Post Reply
Page 3 of 11  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Floods are not the mechanism that produces fossils
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 2:29PM #21
HouseofDavid
HouseofDavid
Posts: 548

Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:06PM, 57 wrote:

Do I need to present a list of cultures that have accounts of a great flood ?  


No, because they all do.  Floods are a common occurrence.  I am disappointed.  I thought you were going to present a list of cultures that have preserved accounts of mountains being thrust up 10,000, 20,000, even 29,000 feet, right in their backyard, over the span of less than 4,500 years.  I mean, we're talking 2, 3, 4, 5 feet/year - do ya think someone would notice after a couple of generations ?
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 2:53PM #22
HouseofDavid
HouseofDavid
Posts: 548

Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:01PM, HouseofDavid wrote:

1.  Flatten the earth ?  But the scriptures say that the ark came to rest on the MOUNTAINS of Ararat, not the PLAINS of Ararat.   Which is it ?


I noticed you failed to google it also. 


See Question 1.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 2:57PM #23
57
57
Posts: 16,343

seems like my evo-friends are having a hard time.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:05PM #24
d_p_m
d_p_m
Posts: 7,603

Apr 15, 2012 -- 8:57AM, 57 wrote:


Apr 7, 2012 -- 8:45AM, Blü wrote:


How about a genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, each bottleneck dating to 2348 BCE?



Why would there be a bottleneck?



Still haven't learned any biology, I see.


Not only must there be bottlenecks, the bottlenecks must have certain characteristics for the biblical myth to have any truth to it.


There are bottlenecks... dating to different times tens of thousands of years apart. And many species do not have bottlenecks.


The flood/ark myth fails... which you would already know if you'd read and understood the posts here that explained why it couldn't possibly be true.

---------------------------------------------------------
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand?
---------------------------------------------------------
Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics.
---------------------------------------------------------
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:07PM #25
d_p_m
d_p_m
Posts: 7,603

Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:57PM, 57 wrote:


seems like my evo-friends are having a hard time.




That's because it takes more time to type a coherent scientific explanation with references to real evidence than repeat a pointless question based on a flawed misunderstanding of reality.

---------------------------------------------------------
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand?
---------------------------------------------------------
Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics.
---------------------------------------------------------
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:12PM #26
d_p_m
d_p_m
Posts: 7,603

Apr 15, 2012 -- 8:57AM, 57 wrote:


I can look it up for you....but if you were to flatten out the earth surface...how high would the water be?  Go ahead, google it. Post the answer.




Google it??!!


Oh, dear. You mean you can't calculate the answer from first principles and post a solid argument with a cogent explanation of your logic and mathematics?


Really, that doesn't even need high school math and science... grade school should have given you those tools...

---------------------------------------------------------
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand?
---------------------------------------------------------
Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics.
---------------------------------------------------------
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:19PM #27
HouseofDavid
HouseofDavid
Posts: 548

Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:57PM, 57 wrote:

seems like my evo-friends are having a hard time.


Like, yeah.  Lets see, the flood sediments were soft enough to fold; but they were not so soft that they didn't slump into mush when they were lifted 29,035 in Tibet in the past 4,500 years, during which time no one cared to describe the process in their recorded history ?  Just how soft or hard were these sediments ?



 
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:21PM #28
57
57
Posts: 16,343

Apr 15, 2012 -- 3:19PM, HouseofDavid wrote:


Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:57PM, 57 wrote:

seems like my evo-friends are having a hard time.


Like, yeah.  Lets see, the flood sediments were soft enough to fold; but they were not so soft that they didn't slump into mush when they were lifted 29,035 in Tibet in the past 4,500 years, during which time no one cared to describe the process in their recorded history ?  Just how soft or hard were these sediments ?



 




You forgot...there were only 8 people alive when it happened.


..then again the book of Psalms mentions it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:26PM #29
d_p_m
d_p_m
Posts: 7,603

Apr 15, 2012 -- 3:21PM, 57 wrote:


Apr 15, 2012 -- 3:19PM, HouseofDavid wrote:


Apr 15, 2012 -- 2:57PM, 57 wrote:

seems like my evo-friends are having a hard time.


Like, yeah.  Lets see, the flood sediments were soft enough to fold; but they were not so soft that they didn't slump into mush when they were lifted 29,035 in Tibet in the past 4,500 years, during which time no one cared to describe the process in their recorded history ?  Just how soft or hard were these sediments ?




You forgot...there were only 8 people alive when it happened.




Wrong again. The last bottleneck in the human genome dates to about 40-70,000 yars ago, when our 'ancestor-stream' narrowed to a few thousand individuals.


There was no flood. There was no ark.

---------------------------------------------------------
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand?
---------------------------------------------------------
Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics.
---------------------------------------------------------
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Apr 15, 2012 - 3:27PM #30
HouseofDavid
HouseofDavid
Posts: 548

Apr 15, 2012 -- 3:12PM, d_p_m wrote:

Apr 15, 2012 -- 8:57AM, 57 wrote:

I can look it up for you....but if you were to flatten out the earth surface...how high would the water be?  Go ahead, google it. Post the answer.




Google it??!!


Oh, dear. You mean you can't calculate the answer from first principles and post a solid argument with a cogent explanation of your logic and mathematics?


Really, that doesn't even need high school math and science... grade school should have given you those tools...


Hint for 57:   V = (4/3)Πr3
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 11  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
Post Reply
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook