The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Will people stop making threads concering Forest Fan? He is not making any effort to look at other people's views, so there is really no need to make topics, as he already had his mind made up, and of course, he's always right because he believes in God.
So yeh, he is ruining this forum, leave him.
So yeh, he is ruining this forum, leave him.
Page:
You wrote that and your quotes of me were purely made up.
Seeing as you practically ignore this.
I don't expect you to 'quote message' in your response, but atleast respond with relation to my comments.
Edgy wrote:
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Edgy wrote:
>
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
>
>
> No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
>
> So there's nothing hypocritical about the way you're presenting your
> views? Lets take this hypothetical situation for example:
>
> Edgy's personal beliefs
>
> Edgy With
> all due respect to other religions, my
> posted today at 4.32pm personal belief is that there is
> no God-like entity. I believe we have this one mortal existence and
> that when we die, that is the end.
>
> Forest Fan
> Then
> you are going to hell, suffer and not
> posted today at 4.33pm taste the juices of Jesus.
> You must take him inside of you now of suffer in eternity.
>
> Edgy That
> is completely irrelevant. If my belief
> posted today at 4.36pm is that my existence
> ends when I die. Then there is nothing you can say that will change
> that.
>
> Forest Fan
> So
> you would rather go to hell?
> Preached away at 4.36pm
>
> Edgy
> That
> question is completely irrelevant. If I
> Posted today at 4.38pm don't believe in hell, and
> there is no evidence of hell, then chances are I'm not anyway. Why
> can't you accept that not everyone has the same beliefs?
>
> Forest Fan
> Boosh Checkmated himself today at 5.00pm Because I can't
> allow names on a message board, who may not be who they really say
> anyway, to believe in what they want. They have the choice, but I
> can't let them choose, despite the God in which I believe allowing
> them that choice. I am a hypocritical git who can not accept other
> cultures, despite claiming to live in harmony with others in my
> neighbourhood. I deny the existence of logic. I deny the ability to
> have an opinion but to respect others. I deny the fact that there is
> even the slightest possibility that I wont be able to convert your
> usernames to a life with Jesus. I am a self obsessed fanboy. That's
> right. A fanboy. I enjoy being the top poster through my spamming and
> I have a tendency to ask the stupidest questions and show myself up
> as the greatest failure to ever attend my school by not even knowing
> the meanings of the words, "Spontaneous Combustion" and
> "Occular Sensory organs". I believe that a piece of writing
> is the word of a God, when if a God really had these powers, he could
> implant his word into our minds from birth, allowing us to make a
> choice for ourselves from day one.
>
> (Note: In this situation the post goes on for around another 5000
> words)
>
>
>
>
> EdgyBecause you don't know when to give up.
>
> Forest FanI just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can
> say to
> Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for
> and
> say, "I told these people."
>
> Right. You've told us. We don't accept it but respect your decision
> to believe. No amount of repetition on your part will convince me
> otherwise. It will only to the opposite.
>
>
>
> EdgyI can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I
> can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
>
> Forest FanBut the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the
> Lord's take on
> issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards),
> present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture,
> judgement etc.)
>
> Funny that, as I thought it was the word of those doped up on various
> substances, as was common practise thousands of years ago...even
> hundreds of years ago, where visions were common. Have you
> ever read Kubla Khan?
>
>
>
> EdgyThe story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board
> two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
>
> Forest FanThe ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that
> there
> actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
>
> And the issues on incest, the lack of extinction through predatorial
> acts, the lack of climates to allow the cold blooded creatures to
> survive, the lack of climates to allow the polar animals to survive,
> the fact that no matter how big the ship, it would have taken way too
> long for Noah to travel the entire Earth and save every single
> species, and so on.
>
>
>
>
> It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
>
> Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science,
> unlike Evolution.
