Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   PROOF OF GOD
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 451 of 739 (122786)
07-07-2004 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 449 by NosyNed
07-07-2004 5:20 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Now about post 400 --- have you agreed that the list of claims are those that your sources make? Do you agree that is what, through those sources, you are claiming?
Yes, of course.
Now, about the CENTER of world's land mass claim:
Here is a site that reflects your view:
http://www.catchpenny.org/pyramid.html
Here is a site defending my sources:
http://www.thairuralnet.org/sunit/pyramid2.html
Please review them thoroughly.
Now go to this site and get a whiff of the type of math employed used to determine the height by anti-supenaturalist Flinders Petrie. Note that Petrie's height is not anywhere near 5449. Rutherford will refute Petrie when I post his math ASAP. The point is to get a feel for the math !
petrie Click on "Levels up the Pyramid"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by NosyNed, posted 07-07-2004 5:20 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 452 by pink sasquatch, posted 07-07-2004 7:13 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 453 by Percy, posted 07-07-2004 7:18 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 454 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 7:22 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 456 by Percy, posted 07-07-2004 7:33 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 452 of 739 (122792)
07-07-2004 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 6:31 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Hi WILLOWTREE,
I checked out the links you provided.
Regarding: http://www.thairuralnet.org/sunit/pyramid2.html
If I were you, I probably wouldn't reference this particular site. This is a criticism of the site, not you. The site uses at least five different pyramid heightsin the course of its discussion - far from consistent. It appears that each time a height needs to be stated, the site chooses the one that will give them the desired result in the calculation they are doing. The site also doesn't state how measurements were obtained, and many statements directly contradict assertions you have made in this thread - so it does NOT defend your sources as you claim.
The Petrie site DOES contain the kind of information we are interested in for this discussion. As you state, the height is much higher than your claim - the Petrie measurement apparently includes the phantom capstone, and so is irrelevant for direct comparison.
We should probably wait until you get the methods and calculations from your sources to continue - hopefully they are at least as detailed as those in the Petrie site.
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 6:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:26 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 453 of 739 (122794)
07-07-2004 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 6:31 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
WillowTree writes:
Now, about the CENTER of world's land mass claim:
Here is a site that reflects your view:
http://www.catchpenny.org/pyramid.html
Here is a site defending my sources:
http://www.thairuralnet.org/sunit/pyramid2.html
Please review them thoroughly.
Neither site provides any evidence whatsoever.
Before you can argue on the evidence, you first have to know the difference between an assertion and evidence. Those websites both make assertions about the "center of land mass" issue, but neither provides any evidence.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 6:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 454 of 739 (122796)
07-07-2004 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 6:31 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Willowtree
From your referenced site. http://www.thairuralnet.org/sunit/pyramid2.html we get this for example.
Piazzi Smyth discovered in 1865 that the proportion of the height to the width of the pyramid was 10:9 and amazingly if we rearrange the proportion to 109 time 5813 inches (the height of the pyramid), then we get the estimation of 91840 miles which is the mean of the radius of the earth’s orbit to the sun.
If by mean they are refering top average then they are so far off as to be pathetic. This is not even the mean of the radius of the moon to Earth.
The dimension of the pyramid is also very interesting. The height of the apothem is around 186 meters. If we use the number of Egypt mean geographical degree of 110,827 meters, divide it by the ancient measurement unit called stadium which equal to around 600 meters By this calculation (110827/600), we then have the answer of 184.72 or estimate to 185 meters, which almost equal to the height of the apothem.
Very interesting indeed since the measurement called stadia is a measurement of 12.5 inches or slight over one foot.This is off by a significant amount and renders the calculation made as useless.
The pyramid sides are slightly bowed in, and amazingly the curvature is the exact opposite of an earth’s curvature surface. Which mean if we could put the pyramid bowed side on the curvature surface of the earth, it will be exact fit in together.
This is amazing but unfortunately there are no calculations to show this as being so however since the Earth is an oblate spheroid we must first determine where on the planet that curvature is measured. Also considering the ratio of the Earth to the pyramid being so large I suspect the effective curvature of the Earth over 9131 inches would approximate a straight line to a high degree.
I will allow others to go on with other math errors in the site but I think you get the idea.

You see a book lying on a table. You know there's a force due to gravity acting on that book. If you take that force (on the book and due to gravity) as the "action," what then is the "reaction" as required by Newton's third law?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 6:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 464 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-08-2004 3:00 PM sidelined has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 455 of 739 (122797)
07-07-2004 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by pink sasquatch
07-07-2004 7:13 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Pinkie:
Just for the record:
The link you critiqued in the post I am responding to was ONLY offered to support my sources for the CENTER of land mass claim.
Go back and re-read the initial post - I only linked for that particular claim - not the height.
The Petrie site was linked to show how complicated the math is.
If you think Rutherford is going to be different ......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by pink sasquatch, posted 07-07-2004 7:13 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by pink sasquatch, posted 07-07-2004 7:37 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 460 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 8:37 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 461 by wmscott, posted 07-07-2004 11:25 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 456 of 739 (122800)
07-07-2004 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 6:31 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
WillowTree writes:
Now go to this site and get a whiff of the type of math employed used to determine the height by anti-supenaturalist Flinders Petrie. Note that Petrie's height is not anywhere near 5449. Rutherford will refute Petrie when I post his math ASAP. The point is to get a feel for the math !
petrie Click on "Levels up the Pyramid"
There's no math at this website that I can find, just many, many figures, some of which represent direct measurements, while others are derived values, none of which looks like it would require any more than a knowledge of basic high school geometry.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 6:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 457 of 739 (122802)
07-07-2004 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 7:26 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
I only linked for that particular claim - not the height.
Please think about this for a moment, WILLOWTREE - you are asking us to look at a source and only believe the part that you want us to believe, and that the rest in incorrect. If you yourself agree that 95% of the site is incorrect, why should we believe the 5% that you are using as evidence?
This is why I said I wouldn't use it as a source if I were you - it is obviously flawed and in most cases contradicts what you have been saying (in addition to contradicting itself).
Your sources should be reliable, not a mishmash of figures that you pick and choose from...
The Petrie site was linked to show how complicated the math is.
If you think Rutherford is going to be different ......
What part of "hopefully they are at least as detailed as those in the Petrie site" didn't you understand?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:48 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 458 of 739 (122808)
07-07-2004 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 457 by pink sasquatch
07-07-2004 7:37 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Please think about this for a moment, WILLOWTREE - you are asking us to look at a source and only believe the part that you want us to believe, and that the rest in incorrect. If you yourself agree that 95% of the site is incorrect, why should we believe the 5% that you are using as evidence?
By this same logic THEN we must toss everything Charles Darwin claimed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by pink sasquatch, posted 07-07-2004 7:37 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 459 by Percy, posted 07-07-2004 7:58 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 459 of 739 (122811)
07-07-2004 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 7:48 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
WillowTree writes:
By this same logic THEN we must toss everything Charles Darwin claimed.
Very few Forum Guidelines are enforced in Free For All, but staying on topic is one of them. If you'd like to argue this point you'll have to open a new thread.
You're understandably eager to defend your point of view, but wandering off topic and repeating unsupported assertions has already proven counterproductive. Wait patiently until you get your evidence, then post it. Until you have your evidence in hand you need do nothing.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 460 of 739 (122815)
07-07-2004 8:37 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 7:26 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Willowtree
The location of the great pyramid of Giza is at 30 degree 10’’ Longitude. And 30 degree Latitude. Which divide the Delta legion of Egypt into equal areas. The Delta legion is a term used by Greek for the part of Old Egypt which geometrically look like the letter Delta of Greek latter. This location of pyramid also located at the exact center of the Earth’s land mass
To continue on in rebuttal exactly how is the center of the Earths' land mass calculated on a sphere? The map does not do a very good job of providing evidence of this. Is the term mass actually appropriate to this point or are you speaking of land area? Do we include the land beneath the oceans of the planet?

You see a book lying on a table. You know there's a force due to gravity acting on that book. If you take that force (on the book and due to gravity) as the "action," what then is the "reaction" as required by Newton's third law?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 461 of 739 (122836)
07-07-2004 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object
07-07-2004 7:26 PM


