Geographical evidence points to a global flood that coincides w/ Genesis account of Noah's Ark

Hi Rezz, I like your new picture, she's much nicer looking than the blue haired cartoon guy with the gold eye patch. Anyway...Agree to disagree Time has become a problem for me so I'll keep it short. Science: A field of study seeking to better understand natural phenomena through the use of observations and experiments. Broad, but increasingly precise and concise, relationships are sought between causes and effects. These relationships, called scientific laws, help predict future phenomena and explain past events. Notice, this does not mean that the first cause must be naturalistic. It is poor logic to say that because science deals with natural, cause-and-effect relationships, the first cause must be a natural event. Furthermore, if the first cause were a natural consequence of something else, it would not be the first cause. Scientific laws can provide great insight on ultimate origins even though the first cause cannot, by definition, be duplicated. Yes, there was a beginning. Scientific conclusions, while never final, must be based on evidence. scientific evidence: Something that has been measured with instruments or detected with our senses, is verifiable, and helps support or refute possible physical explanations. All evidence I presented is based on observable, natural phenomena that others can check. To most people, this evidence implies a global flood. Also, the consequences of a global flood have been misinterpreted as evidence for evolution, not as evidence for a flood. That misinterpretation, unfortunately, is taught as science. Explanations other than a global flood may someday be proposed that are (1) consistent with all that evidence and (2) demonstrable by repeatable, cause-and-effect relationships. Until that happens, those who ignore existing evidence are being quite unscientific. People that disagree the flood best explains many features on earth, object to a global flood, because the Bible—a document they wish to discredit—speaks of such a flood. Still others object to the starting point for the flood, but in science, all starting points are possibilities. The key question must always be, "What best explains all the evidence?" Also, the source of a scientific idea does not need to be scientifically derived. For example, Friedrich Kekulï¿½ discovered the ring structure of benzene in a dream in which a snake grabbed its tail. Kekulï¿½'s discovery laid the basis for structural chemistry. Again, what is important is not the source of an idea, but whether all evidence supports it better than any other explanation. Science, after all, is a search for truth about how the physical universe behaves. http://www.creationscience.com... I don't see why it matters if the information I posted is from a Christian website. All the information/studies/experiments they site are from secular and Christian scientists. That is like saying that if a Muslim gave you a Bible it's not really a Bible because it came from a Muslim. There are Christian scientists all over the world, they do not get published as often as as secular scientists b/c the majority of the scientific community are liberals. The information below is off CNN if that makes it more credible for you. http://archives.cnn.com... There's no dispute that the Black Sea was flooded when rising world sea levels caused the Mediterranean to fill the Black Sea. Prior expeditions show the flood was so monstrous it raised water levels by 511 feet, and submerged up to 60,000 square miles of land, an area the size of Georgia. The questions are when did it happen, and how rapidly? Until recently, scholars believed the drowning occurred about 9,000 years ago and was gradual. But marine geologists Walter Pitman and William Ryan wrote in 1997 that the flood was sudden and took place about 7,150 years ago. http://www.cbsnews.com... If you want to see more awesome evidence for the Flood go to this website... http://www.creationscience.com... Sorry Rez it is a Christian Website but the author was an evolutionist most his life so you might like him. Walt Brown received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. He has taught college courses in physics, mathematics, and computer science. Brown is a retired full colonel (Air Force), West Point graduate, and former Army Ranger and paratrooper. Assignments during his 21 years in the military included: Director of Benï¿½t Laboratories (a U.S. Army research, development, and engineering facility) near Albany, New York; tenured associate professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy; and Chief of Science and Technology Studies at the Air War College. For much of his life Walt Brown was an evolutionist, but after years of study, he became convinced of the scientific validity of creation and a global flood. Since retiring from the military, Dr. Brown has been the Director of the Center for Scientific Creation. He devotes full time to teaching, research, and writing on creation and the flood. People...whether you vote for me or Rezz please look at the information and websites we both posted to come to your own conclusion. Thanks for my first debate Rezz; I learned a lot.