"The Exodus Revealed" Video II

quote:

---

We are claiming there are none being used by the researchers we are referencing. If you think there are, it's up to you to produce. That's what you demand of us. Turn about's fair play.

---

So, in other words, the researchers you are referencing can think of no other explanations for how the evidence appears as it does? None at all?Then they are not doing science.If you are saying that the ONLY explanation the researchers could ever accept is the one they WANTED TO FIND BEFORE THEY EVER LOOKED AT THE EVIDENCE, then they are not doing science.

quote:

---

If you think there are better alternatives, show us something better. That burden lies on you, again, just the same as you demand of us.

---

Every good scientist who is expert in their field (especially if it is a frontier) understands that there will be a lot of trial and error. There will be a lot of attempts to explain phenomena and not all of them will be correct, in part or in full.As such, every scientific paper that is published addresses any alternative explanations that exist or that can be imagined, or that need to be explored in future work.Where in this research do they mention, say, that the Egyptians have no record whatsoever of the Jews being enslaved in Egypt?

quote:

---

Please refrain from cluttering the thread with unspecified questions and begin producing productive input posts.

---

If you had cared, over the years, to actually familiarize yourself with the format of real scientific papers at all, buz, you might have learned that my request would be easy to find in pretty much any paper.Scientists bend over backwards to show in their papers how they might be wrong, and how other research that has already been done contradicts theirs.It's all part of the rigor of real scientific methodology. Scientists aren't allowed to just show how they think they are right, they also have to show how they might be wrong.Where have these researchers listed where they might be wrong?

quote:

---

.....And if you will approach this thread objectively and in good faith, you will not only acknowledge the evidence that has been presented but will learn all you can about the facts of the matter as those who've produced the evidence have.

---

...but if I cannot trust that the researchers have followed an objective, corrected-for-bias, rigorously self-doubting scientific protocol, how can I remain open minded?I cannot trust the researchers to have done their research properly. chances are, they are simply cerry picking the evidence and are avoiding talking about alternative explanations.

quote:

---

Yours is obviously preformed and/or eroded. Ours is obviously a one time solid boulder split down the middle.

---

What are the differences that make it "obvious" to you? If you put two samples in front of me, how can I tell the difference between rock that appears to have been eroded or preformed with a split and one that is a one time solid boulder split down the middel thousands of years ago?Please be very specific in your explanation.

quote:

---

Ours has obvious waterflow evidence as in the Biblical record which your doesn't have.

---

What is this "obvious" water flow evidence?What does it look like, what are it's typical characteristics, does it appear anywhere else in the world, etc.?IOW, how can I know, given two examples, which one is water flow eviodence and whaich one isn't?also, please explain how this water flow evidence is important to this specific case, and why finding it in this location confirms your theory. Would finding it elsewhere be problematic?Please be very sopecific in your explanation.

Charles clarifies his insults: "I would like it to be known that I don't consider all creationists to bullshitters - only those who carry on with such nonsense like this."Amazing, he still insists that a very intelligent scientist named Lennart Moller, who works with the people who hand out the Nobel Prize in medicine, is nothing but a "bullshitter" --Again, my dear Charles, this is why no one will enter into your debate challenge -- because of your obvious bias against listening to any of the evidence or our interpretation of the evidence, and the degree to which to are willing to insult and mock people.Creationists can provide the names of hundreds of scientists who believe the Bible, but you block all that out -- you don't want to listen to it -- you just don't want "God" to figure into science.I feel very sorry for you -- terribly so -- because until you get to the point of realizing that God is REAL, you are just not seeing the whole picture.You need to get in touch with a scientist that you can talk with face-to-face who can tell you how he knows that God is real -- you really need to overcome this locked mind set that repeats this negative mantra in your head -- there are scientists in all sorts of fields who acknowledge the existence of God!Science can only take you so far -- then, as all these scientists have realized, there's a point at which you can go no further with science, and God is there to supply the answers.Come on, Charles -- push it a little further -- dig a little deeper -- pay attention to Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" -- and maybe then you will understand how Lennart Moller can look at the TONS of evidence that he has for the Exodus site and how he can easily come to the conclusion that everything he sees tells him that it perfectly matches the Bible story of the Exodus.Try to grow beyond the "bullshitter" mind set, because frankly the "bullshit" is the bias that is inside your own head -- why not try flushing it out and try growing as a true scientist who honestly acknowledges that God is the ONLY true source for the ultimate answers in science? If you honestly respect science, then you will do some honest delving into its depths.

Buzsaw -- I think you guys have done your best to share the Exodus material with these folks. But as is with these types of message threads, certain nay-sayers on these forums consider it their "life's mission" to shoot down anything and everything you post --I used to work briefly for the late Carl Sagan when I lived in DC in 1987, and in his "Demon Haunted World" book he observed that the field of science is often a field based upon rudeness and one-upmanship wherein "the Quickest Gun in the West" Syndrome often prevails -- that's where other scientists immediately try to do their best to "shoot down" any new idea -- they think it's "normal" and acceptible behavior, which is how these people on this forum have also behaved -- but it's just normal fallen human being behavior.There's really not much hope to win over any of these people who have posted and reposted their negative opinions -- if anyone was truly interested in what we've posted, those people would privately contact you to carry on a private conversation that can happen without the obnoxious posters interferring! The person would do it like Nichodemus did when he privately approached Jesus without any of the other pharisees around --You folks have done a good job of attempting to share the Exodus material with these folks -- but you will never succeed on these forums -- but hopefully a few "lurkers" WILL be impressed with what you have shared, but I think that they will be few and far between!It's unfortunate, but it's the world we live in.

schrafinator wrote: "the researchers you are referencing can think of no other explanations for how the evidence appears as it does?"We fully expect people to offer alternative interpretations -- that is normal and acceptible -- but at the same time there is a point reached when the alternative ideas are just being STUBBORN and FOOLISH DIVERSIONS that are nothing but persistent sorry attempts at disagreeing!Sure, if we only had the evidence of coral shapes as our "only" evidence, then you folks would be OK in ripping them apart -- but we don't just have the coral objects, WE HAVE EVERYTHING MENTIONED IN THE ENTIRE EXODUS STORY! We have the route, we have the crossing site, we have a Mt. Sinai that has evidence of everything written in the biblical account --Which is why the insistent "alternative ideas" just don't wash.You guys are ignoring TOO MUCH evidence just so you can be contrary -- and if you choose to be contrary about "all" the evidence, then you're just being blind and should honestly admit you're biased and you have no intention of ever accepting any evidence that proves the Bible.

Last night I re-watched the 90-minute interview that I have on video of Lennart Moller appearing on 4 TV programs of "Prophecy in the News" where he answered questions and talked about his Exodus book and video. I watched to see if there was anything there that might answer any of your guys' questions --Moller said he has travelled a lot, he said he'd been to 60 countries -- he described how difficult it was to dive in the Gulf of Aqaba (as anyone who has been there will tell you) -- he discussed how the name "Red Sea" is really not in the Bible, it's just a poor translation of "yam suph" --One very interesting point he mentioned was that Solomon kept his fleet of ships in the "yam suph" -- which HAD to be the northern area of the Gulf of Aqaba -- so the "yam suf" of the Gulf of Aqaba is also the "yam suph" where the crossing happened!Why would Solomon keep his fleet over in the Gulf of Suez??Nope, Solomon's fleet was in the "yam suph" -- the Gulf of Aqaba!Moller also explained that we do not know exactly how deep the landbridge is in its deeper section -- but there is an obvious beach-area land extension on both sides of the gulf there at the Nuweiba beach area.Accept it or don't -- it's your choice.

Jim:The post you are responding to said It dealt with a very specific question.You respond with something about Solomon's Fleet (something certainly nor related to the Exodus or the period when you claim it happened). You also use the assertions of Moller to support other assertions of Moller. That's like saying Carl Sagan is right because Carl Sagan says he is right.The resaon that the vast majority of folk don't buy into the premise presented in the Exodus Video is because you folk have no support for the assertions and claims that you make.I have asked a few simple questions.How is the split rock any different than any similar erossion example from all over the world?What was used to connect the rock to the Exodus?What dating methods were used?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar asked this question: "Why would they want to prove one of their own prophets wrong or hide evidence that supports their own prophets?"Quit thinking like an open-minded American!The Moslems already "KNOW" that they are right about their prophets, they don't need any verification done to know that Moses was a prophet of God and that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia!It's just that they REFUSE to do anything to help either Christians or Jews support their belief systems! WHICH IS WHY THEY WON'T LET US IN TO DOCUMENT OR STUDY JEBEL EL LAWZ!BTW, how long do you think you would last in a Moslem culture believing your atheistic beliefs? You'd be DEAD, that's what you'd be!We are dealing with a very touchy, very difficult situtaion with trying to verify anything that is in Saudi Arabia -- so if you want to get mad at somebody, stop getting mad at US because we share this Exodus information with you, get mad at the Saudis who won't let archaeologists into their country to study the site and settle the issue!

jar, the Rock at Horeb is a very unique rock -- there are no other 5-story tall split boulders in Saudi Arabia near the Jebel el Lawz site -- and this has been shared with you on ALL our websites and in Moller's book and video, ALL of which you just don't seem to want to pay attention to!The rock is UNIQUE, it is UNLIKE any other huge boulders in the area!It is on the back side of Mt. Sinai, EXACTLY where the biblical story tells us that it was!It has obvious water erosion signs that millions of gallons of water flowed over its base, YET IT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A "DESERT" AREA THAT GETS VERY LITTLE RAINFALL!Again, what we told you this on our websites --Do more tests on it? Sure -- we'd love to -- except that the Saudis won't let anybody in there to do it!!!We can clearly identify it as the Rock at Horeb -- you don't have to believe us, you can believe anything you wish.This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-07-2004 11:28 AM

Once again, shell game. Attack the messenger and change the subject.You did not answer my question. If you could prove that Mt. Sinai was in Saudi Arabia that would simply add one more holy site to the existing list.Why would Saudi Arabia (home to two of the most Sacred sites in Islam) not want to add yet another one?You allege that they don't want to help you support your particular beleief system. So don't support it. Support the story of Moses and the Exodus from the Islamic belief system. It's the same GOD, the same tablets, the same story.Your excuses are just plain silly. ISLAM accepts all the same tales from the Old Testament as Christianity and Judaism. The stories are all about the same (although women sure come out better in the Islamic version of the Garden of Eden).So answer the question. Why would Saudi Arabia (home to two of the most Sacred sites in Islam) not want to add yet another one?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, shell game.What are the visible differences between water and wind erosion. What are the obvious signs of water erosion that are different from wind erosion and heat cracks?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar jar writes: "You did not answer my question. If you could prove that Mt. Sinai was in Saudi Arabia that would simply add one more holy site to the existing list."Are you really that dumb?MT. SINAI UPHOLDS THE "JEWS" VICTORY OVER THE EGYPTIANS!MT. SINAI UPHOLDS THE JEWISH LAW OVER THE MOSLEM LAW!MT. SINAI IS A !!!!JEWISH!!!! VICTORY STORY!!Why are you being so dense about this?The Saudis are afraid that the Jews would want to reclaim the site!!!This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-07-2004 11:33 AM

jar: "What are the obvious signs of water erosion that are different from wind erosion and heat cracks?"The water erosion "flows" down over the base rocks just like water would flow -- wind cannot "blow" in that area to erode the stone, wind would mainly effect the edges of rocks!This erosion is obviously water erosion.I would post pictures if I knew how to do it here .....

Once again, shell game and misdirection.Islam has always recognized the Jews and Jewish Prophets. Moses and the story of Exodus are as much a part of Islamic History as Jewish History. Nonsense. Since the Exodus and the story of Moses is part of the Islamic tradition, how could it possibly uphold Jewish Law over Muslem Law. It is part of the Islamic history.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

http://EvC Forum: Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

---

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com