Celtic Heroes

Also solumbum my question stands, would you elect an atheist for president if they were the best candidate

What do u mean by best candidate exactly? I mean we differ on gun control and economics so my idea of a good candidate is probably different from yours. Oh and plus3 between Obama and Romney( who is a Mormon by the way just in case u didnt know) my family supported Romney. We are certainly not Mormons. We are baptists.

I brought up Mormonism specifically because of Romney. Take a look at who would and would not support him and all the press as well. It's a statistical fact a broad base of people wouldn't support him for his religious views alone - not even Christians (all lumped together anyhow). It's kind of understandable given that religions recent history as the next rung down on the ladder of popularity is probably Scientology. Of course the last rung after homosexual satanists who also are convicted killers is atheists.

I'm just going by what the bible says. They may be disagreeing with me but they are also disagreeing with the bible

So you agree with the entirety of the bible? You agree it is possible for noah to have about 100,000 kids in 100 yrs between the flood and Moses happening, if so, you are a prime example of an educational system failure. Unless chill pill existed in Noah's times (it didnt) then there is no way he had 100,000 odd kids.

Had to look it up myself. According to the Septuagint which is the primary reference translation of the Hebrew bible into Greek this is true. 106 years or so. This isn't the same timeline as the masoretic which puts the date some 800 years earlier. Either way it's overlooking the fact that mitochondrial DNA evidence shows the breeding population for humans was reduced to around 10,000 only 70,000 years ago (which is scary we almost didn't make it). Some other evidence suggests the number could have been as low as 2,000. That was the smallest human population in all of history. If it was ever 2 or 10 it would have left unmistakable evidence. This completely falsifies genesis on its own.

I will be honest and go ahead and say it: i don't know much about genes and such. But we were talking about the Bible. Look at the bible. Do u not see all the names between Noah and lets say Abraham? Then it says there was Isaac and Jacob. After that it was Joseph; he was the first to go to Egypt and he brought his father eventually. So we know Abraham lived 110 years and i think its safe to assume that the rest lived into there 80's. and even after Jacob there were generations between him and Moses. I don't have the texts right now but i could get them. So if u do ur math from what the bIble says u have, just from Abraham to Moses 4-500 years

Why do people in the bible have longer lives...? What changed?

I will be honest and go ahead and say it: i don't know much about genes and such. But we were talking about the Bible. Look at the bible. Do u not see all the names between Noah and lets say Abraham? Then it says there was Isaac and Jacob. After that it was Joseph; he was the first to go to Egypt and he brought his father eventually. So we know Abraham lived 110 years and i think its safe to assume that the rest lived into there 80's. and even after Jacob there were generations between him and Moses. I don't have the texts right now but i could get them. So if u do ur math from what the bIble says u have, just from Abraham to Moses 4-500 years

Here is a pretty good free reference to the biblical timeline - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible It's very well cited i doubt there are any errors. It's true that there are multiple ways to compute the timeline depending on what part of the bible you use for dates (there are many contradictions) and what version/translation you use. This does put the time at 106 years or 711 years from two common methods.

Um, according to the Bible the Israelites were in captivity in Egypt for about 400 years, and that was after the flood.

Why do people in the bible have longer lives...? What changed?

Just my theory but I think we can infer from the scripture that Adam and Eve were originally created with perfect bodies that did not die but after the fall they started to die. Genetically their bodies were far better than ours and so the closer people were to the beginning the more perfect their genes would be. So something like the perfection of our genetics is decreasing and our bodies are becoming less resistant to age would make sense from this point of view.
(Notice as the Bible progresses people's average life spans decrease)

As far as the Bill vs Ken debate, I was not very impressed with either side. In fact, I was very disappointed. Granted both sides had a few good arguments, but both did a terrible job of actually arguing their views. I didn't expect much from Ken Ham because I knew there is a fatal flaw in his approach to science, but I had heard a lot about Bill and was frankly disappointed by the level of thinking he displayed. The whole thing was pretty much a publicity stunt and was another poor debate in my opinion, both sides had me laughing.

As far as internet debates vs real ones, the biggest problem with internet debates on open forums like this is the flow of people who only think they know what they are talking about.
Just so you know, a quick internet search does not afford you the level of knowledge and understanding needed to debate any but the most simple topics. You get a lot of uneducated rabble thinking that their ability to quote wiki articles makes them masters of debate.
Also no one actually has any intention of changing their minds. They aren't debating to learn, they are arguing because they want to be right.

Why do people in the bible have longer lives...? What changed?

Just my theory but I think we can infer from the scripture that Adam and Eve were originally created with perfect bodies that did not die but after the fall they started to die. Genetically their bodies were far better than ours and so the closer people were to the beginning the more perfect their genes would be. So something like the perfection of our genetics is decreasing and our bodies are becoming less resistant to age would make sense from this point of view.
(Notice as the Bible progresses people's average life spans decrease)

There is a massive amount of genetic evidence disproving this. In fact humans never had a breeding population under about 2,000-5,000. Just DNA evidence disproves genesis beyond any doubt, not to mention the geological, arechogical, radiological and many other kinds of evidence as well. You kind of have to be ignorant, mentally challenged, obtuse, mentally Ill or a combination of them to believe young earth creation.