>
>
> The points I have made above are scientific. Evolution is also
> scientific. I haven't studied Evolution enough to know all sides to
> the story, but all scientists know that science is about finding the
> truth, not masking it. After all, Romans believed the eyes project
> sight, and that's how they see, when infact it was the opposite, that
> light travels into the eyes. That is a mistake in what was then
> modern science that was corrected.
>
>
>
>
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the
> animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in
> the
> Bible or not.
>
> It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God
> through Moses.
>
> So how long do you think it would take to sail/row around the world
> with only two people aboard this ship?
I don't expect you to 'quote message' in your response, but atleast respond with relation to my comments.
Edgy wrote:
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Edgy wrote:
>
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
>
>
> No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
>
> So there's nothing hypocritical about the way you're presenting your
> views? Lets take this hypothetical situation for example:
>
> Edgy's personal beliefs
>
> Edgy With
> all due respect to other religions, my
> posted today at 4.32pm personal belief is that there is
> no God-like entity. I believe we have this one mortal existence and
> that when we die, that is the end.
>
> Forest Fan
> Then
> you are going to hell, suffer and not
> posted today at 4.33pm taste the juices of Jesus.
> You must take him inside of you now of suffer in eternity.
>
> Edgy That
> is completely irrelevant. If my belief
> posted today at 4.36pm is that my existence
> ends when I die. Then there is nothing you can say that will change
> that.
>
> Forest Fan
> So
> you would rather go to hell?
> Preached away at 4.36pm
>
> Edgy
> That
> question is completely irrelevant. If I
> Posted today at 4.38pm don't believe in hell, and
> there is no evidence of hell, then chances are I'm not anyway. Why
> can't you accept that not everyone has the same beliefs?
>
> Forest Fan
> Boosh Checkmated himself today at 5.00pm Because I can't
> allow names on a message board, who may not be who they really say
> anyway, to believe in what they want. They have the choice, but I
> can't let them choose, despite the God in which I believe allowing
> them that choice. I am a hypocritical git who can not accept other
> cultures, despite claiming to live in harmony with others in my
> neighbourhood. I deny the existence of logic. I deny the ability to
> have an opinion but to respect others. I deny the fact that there is
> even the slightest possibility that I wont be able to convert your
> usernames to a life with Jesus. I am a self obsessed fanboy. That's
> right. A fanboy. I enjoy being the top poster through my spamming and
> I have a tendency to ask the stupidest questions and show myself up
> as the greatest failure to ever attend my school by not even knowing
> the meanings of the words, "Spontaneous Combustion" and
> "Occular Sensory organs". I believe that a piece of writing
> is the word of a God, when if a God really had these powers, he could
> implant his word into our minds from birth, allowing us to make a
> choice for ourselves from day one.
>
> (Note: In this situation the post goes on for around another 5000
> words)
>
>
>
>
> EdgyBecause you don't know when to give up.
>
> Forest FanI just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can
> say to
> Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for
> and
> say, "I told these people."
>
> Right. You've told us. We don't accept it but respect your decision
> to believe. No amount of repetition on your part will convince me
> otherwise. It will only to the opposite.
>
>
>
> EdgyI can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I
> can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
>
> Forest FanBut the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the
> Lord's take on
> issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards),
> present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture,
> judgement etc.)
>
> Funny that, as I thought it was the word of those doped up on various
> substances, as was common practise thousands of years ago...even
> hundreds of years ago, where visions were common. Have you
> ever read Kubla Khan?
>
>
>
> EdgyThe story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board
> two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
>
> Forest FanThe ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that
> there
> actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
>
> And the issues on incest, the lack of extinction through predatorial
> acts, the lack of climates to allow the cold blooded creatures to
> survive, the lack of climates to allow the polar animals to survive,
> the fact that no matter how big the ship, it would have taken way too
> long for Noah to travel the entire Earth and save every single
> species, and so on.
>
>
>
>
> It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
>
> Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science,
> unlike Evolution.
