The use of 'man', 'mankind', and even 'men' has always been accepted as inclusive of both sexes....in spite of the idiots of political correctness that would have prayers end in "Apersons"....

Well frak you X ways from sideways. That "always" is presumptuous when you compare recently existing humans with estimates of the total historical human population, and more importantly, you're being a brat to respond like that. You full well know we agree on the general point and you're just indulging in retro defensiveness about testicle ownership and the eccentricities of English. 

Sorry...

Am not being a 'brat'...and am only really in this pathetic time-waster of a thread to police it against idiots these topics ALWAYS attract, and yes, ALWAYS.

Couldn't give a toss about 'testicle ownership', just stating the realities of the chosen language of communication.

It seems like you are all debating morals, rather than the idea of God being science. Science is humanity trying to figure out how everything works. Religion is when you claim that God or gods are the answer to everything you can't understand, which makes since. How can you explain the mindset of (a) being(s) that were around way before you were even thought of?

Debating what you think is wrong or right is pointless. When we die we will find out the truth. Some already know it, others have yet to find out.

One of Arthur C. Clarke's three laws of prediction states: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

Of course, since we no longer believe in magic, I think it's pretty obvious these days (at least it is to me) that God and science are in no way incompatible. The whole of creation obeys to specific rules, and it is indeed the discovery of those rules that we call science.

But - as you said - in all of this we are like little ants trying to understand the world, just beginning to realize that there is more to it than their small underground colony. They might now be vaguely aware that there is some kind of garden around them, but the incredible vastness and complexity of the Universe are still things that are completely unimaginable to them.

Not at all, if you keep an open mind!

MortalKhrist, the title is "Science and God" ... not God being science. What does God need science for since everything is just a snap of the fingers (wiggle of the nose) away. Sooo … man (hahaha) was not made privy to the spirit world (check insane asylum clientele?) so we just muddle along as best we can mostly through trial and error, but we are getting there. If one is want to describe our understanding of the world around us and everything in it as our ‘science’, it’s ok with me. All I need to make my case is a reasonable encyclopedia … the opposition uses a two thousand year old black book compiled by likeminded folk (zealots one and all) from folk lore handed down verbally for uncountable generations. Hell, just give me Wikipedia and I am ready for the “debate (hehehe)”. If one is going to discuss God … I would think morals are at the center of the discussion and cannot be avoided, just me though.

I'm curious as well whether they happened to carry 2 gold fish, 2 jelly fish , 2 whales in a big fish tank, 2 star fish and 2 hammer head sharks.

Quoting RiddleKing "I'm curious as well whether they happened to carry 2 gold fish, 2 jelly fish, 2 whales in a big fish tank, 2 star fish and 2 hammer head sharks."

In Genesis 7:22-23 "Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth."

It doesn’t say anything about the fish so Noah would not have put them on the ark. They would have just stayed in the water. Here’s another verse. In Genesis 7:8 it says that "Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah." It doesn't say anything about fish; so there you have it the fish stayed in the water.

This is how I see it: first there had to be your one God, no doubt. Then everything became … however you want it to, ok. Since we are deprived admittance to the supernatural ‘world’, God must get His message out somehow. So God ‘plants’ all His wisdom into the minds of some of His animals (couldn’t use a Willie or a Sam … just His zealots) who of course didn’t know He existed yet, oh well … trivialities hahaha. So these chosen zealots realized that when ‘these idiots’ learn the world is round … well they were going to need more help. So they created religion to spread the word but shit … there were so many myths, they started diverging … so in steps Big Brother, The RCC … the only true representatives for anything Godly (just ask any one of them). Now I don’t know of very many people in lockstep with the RCC, but if they are they surely are Catholic. Religion doesn’t need us to be placed in a bad light no way … thank the RCC for that one. The scandals were (FTMP) Catholic practitioners screwing their flock. The ‘religious’ problems of the last two thousand years were (FTMP) Catholics practicing Catholicism being let off their leashes … again The RCC. True heroes like Martin Luther who defied the RCC (NOT religion) should be applauded. Sorry, I digress … Evil is as evil does and the RCC is packed full of it … that is where your ‘religious’ slanders stem from.

bigdave13, I know what it says in Genesis … I was just making a joke, hahaha. I just wanted to hear their answer sorry. Anyone interested in discussing ark logistics vs. science of course hahaha?

PS: You clicked on the text color icon instead of the background icon.

Again, don't confuse the message with the actions of the messenger. Furthermore, you must first put those things in the context of the time they happened - those were brutal times. Medieval age was no walk in the park, and people back then were also extremely superstitious. The church had a tremendous amount of power and, as such, attracted many who wished nothing but their own personal gain.

Same thing can be said about science. There are those who engage in science for the benefit of all mankind, and those who engage in science for their own benefit and the destruction of others.

The common denominator here is men, not science or religion by themselves. The same type of men who even today abuse their influence over others by claiming that Islam and God wants them to bomb innocent women and children. I would dare to say that most Muslims, however, do not share that point of view and prefer to live their lives in peace.

Unfortunately bad apples exist everywhere, and sometimes all it takes is a couple of them to 'spoil' a whole tree in the eyes of others. But should the whole tree be cut down because of the few rotten apples, when it still gives good fruit otherwise?

FROM: http://christianity.about.com/od/biblestorysummaries/p/noahsarkflood.htm

Noah's Ark and the Flood - Story Summary:

Points of Interest from the Story:

Question for Reflection:

I can answer one question....[if it was one]....that's crap for a start....but I'm sure someone somewhere has one that proportion...so it MUST be gospel.

He said the proportion was interesting.  And I concur.   So I went and looked up some stuff.   Ancient Egyptian ships had a 7:1 ratio.  Kayaks are about 9:1 to 10:1.   Modern ships tend to design for higher length-to-width ratios to navigate choppy waters, but they have the liberty to steer and propel their boats directly into the waves.  Noah would not realistically be able to steer the ship.  Longer boats are easier to propel.   Noah probably wanted to have some degree of control, but he wasn't building a racing boat:  his priority was just to survive. 

I looked up length-to-beam ratios of modern cruise ships--what I expect to be the closest design to the ark.  Royal Caribbean's Freedom of the Seas has a 6:1 ratio.  Others range from 8:1 to 9:1, though certainly they're going to have a much higher draft and they have advanced ballast and controllers to stabilize the ship.  Plus they're designed to motorboat at 30 knots.  6:1 vs. 9:1...IMHO that is not that large of a deviation.  I think there's a lot to be said how some things about boat design have not changed that much over the millennia.  And like I said, Egyptian boats were 7:1, so we can safely take any strong biases for/against the Bible out of the equation.   I think the big thing to take from the 6:1 ratio of the ark is, this boat was designed for stability in the event of catching a wave to its side--not to be a warship, or fish, or travel somewhere, etc..   Which is significant, considering he spent 100 years building the ark in the middle of what was likely arid land.