Quoting: Lada D
but have been proven wrong so many times, and their evidence picked apart and shown the holes in it, that they are no longer respected by their peers. That happens a lot. Someone attempts to prove something in the bible actually took place, and often will go to extreem measures to make their data match up to what they're saying. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10310280
Let's step out of the Bible for a moment and address the Troy question, above and also the dating of the Pyramid/Sphynx.
The Pyramid/Sphynx "Mainstream" viewpoint regarding it's age and construction is fruitbat crazy, unsupportable, and yet it's bullet-proof because questioning it will get you ostracized by those who support it.
They are still trying to tell us the Pyramids were tombs. Maybe a couple of shitty copycat pyramids out in the desert were shitty tombs for shitty Post-empirial Pharoahs, but not the Great one.
Water erosion damage at the base of the Sphynx shows it existed at a time when the area was fertile and had a great deal of rain.
Yes, let us take the age of the sphinx into question.
Whether the current belief of its age is the opinion of
All archeologists, or whether most actually believe the dating is probably vastly off. To say that the dating is wrong is one thing, but to say that the dating is wrong, and everyone supports is because of some vast conspiracy., well.. that is an entirely different animal altogether.
I'm quite sure that most egyptologists will tell you without question that the dating is most likely off, and also I know plenty of archeological programs, that do discuss the fact that dating could be off.
Does that point to liberal leftist agendas? No. Come on.
What most will believe, based on evidence such as fossil placement, and better dating techniques than let's say carbon 14, is the difference between knowing, and guessing. We can guess that the age of the sphynx is older than current estimates, but we cannot change the properties of a wave. Do you see the difference. Science is evolving, always, but that doesn't mean that all the evidence against a flood will someday be different, the data remains, it cannot be changed just because science changes, or opinions change. There's a difference there. We can't say that because they found Troy (they believe) that it is inevitable they will find Noah's Ark. Besides the very obvious inconsistencies, and the fact that a task like his was virtually impossible, not just in his time, but any time. Not possible, there's no discussion about it. A child could see that superhuman feats do not occur in the world. It's a real problem of logistics, that no amount of thinking outside the box will fix.
I stand behind science, and respect it and what it has done and continues to do to help the human race. I refuse to believe that science has anything to with religion, simply based on the fact that it doesn't need to in order to operate and function. God isn't needed in the equation. If some would like to keep god on the wayside while being a scientist that is a personal choice, not an obligation.
I just don't see it. And I honestly think the reason that you see it, is because without the evidence provided by science to secure beliefs, then if holds no purpose for you, and therefore, must be evil. I don't see how troy, or anything else is going to alter the truth of the matter.