>
>
> The points I have made above are scientific. Evolution is also
> scientific. I haven't studied Evolution enough to know all sides to
> the story, but all scientists know that science is about finding the
> truth, not masking it. After all, Romans believed the eyes project
> sight, and that's how they see, when infact it was the opposite, that
> light travels into the eyes. That is a mistake in what was then
> modern science that was corrected.
>
>
>
>
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the
> animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in
> the
> Bible or not.
>
> It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God
> through Moses.
>
> So how long do you think it would take to sail/row around the world
> with only two people aboard this ship?
There are revivals in some parts of the world like Indonesia, China and USA. Britain has not had a revival.
Yet after 3000 years many MANY people are turning away from the Bible.
What's that saying about Chritianity eh?
Great Britian used to be a rather dedicated nation to Christianity. Infact, if you believed in science, the Christian way was to "burn the witch!"
What's that saying about Chritianity eh?
Great Britian used to be a rather dedicated nation to Christianity. Infact, if you believed in science, the Christian way was to "burn the witch!"
Edgy wrote:
> Scientists study and explore the possibilities for years before
> drawing conclusions.
After 150 years science appears to have accepted evolution, although some scientist saw through it and disproved it.
> Scientists study and explore the possibilities for years before
> drawing conclusions.
After 150 years science appears to have accepted evolution, although some scientist saw through it and disproved it.
Oh for the love of God (because that might be some kind of incentive for someone like you), Forest Fan, SHUT THE BLOODY HELL UP. SERIOUSLY, YOU TICK ME OFF SO BADLY.
Scientists study and explore the possibilities for years before drawing conclusions.
I have studied evolution, but there were too many impossibilities to begin to believe it.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Edgy wrote:
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
>
> No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
So there's nothing hypocritical about the way you're presenting your views? Lets take this hypothetical situation for example:
Edgy's personal beliefs
Edgy With all due respect to other religions, my
posted today at 4.32pm personal belief is that there is no God-like entity. I believe we have this one mortal existence and that when we die, that is the end.
Forest Fan Then you are going to hell, suffer and not
posted today at 4.33pm taste the juices of Jesus. You must take him inside of you now of suffer in eternity.
Edgy That is completely irrelevant. If my belief
posted today at 4.36pm is that my existence ends when I die. Then there is nothing you can say that will change that.
Forest Fan So you would rather go to hell?
Preached away at 4.36pm
Edgy That question is completely irrelevant. If I
Posted today at 4.38pm don't believe in hell, and there is no evidence of hell, then chances are I'm not anyway. Why can't you accept that not everyone has the same beliefs?
Forest Fan
Boosh Checkmated himself today at 5.00pm Because I can't allow names on a message board, who may not be who they really say anyway, to believe in what they want. They have the choice, but I can't let them choose, despite the God in which I believe allowing them that choice. I am a hypocritical git who can not accept other cultures, despite claiming to live in harmony with others in my neighbourhood. I deny the existence of logic. I deny the ability to have an opinion but to respect others. I deny the fact that there is even the slightest possibility that I wont be able to convert your usernames to a life with Jesus. I am a self obsessed fanboy. That's right. A fanboy. I enjoy being the top poster through my spamming and I have a tendency to ask the stupidest questions and show myself up as the greatest failure to ever attend my school by not even knowing the meanings of the words, "Spontaneous Combustion" and "Occular Sensory organs". I believe that a piece of writing is the word of a God, when if a God really had these powers, he could implant his word into our minds from birth, allowing us to make a choice for ourselves from day one.
(Note: In this situation the post goes on for around another 5000 words)
>
Edgy> Because you don't know when to give up.
>
Forest Fan> I just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can say to
> Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for and
> say, "I told these people."
Right. You've told us. We don't accept it but respect your decision to believe. No amount of repetition on your part will convince me otherwise. It will only to the opposite.
>
Edgy> I can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
>
Forest Fan> But the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the Lord's take on
> issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards),
> present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture,
> judgement etc.)
