[Digit]

*Ding Ding!
Round 3(?) and digit enters the ring, opens his collapsable seat and sits in zylarks corner to join the debate.

i dont want to unbalance the debate, so hopefully someone else might join in for the other side of argument. it would be unfair to see cottons have to rebuttle arguments from two people.

Shame i missed so much of this. I'll try to catch up as quickly as possable...

Cottons, you say you do not beleive in evolution and yet you talk about it alot... you've even inadvertantly noted its existance several times in your arguments.

"instead of having 2985739874 kinds of dogs (not the actual number obviously... just to make a point), they had just 2 dogs. then through cross breeding afterwards is how you have the different variations today. if you think this takes millions of years, you are wrong. don't believe me? look at the cannabis plant, and how many different variations there are today (do to selective crossbreeding), compared to how many different variations there were a century ago... or even a few decades ago for that matter. i'm sorry if how i described it came off as evolution, and can see how it would be interpreted as such. but rest assured, i do not believe at all in evolution."


thats evolution. whether you want to beleive it or not... it is. Species changing and creating variations? how can you speak about that and not beleive in evolution... thats what evolution is! you even said that evolution has not been proven... well that is simply wrong. it has been, many times over and its proof (the kind outside the lab) surrounds us everyday.. you can actually SEE it happening. it is simple blind creationist beleif that stops some people from accepting it.

I dont deny that great floods happened, whether global or not remains to be proven. simply from looking at records of global temperatures recovered from analysis of tree rings and ice core samples we can tell that the world has been alot hotter and has been alot colder. even the noticeable (and predictable) fluctuations in the earth's orbit around sol prove this. Also there is no doubt that the continents are in motion, and it is a widely held beleif in most scientific circles that all continents were once one. the motion of continents alone could be explanation enough as to why and how fossils have been found in strange places. anothe explanation of this is debri and other rocky discharge from super tsunami created by huge landslides (entire sides of mountains colapsing into the sea), the likes of which we will see very soon again.

if the existance of a monothistic creator (and creationism) were true and that the world and all its living things were created to perfection, there would be no variation of lifeforms to the extent as to create different species, there would be no motion of the earth's crust, and there wouldnt be a need for such events as a "global" flood.

but since such things have happened (and ARE happening), and have been reported in some of the most ancient of record keeping methods (religion and religious texts) it is reasonable to asume that our world and its contents are not "perfect" unless you percieve imperfections as a form of perfection themselves.

Whether or not you can fit these animals into the arc or not (which you cannot) is a complete null argument as you require far more than just two of a species (or 'type of animal') to repopulate.

Why would this so considered omnipotent entity need to store 'his' creations on a boat anyway? why could he not just recreate them as he did in the first week? lol.

you do propose to have an interesting argument in the explanation of the great discrepancies and variations in what the bible says. i would very much like to hear this explanation in more detail. perhaps explaining how several individual differances came about.

i'm pleased you reccognise that 'man' has created many changes in the bible over the centuries, either through mistranslation, alternate interperation or even consious changes due to different motives... but can you tell me what version it is you read?... and why you can be certain that THAT version is the exact word of god?

i've touched on only a few of the arguments put forward as this is already quite a long discussion, but would like to point out as a final note that:
much of what monotheists can only explain by saying things like "god did it", more scientific approaches can actually explain the processes behind it. And for the few things science has yet to discover answers for they use as "proof" that science is fundamntally flawed. well it is this very acceptance that science does not YET hold ALL the answers that is evidence that it is NOT flawed. what's flawed is the beleif that everything could have been explained so perfectly to a being (human) long ago to within their understanding so it could be transcribed in texts perfectly and without flaw for all eternity for the benifit of all those who would follow after.
just because you dont know of the scientific explanation doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

i look forward to your responce cottons.