proof that the great Pyramid is not of divine origin or significance
Dear Willowtree;
In e-mail you asked for my proof that the great Pyramid is not of divine origin or significance, so here it is.
The scripture cited to support the Great Pyramid as being an altar to Jehovah God is, (Isaiah 19:19) "In that day there will prove to be an altar to Jehovah in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar to Jehovah beside its boundary." which can not be a reference to the Great Pyramid for a very simple reason. (Exodus 20:25) "if you should make an altar of stones for me, you must not build them as hewn stones. In the event that you do wield your chisel upon it, then you will profane it." (Deuteronomy 27:5-6) (Joshua 8:30-31) (Judges 6:26) (1 Kings 18:30-32) So there is no way the great Pyramid with it's many cut stones would be acceptable to God, it would be profane.
Foreigners were not allowed to share in building the temple or even the wall of Jerusalem because as non worshipers of Jehovah, they have no share in true worship. (Ezra 4:3) "and the rest of the heads of the paternal houses of Israel said to them: "YOU have nothing to do with us in building a house to our God, for we ourselves shall together build to Jehovah the God of Israel," (Nehemiah 2:20) "we must build; but YOU yourselves have no share, nor just claim, nor memorial in Jerusalem." So scripturally there is no way Egyptians could have built an acceptable altar to Jehovah.
Also Isaiah 19:19 is written in symbolic language and is not describing an actual altar, this symbolic altar is stated to be a pillar. A pillar is a tall narrow cylinder, not a pyramid. The Egypt described here is not literal Egypt, it refers to the world alienated from God. (Revelation 11:8) "the great city which is in a spiritual sense called Sodom and Egypt," and the pillar (1 Timothy 3:15) "is the congregation of [the] living God, a pillar and support of the truth." (Revelation 3:12) So what Isaiah 19:19 is saying that there will be true worshipers of Jehovah standing firm in the middle of a world that is in spiritual sense like Egypt and yet they will be on the border of that land because they are soon to enter God's promises. So no reference here to the Great Pyramid or any other.
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-07-2004 7:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by Gilgamesh, posted 07-08-2004 12:17 AM wmscott has not replied
 Message 466 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-08-2004 3:38 PM wmscott has replied

Gilgamesh
Inactive Member


Message 462 of 739 (122850)
07-08-2004 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 461 by wmscott
07-07-2004 11:25 PM


Re: proof that the great Pyramid is not of divine origin or significance
wmscott wrote:
Also Isaiah 19:19 is written in symbolic language and is not describing an actual altar, this symbolic altar is stated to be a pillar. A pillar is a tall narrow cylinder, not a pyramid. The Egypt described here is not literal Egypt, it refers to the world alienated from God. (Revelation 11:8) "the great city which is in a spiritual sense called Sodom and Egypt," and the pillar (1 Timothy 3:15) "is the congregation of [the] living God, a pillar and support of the truth." (Revelation 3:12) So what Isaiah 19:19 is saying that there will be true worshipers of Jehovah standing firm in the middle of a world that is in spiritual sense like Egypt and yet they will be on the border of that land because they are soon to enter God's promises. So no reference here to the Great Pyramid or any other.
Bingo.
1) The majority of Christians do not interpret Isaiah 19: 19 as refering to the Pyramids.
2) By Willow's silence, I suspect that the Gemantric calim about Isaiah 19: 19, 20 equaling 5449 (or any other figure debatably close to the height of an un-capped pyramd) is dependant upon some very unique Hebrew translation, and some very dodgey maths.
The Bible (and Christian God) link to the Pyramid link is not sustained.
Let's debate whether aliens built it or not.
Sorry Nosyned and others for complicating things and distracting Willow on the previous page of this thread.
I'm out of here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 461 by wmscott, posted 07-07-2004 11:25 PM wmscott has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by Percy, posted 07-08-2004 9:50 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 463 of 739 (122909)
07-08-2004 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 462 by Gilgamesh
07-08-2004 12:17 AM


Re: proof that the great Pyramid is not of divine origin or significance
Gilgamesh writes:
By Willow's silence...
I've rarely seen a poster more determinedly bent on self destruction, but perhaps WillowTree is finally learning to practice discretion.
[text=black]The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.
-Proverbs 12:15[/text]
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 462 by Gilgamesh, posted 07-08-2004 12:17 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 464 of 739 (123022)
07-08-2004 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 454 by sidelined
07-07-2004 7:22 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Sidelined:
I appreciate your input.
BUT, the site you critiqued was only offered for its center of world's land mass value.
This is amazing but unfortunately there are no calculations to show this as being so however since the Earth is an oblate spheroid we must first determine where on the planet that curvature is measured. Also considering the ratio of the Earth to the pyramid being so large I suspect the effective curvature of the Earth over 9131 inches would approximate a straight line to a high degree.
The Earth is a "sphere" flattened at the poles, but in reality it is really equatorial protuberance via centrifugal force which accounts for the true spheric defect.
I am going to recover the measurements and math which evidence that the Pyramid's slight concavity doubled equals the curvature of the Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 454 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 7:22 PM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by NosyNed, posted 07-08-2004 3:07 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 465 of 739 (123023)
07-08-2004 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 464 by Cold Foreign Object
07-08-2004 3:00 PM


Re: REGARDING EVIDENCE
Thanks WT. We will finally be able to progress a bit when we see the details.
When you say:
"I am going to recover the measurements and math which evidence that the Pyramid's slight concavity doubled equals the curvature of the Earth."
I presume you are going to get all the other caluclations as well?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 464 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-08-2004 3:00 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024