The article states that the “discoverers” of the ark clearly stated that science shows the ark is only 4,800 years old, but all the shells on the mountain sides are dated to over several million years old by science.
Also, to those who use the fossilized shells on the top of mountains, have you ever heard of plate tectonics movements and how this process creates mountains from land that use to be sea level. This same process is used to create the Dead Sea.
If people want to use science to bolster up their beliefs, then they need to be prepared for science to unbolster their claims.
Those who use shells on mountains as evidence of a global flood either must not understand plate tectonics or they shouldn’t use science to help their beliefs.
Nothing perplexing about that.
>>...but all the shells on the mountain sides are dated to over several million years old by science.<<
Who is this “Science” guy you keep referring to and why didn’t you capitalize his name?
How did this Science guy determine the age of the “ark” and the shells? Did he use the same method and is it trustworthy?
They dig up a jawbone out of some trashpile in Spain and declare it an 11,000,000 year old never-before known primate. Science gladly accepts the primate evidence as fact and start drawing pictures of what the primate looked like in text books. But someone produces a big wooden structure built with ancient boat building techniques on the side of a mountain at 13,000 feet and Science and non-Christians won’t even give that a passing glance.
The article states that the “discoverers” of the ark clearly stated that science shows the ark is only 4,800 years old, but all the shells on the mountain sides are dated to over several million years old by science.
Also, to those who use the fossilized shells on the top of mountains, have you ever heard of plate tectonics movements and how this process creates mountains from land that use to be sea level. This same process is used to create the Dead Sea.
If people want to use science to bolster up their beliefs, then they need to be prepared for science to unbolster their claims.
Those who use shells on mountains as evidence of a global flood either must not understand plate tectonics or they shouldn’t use science to help their beliefs.
My faith is not 100% blind, as there is a lot of things to look at,but if it was, that would be good enough.
And you are right, i know nothing about science, but science trys to make me believe that oil comes from dead historic animals when there are obvious explanations
that would make a lot more sense which i will not go into.
Just that one thing is enough to make me distrust science,
but that does not mean that i disagree with them on every thing, it depends on if it seems logical or not to me.
P.S
I do not see how it would make any difference how old the shells are, maybe they were already millions of years old when the flood came.