What has one got to do with the other? We're not, as I mentioned in an earlier post. Your reasoning, for example, is seldom "correct". You can't control your thoughts completely. Try not to think about elephants. Not "just" - but there is an element of uncertainty. You shouldn't. You should always consult with other people. No. You have some willful control, just not absolute control. Again, what has one got to do with the other?
Many are, yes. You can predict with some accuracy what someone will think. For example, I can predict with some accuracy what you will say when presented with evidence that the Drupinar site is not really Noah's Ark. But since there is some uncertainty we cannot be 100% sure. You are inaccurately conflating consciousness with free will. You can't control your thoughts. You can, however, control what you do. Would be pretty hard to live your life if you didn't. Some people cannot - and their lives are pretty miserable. Now you are conflating a third thing. Cut it out.
Again, please verify the following quotes... Sam Harris PhD in neuroscience from UCLA Atheist “How can we be “free” as conscious agents if everything that we consciously intend is caused by events in our brain that we do not intend and of which we are entirely unaware? We can’t.” And... “You can do what you decide to do - but you cannot decide what you will decide to do.” Jerry A Coyne Professor of Ecology and Evolution University of Chicago (Author of “Why Evolution Is True”) “Free Will is an illusion so convincing that people simply refuse to believe that we don’t have it.” There are many, many more quotes available from many other experts on the topic... SetiAlpha6 So, it seems that the raw Science is telling us that human free will does not exist. If I go with the Science, as you guys are always telling me to do, I have to stop there, and say that the limitations of our physical brain matter and chemistry make the existence of human free will impossible. But, you and I apparently both hold that free will is real and does exist. And so I am just saying that if it does, it points to the reality and existence of the supernatural, simply because the physical material Universe cannot explain it. And with that, I will hopefully end my side of this conversation inside this thread.
Noah could not have humanly known in advance either, that a Worldwide Flood was coming, or that he needed to build the Ark to prepare for it. God would have had to tell Noah both of these things very far in advance. Years in advance! Because it would have taken years for Noah to actually build the Ark. If God told him years in advance, then God exists. If God exists, then Atheism and Naturalism are both false.
A very small sample of the Scientific evidence that points towards a Global Flood is discussed here... https://earthage.org/scientific-evidence-for-a-worldwide-flood/ The expected responses will be, the suppression of this evidence, mainly by the criticism of the Site, and with Character Assassinations for one and all. You know, pretty much the typical Atheistic Scientific Empire-icl approach to the topic, because it is a threat to their Religion and a threat to their World Domination. There are still a few of us who rebel against the dogmatic empire. I am just one of many. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Nope. You misunderstand those quotes if you think that. To "go with science" first you have to understand science. If you read Newton's first law - "an object at rest tends to stay at rest" - and then proclaim "Science claims that once my car stops, it can never move again!" you have not just disproved science. You have not made a clever and insightful observation. You just didn't understand Newton's laws. If you hold that God is omniscient then you hold that you do not have free will.
I looked at the very first argument - "since there are marine fossils everywhere, everywhere was once under water." 1) There are not marine fossils everywhere. 2) Finding marine fossils on the top of a mountain means that that mountain was once a plate of rock underwater, and tectonic forces have pushed it upwards to make that mountain. I stopped there.
Yes, exactly. And the plate tectonics that pushed it upwards to make that Mountain would have also occurred during the year long Global Flood event.
Regarding Sam Harris, So, are you saying that Sam Harris does not understand the Science? Or, alternatively, are you saying that Sam Harris thinks that we really do have free will? If I am misunderstanding Sam Harris, how should he be correctly understood? Dang, I can’t stop thinking about it! Guess maybe I don’t have free will after all. Rats! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Double Rats!! Guess I’m just a complex bio-mechanical Robot! Ur... or not... yes, no, yes, no, yes?
If an ark is found at Durupinar, that says nothing about a "worldwide" flood. Look at the world today - there are crazy things built all over the place. The ark, if it exists toady, could have been built by some looney. (In fact, there are several arks in the world today that were built by looney creationists.) They do not prove a worldwide flood. See above. The existence of an ark does not prove that God exists any more than the existence of the Eiffel Tower proves that Quetzalcoatl exists.
If Noah’s Ark is found at Durupinar, and if it can be proven to be authentic, then it provides evidence for God and also for the World Wide Flood, for the reasons already stated.
As I have explained, the reasons you stated do not work. There is no way to "authenticate" any ark that might be found. It might have been built by some nut to fool people like you.
relics It has been written that Buddhas frail little body yielded over 28 pecks of relics. anyone wanna buy a "piece of the true ark" Noah built one helluva big boat even after all of these years, I would hazard the guess that we could have more than 3249 metric tons of relics
Sam Harris attacks the popular (and incorrect) version of free will, which is that you can make objective decisions regardless of your emotional drives. You can't. You can, however, make your own choices with those drives in mind. They will absolutely be influenced (not determined) by emotion, subconscious fears and desires and your past experiences. Again, the only person saying that people's lives are predestined here is you.
You can date almost anything using proven scientific methods. But to find a piece of wood that's about 6000 years old and claim "that's Noah's Ark!" would take a leap of faith rather than science.
I do, which how why I seriously doubt that the Durupinar "ark" is authentic. There are also other supposed ark sites that are equally dubious. Why do you accept one and not the others?