No kidding.
And the HOW is what were are discussing.
Yes.
Now you've gone back to your opinion again. How do you know that?
How would a flood cause radioactive elements to be formed? You'd have to in order to argue this view show that radioactive elements did not exist before sometime in the past say 5000 years? Is there any archeological or geological evidence that radioactive elements didn't exist before then? And why do you take the viewpoint that radioactive elements are a curse? When we're able to derive such power from them when properly engineered? They're not just weapons and carcinogens, they also might be the ultimate solution to climate change, whether or not that's really a threat. And why should I not just think that God created the earth with radioactive elements?
No we're not. Not white people anyway, poc, sure, the atmosphere along with all their melanin protects them from the sun's carcinogenic radiation. But also in the process, poc are more likely to be deficient in vitamin D, especially in northern climes, which our bodies make when we're out in the sun. White people get sunburned easily, especially the Irish and other very fair complexions, ask me how I know. So your reason for thinking radioactive elements must be part of a curse also applies to the sun.
No but I don't have any reason to think otherwise either. There are like millions of different sorts of plants, almost none of them mentioned in Scripture, why shouldn't I just believe that God made them along with the earth?
You make lots of assumptions.
Non sequitur.
And I answered that. He didn't ask "how does the flood make radioactive elements".
I already gave my argument, you and RD scoffed at it. I don't have any reason to think that radioactive elements are part of the curse in Genesis. In fact the burden is with you two to show, even though the Bible doesn't mention radioactive elements at all, let alone as specifically part of the curse, that your idea is the right one.
No, it argues against those "harmful things" being part of any curse. I put harmful things in quotes because water is harmful if you drown in it, and wood is harmful if you're impaled on it, and rocks are harmful if you get stoned by them.
That wasn't my argument.
No I don't.
I don't, exactly like how you don't know that He didn't and that they weren't. We're comparing notes, setting out our arguments. We're commenting on them and critiquing them. You've found my arguments wanting, and I have found yours the same.
Your answer was nothing but opinion based on nothing.
An opinion based on nothing is not an argument.
I don't either, but I do have reason to believe that they were created during the flood.
And you've made an unsupported claim that they were part of God's creation. The Bible is silent, so why do you make that assumption?
You made no argument whatsoever.
Yes.. you do... you claimed that God created them as part of creation. Where is some evidence of this?
You've made no argument whatsoever. There is evidence that these elements can and were created during the flood.
You've made no argument whatsover.
Great, then set it out, and also what is the test that can confirm that your hypothesis is correct? How can we look at the earth and see that radioactivity didn't exist here until the flood?
Because they exist. The Bible is silent on the matter of radioactivity, which means it neither supports mine or your view, but the earth is not silent on that radioactive elements are real today. And I don't have any reason, especially not a biblical one, to think that God didn't create the earth with radioactive elements.
Please educate yourself on the hydroplate theory and the evidence that it provides.
Again... this does NOT tell you HOW or WHEN they came into being.
Again... this does NOT tell you HOW or WHEN they came into being.
That wasn't an assumption, it was the conclusion of an argument that you claim I didn't make.
See?
Great. Set it out.
See?
lol no way. Give me the test that confirms your theory that radioactive elements didn't exist before the flood (~5000 years ago) and /or that the flood made them.
I know. It's your job to demonstrate that radioactive elements are not very good, so that you can claim that they only exist as part of a curse on creation. I do not think that they are not very good, you do; so show it.
Again... you made no argument. You expressed your assumption.
Watch the video that I posted.
:juggle:
Once again... neither of us know whether radioactive elements existed before the flood.
Please educate yourself on the THEORY that they were created during the flood. Then we have something to discuss, instead of just your opinion based on nothing.
Right, so cancer, caused by the sun.
Maybe instead of claiming that radioactive elements were made during the flood, you should argue that we used to be protected against radioactive elements but now since the curse we are susceptible? Just a thought.
Everybody knows that.
We see the organisms that God made at creation, plus those that came into being, or at least became troublesome and a nuisance, when He cursed it. If you're trying to draw a parallel between this and radioactive elements, then show me that they are inherently not good. I don't have any more reason to think that uranium is not good than I do water, wood, or rock, all of which can cause grave bodily injury and even death when mistreated or by accident.