Funny that, as I thought it was the word of those doped up on various substances, as was common practise thousands of years ago...even hundreds of years ago, where visions were common. Have you ever read Kubla Khan?
>
Edgy> The story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
>
Forest Fan> The ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that there
> actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
And the issues on incest, the lack of extinction through predatorial acts, the lack of climates to allow the cold blooded creatures to survive, the lack of climates to allow the polar animals to survive, the fact that no matter how big the ship, it would have taken way too long for Noah to travel the entire Earth and save every single species, and so on.
>
> It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
>
> Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science,
> unlike Evolution.
>
The points I have made above are scientific. Evolution is also scientific. I haven't studied Evolution enough to know all sides to the story, but all scientists know that science is about finding the truth, not masking it. After all, Romans believed the eyes project sight, and that's how they see, when infact it was the opposite, that light travels into the eyes. That is a mistake in what was then modern science that was corrected.
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the
> animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in
> the
> Bible or not.
>
> It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God
> through Moses.
So how long do you think it would take to sail/row around the world with only two people aboard this ship?
> Edgy wrote:
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
>
> No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
So there's nothing hypocritical about the way you're presenting your views? Lets take this hypothetical situation for example:
Edgy's personal beliefs
Edgy With all due respect to other religions, my
posted today at 4.32pm personal belief is that there is no God-like entity. I believe we have this one mortal existence and that when we die, that is the end.
Forest Fan Then you are going to hell, suffer and not
posted today at 4.33pm taste the juices of Jesus. You must take him inside of you now of suffer in eternity.
Edgy That is completely irrelevant. If my belief
posted today at 4.36pm is that my existence ends when I die. Then there is nothing you can say that will change that.
Forest Fan So you would rather go to hell?
Preached away at 4.36pm
Edgy That question is completely irrelevant. If I
Posted today at 4.38pm don't believe in hell, and there is no evidence of hell, then chances are I'm not anyway. Why can't you accept that not everyone has the same beliefs?
Forest Fan
Boosh Checkmated himself today at 5.00pm Because I can't allow names on a message board, who may not be who they really say anyway, to believe in what they want. They have the choice, but I can't let them choose, despite the God in which I believe allowing them that choice. I am a hypocritical git who can not accept other cultures, despite claiming to live in harmony with others in my neighbourhood. I deny the existence of logic. I deny the ability to have an opinion but to respect others. I deny the fact that there is even the slightest possibility that I wont be able to convert your usernames to a life with Jesus. I am a self obsessed fanboy. That's right. A fanboy. I enjoy being the top poster through my spamming and I have a tendency to ask the stupidest questions and show myself up as the greatest failure to ever attend my school by not even knowing the meanings of the words, "Spontaneous Combustion" and "Occular Sensory organs". I believe that a piece of writing is the word of a God, when if a God really had these powers, he could implant his word into our minds from birth, allowing us to make a choice for ourselves from day one.
(Note: In this situation the post goes on for around another 5000 words)
>
Edgy> Because you don't know when to give up.
>
Forest Fan> I just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can say to
> Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for and
> say, "I told these people."
Right. You've told us. We don't accept it but respect your decision to believe. No amount of repetition on your part will convince me otherwise. It will only to the opposite.
>
Edgy> I can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
>
Forest Fan> But the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the Lord's take on
> issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards),
> present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture,
> judgement etc.)
Funny that, as I thought it was the word of those doped up on various substances, as was common practise thousands of years ago...even hundreds of years ago, where visions were common. Have you ever read Kubla Khan?
>
Edgy> The story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
>
Forest Fan> The ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that there
> actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
And the issues on incest, the lack of extinction through predatorial acts, the lack of climates to allow the cold blooded creatures to survive, the lack of climates to allow the polar animals to survive, the fact that no matter how big the ship, it would have taken way too long for Noah to travel the entire Earth and save every single species, and so on.
>
> It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
>
> Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science,
> unlike Evolution.
