,716,173,638 facts as to why something like this could never happen. It's just a story, cool out. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
You're splitting hairs. If the tale says God had his hand in everything occurring, then everything is entirely plausible including the fact that all species did make it and fit into the ark. Of course IRL science proves everything otherwise and lists 1,716,173,638 facts as to why something like this could never happen. |
God didn’t have his hand in everything. Noah built the ark. It wasn’t a magical ark with the inside of the tardis ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
It's just a story, cool out. |
You could say the same about anything in the books of the desert gods, so maybe you should direct your “cool out” comments to the people who would cut your head off for declaring something “just a story”. Nobody ever dug up a mountain because of “just a story”. |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
God didn’t have his hand in everything. Noah built the ark. It wasn’t a magical ark with the inside of the tardis ;) |
It is obviously assumed so. If you disagree than you are ignorant to the reasonings I have heard.
| quote: |
You could say the same about anything in the books of the desert gods, so maybe you should direct your “cool out” comments to the people who would cut your head off for declaring something “just a story”. Nobody ever dug up a mountain because of “just a story”. |
That's great. What's your point? Do you believe it? |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
It is obviously assumed so. If you disagree than you are ignorant to the reasonings I have heard.
That's great. What's your point? Do you believe it? |
The point is, the story is bollocks.
What point, exactly, are you arguing? |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
Funny thing is, ancient flood myths reverberate around the world, not just in the Middle East. |
Cultural transmission. Not to mention the fact that floods are not exactly the most rare of all natural events.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Either way, I call bollocks! :) |
And so do I ;) |
|
|
| tachobg |
| quote: | | It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it |
lol, lern2argue. Yea, I know it's dumb and obvious but ... pulling numbers out of your ass in an attempt to sound legit shows such a deep disrespect and misunderstanding of what it is to make a rational, well-supported argument.
Even some supposedly intelligent people are so used to BS-ing (probably a remnant of survival skills built up during most of their schooling) that it becomes their dominant mode of communication. They're used to putting down buzzwords and vague ideas on tests that only require regurgitation, glossing over their general cluelessness under the guise of brevity. Yea, I've done it too. Like I said -- survival skill. In the same way, they end up using vague buzzwords to try to fool their bosses, interviewers, teammates and professors. The worst is when two such people are engaging in a technical conversation. It's full of "yea, that makes sense" and "ah, I see." In the best case, both are just being passive aggressive and don't have the balls to challenging each other's views. In the worst case, neither person has a ing clue what's going on and nothing is gained from the conversation.
As a math major, I hadn't done many (if any) team projects before, but now as an EECS major with a couple of lab/project based classes, I've started thinking about team communication skills. I think it's an important skill to be able to deal with such people positively, and to help them see why they might be wrong on a certain issue, or at least to help them see holes in their argument and help them improve it. The point is not to be a jerk -- an important criterion for whether you succeeded is that the other person feels that they learned something useful from you. Of course, it's important to be able to take such criticism as well. Anyway, this turned into an off-topic rant. It's just that in the past few weeks, there have been many times where I've just wanted to tell someone straight up "you are actually just talking nonsense. No, no, you don't understand, I don't disagree with your argument --- you have none! How exactly are you going to design that algorithm? What are the inputs/outputs?" Don't tell me you're going to "use probabilistic decision making to integrate the sensor data" and expect me to be satisfied. That's like saying you're going to use logarithms :whip:
Obviously, if you haven't thought deeply about something, and you are forced to make a statement, you'll say vague things. That's perfectly fine, and it might take some probing by yourself or others to cut to the core of the issue. But it bothers me that people whose responsibility it is to do so are conditioned to think that their vague bs is an acceptable answer.
/rantrantrant |
|
|
| woscar |
| quote: | Originally posted by tachobg
|
:stongue: |
|
|
|
|
