Meert / Brown Debate

Well, probably the reason why most people don't care to debate with this guy, and or discuss the theorys he presents is they feel he's an idiot. If you havent searched around or looked up what other websites say about this guy, you really should. I mean, lets look at a few of his theorys logically...1. The water all trapped beneath the crust, pillars of rock holding up the continents and land above.Sure, that's all well and good. But anyone with any knowledge of mining and or a plain old science book could tell you that the further down you dig, the warmer things get. The heat and pressure would just keep rising on these undergound pockets of water since they have no place to go. Exactly how hot would things be? Well, lets just say it'd be the worlds fastest steam fryer, hot food in hundreths of a second. 2. The releasing water sends rock and other particles into a low and brief orbit to later rain back down upon the earth as ice.Whoa, hold on there... Do you have any idea how fast water would have to move in order to actual get into even the lowest of possible "orbit" conditions? And secondly, we already know from common sense that pockets of water that deep are gonna be hot. What happens to your hand when lift the edge of a lid of a pot of boiling water... steam burns sound familiar? Well, there goes half the earth to the giant vegetable steamer...3. Ice raining from the sky afterword.This ones common sense too. The higher something gets, the faster it starts to fall before the air gets thick enough to start slowing it down again. Since this theory involves water shooting, and I quote "high above the atmosphere," it falls apart. Anything falling from "high above the atmosphere" would experience a normal re-entry just like anything else we shoot into space and be super-heated and melted by the air friction on its way down. Kind of hard to bury something in ice that melts on its way.Then we have the assumptions he continuously makes throughout the entire theory...A mammoth cant survive in the cold because an elephant can't.
Guess that means anything that looks alike must be alike.The speed of light must have been faster in the past to make the universe look older, all because an atomic clock can't keep 100% perfectly perfect time.Animals and plants had to be preserved by the hydroplate theory and water lenses because they became flattened.
And somehow they wouldnt become flattened by years of layers and layers of dirt, ice, debris and water piling up on top of them?Animals and plants couldnt have evolved in stages because we've studied up to 3000 generations of a fruit fly and not seen changes.
Never mind millions upon millions of generations in the wild, 3000 should predict everything.Evolution isnt plausible because fossil records don't show the animals evolving over time.
Yes, and of course things become fossilized isnt a difficult process and it's not possible that largs parts of land where things evolved are on the coastlines that are now underwater because of raised water levels?I could go on and on with 100's of more things from his website, all the same. His way is just as much a guess as other ways but his way has to be right because he says so. that's basically what I got out of reading his theories.

---

~~Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times.~~