>
The points I have made above are scientific. Evolution is also scientific. I haven't studied Evolution enough to know all sides to the story, but all scientists know that science is about finding the truth, not masking it. After all, Romans believed the eyes project sight, and that's how they see, when infact it was the opposite, that light travels into the eyes. That is a mistake in what was then modern science that was corrected.
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the
> animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in
> the
> Bible or not.
>
> It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God
> through Moses.
So how long do you think it would take to sail/row around the world with only two people aboard this ship?
Edgy wrote:
> Ah - so we don't have freedom of choice even in this existence then?
Yes, Jesus or not.
>
> It's not good enough that people will be refused entry into heaven if
> they don't 'piece' people off.
Sin cannot enter Heaven, for Heaven, for it to be perfect, no sin must enter. There is only one way, to appear sinless, trusting in Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour.
> No, instead, they have to suffer in this existence too.##
Who, believers, because I am certainly not suffering.
>
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
> The average Christian will go to his or her form of heaven. They are
> the good people.
Well, I don't consider myself the "average Christian". The "average Christian", may or may not be saved. I am not "good", nor is there one person walking the face of this Earth that is "good".
>
> You, however, will most likely burn in whatever hell you percieve to
> be your reality.
I percieve the New Jerusalem to be my destination.
>
> Why?
>
> Because you don't know when to give up.
I just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can say to Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for and say, "I told these people."
>
> I can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
But the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the Lord's take on issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards), present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture, judgement etc.)
>
> The story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
The ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that there actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science, unlike Evolution.
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in the
> Bible or not.
It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God through Moses.
> Ah - so we don't have freedom of choice even in this existence then?
Yes, Jesus or not.
>
> It's not good enough that people will be refused entry into heaven if
> they don't 'piece' people off.
Sin cannot enter Heaven, for Heaven, for it to be perfect, no sin must enter. There is only one way, to appear sinless, trusting in Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour.
> No, instead, they have to suffer in this existence too.##
Who, believers, because I am certainly not suffering.
>
> You're beliefs suck Forest Fan. They're hypocritical, selfish, and
> totally contradictory throughout.
No they are not, some of evolutionary beliefs are though.
>
> The average Christian will go to his or her form of heaven. They are
> the good people.
Well, I don't consider myself the "average Christian". The "average Christian", may or may not be saved. I am not "good", nor is there one person walking the face of this Earth that is "good".
>
> You, however, will most likely burn in whatever hell you percieve to
> be your reality.
I percieve the New Jerusalem to be my destination.
>
> Why?
>
> Because you don't know when to give up.
I just have to share the Gospel, so when I meet Jesus I can say to Him, when He judges my life according to works, I can account for and say, "I told these people."
>
> I can do the same thing you're doing for any given situation. I can
> analyse any comment, quote or passage from a story and say how it
> could be true if I add more words to it.
But the Bible is the Word of God, you are hearing the Lord's take on issues, His commentary on the World, past (Creation and afterwards), present (Beginning of End Times) and future (End of ages, rapture, judgement etc.)
>
> The story generally told is that Noah and his wife took on board two
> of every living creature to save them from the great flood. This
> means that every creature alive now is a product of incest. It means
> that predators would have stopped their basic instincts to avoid
> killing each other. It means that the Ark would have had to be huge
> and have a power source able to generate hot and cold to keep the
> cold blooded, the polar, and various other animals alive.
The ark was huge, it was not until about the 1800's that there actually was a ship, as large as the ark.
It would
> mean that all vegetation on the planet that can not survive under
> water would have 'drowned' and died off. The story isn't feasable.
Of course, there are no parts of the story that contradict science, unlike Evolution.
> Sure, you can try to tell me that Noah travelled the world before
> hand to find all the animals. You can try to tell me that the animals
> decided to all be friends. You can tell me that the Animals of
> Farthing Wood didn't actually make it to White Deer park, but I can
> tell you that the story has no real credability, whether it is in the
> Bible or not.
It has perfect credibility, because the story is narrated by God through Moses.
Page: