Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,421 Year: 3,678/9,624 Month: 549/974 Week: 162/276 Day: 2/34 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "The Exodus Revealed" Video II
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 375 of 603 (132397)
08-10-2004 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by jar
08-10-2004 2:19 PM


Re: APROACHING 400! Posts
I agree we are going on for 1000 posts and still have not see a shread of evidence - what do we do wait till 3000? 5000?
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 08-10-2004 01:35 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by jar, posted 08-10-2004 2:19 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by Buzsaw, posted 08-11-2004 12:52 AM CK has not replied

Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 376 of 603 (132398)
08-10-2004 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by jar
08-10-2004 2:19 PM


Re: APROACHING 400! Posts
I don't know about you Jar, but I find this whole back and fourth, remarkably entertaining. A drama teacher of mine once said, "All good comedy bases it'self around a character or characters, who never learn."
I'll leave it up in the air as to who the comic relif is

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by jar, posted 08-10-2004 2:19 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by CK, posted 08-10-2004 2:40 PM Yaro has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 377 of 603 (132400)
08-10-2004 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 376 by Yaro
08-10-2004 2:37 PM


Re: APROACHING 400! Posts
you could be right - this could be the comedy thread and Brian's could be the one for serious debate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 376 by Yaro, posted 08-10-2004 2:37 PM Yaro has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 378 of 603 (132416)
08-10-2004 3:35 PM


Just be patient. It takes time to write articles.

~Lysimachus

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 379 of 603 (132418)
08-10-2004 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 369 by Amlodhi
08-10-2004 10:06 AM


Re: Moller's video...
Amlodhi,
I strongly recommend that you read these articles regarding Jebal Al Lawz.
Cornuke and Williams address many of the issues you have presented. I sure would quote the highlights if I had the time...but I have too many projects on the burner.
WHAT DO THE MOST ANCIENT SOURCES SAY ABOUT THE LOCATION OF HISTORICAL MT. SINAI?
Access denied
WHAT DID THE FIRST-CENTURY HISTORIAN JOSEPHUS SAY ABOUT THE LOCATION OF MOUNT SINAI?
Access denied
WHERE WAS THE "ARABIA" OF PAUL'S ARGUMENT IN GALATIONS 4?
Access denied
DID PAUL MEAN LITERAL "ARABIA" IN GALATIONS 4:25?"
Access denied
WHO BUILT THE ALTAR TO THE GOLDEN CALF AT THE BASE OF MT. SINAI?
Access denied
WHAT WAS JETHRO'S "LAND" IN EXODUS 18:27?
Access denied
You know what I say? Get a hold of what true research is and quit wasting your time primarily focusing on negative articles that are old-rehashed arguments thoroughly refuted. The above articles were written specifically to refute the links you provided. These are very long articles, and show with great certainty that Jebel Al Lawz is Mt. Sinai.
One reason you probably come to the conclusions you do is because you sit down and take the time to thoroughly read the negative articles on the net. My research is based on reading BOTH the negative and the positive. After reading most of the articles above, I was thoroughly convinced that Jebal Al Lawz can be non-other than the Mt. Sinai of scripture.
We will also be providing data that will analyze the blackened peak on Jebel Al Lawz, and how we believe it cannot be volcanic, yet burnt by severe temperatures. All the negative articles in the world arn't going to make a dent on the overall picture. We have to weigh the facts. Carefully.
My suggestion is to take a few hours to go over these links and then come back and show me what you think is wrong with them. They are absolutely LOADED,...much longer than any of the links you provided.
This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-10-2004 02:45 PM

~Lysimachus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Amlodhi, posted 08-10-2004 10:06 AM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by CK, posted 08-10-2004 3:59 PM Lysimachus has replied
 Message 391 by Amlodhi, posted 08-10-2004 9:11 PM Lysimachus has not replied
 Message 399 by Hydarnes, posted 08-11-2004 9:32 AM Lysimachus has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 380 of 603 (132423)
08-10-2004 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 379 by Lysimachus
08-10-2004 3:37 PM


Re: Moller's video...
You are still missing the point - we don't want an article, we don't want a lengthy essay - we just want a really simple list of the primary evidence and where it had been tested.
That will give us a basic to take this forward.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 3:37 PM Lysimachus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:38 PM CK has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 381 of 603 (132431)
08-10-2004 4:35 PM


Concerning the "Molecular Frequency Generator" arguments that have been raised. Has anyone taken the time to read this?:
------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been those who have been critical of Ron's discoveries. Honest criticism (when informed of the evidences) and personal opinion are the right of every individual. However, untruths and "half-truths" told by those who dispute the validity of the discoveries MUST be countered with the real and "whole" truth. Why? Because we believe that God has revealed these things for a purpose- HIS purpose, and that purpose is to vindicate His Word and His Truth. We have seen many people's lives changed after seeing these evidences, and we cannot allow others to speak words of deceit against them without making the truth available.
Recently a book came out called "The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark" by Sellier and Balsiger of "Sun International"- the same people who produced the documentary of the same name which aired on CBS in Feb. 1993. It is full of twisted tales and untruths clearly designed to try to discredit the real Noah's Ark. And I am sorry to have to present just a few evidences to show how completely unreliable this book is.
In 1992, we received numerous calls from Mr. Balsiger's office requesting the use of some of our photos and video in a "documentary" they were making on Noah's Ark. We told them we were not interested. In this "documentary", they featured all of the usual eye-witness "ark stories", none of which was backed-up by a single piece of hard evidence, except for one- the story of "George Jammal". I will now quote from TIME MAGAZINE, July 5, 1993, page 51, under title, "Phony Arkaeology" in one of many news reports about this documentary:
"`This piece of wood is so precious- and a gift from God.' These moving words were spoken reverently by George Jammal as he displayed the relic that he said had come from Noah's ark.... What the network didn't know- and didn't bother to find out- was that Jammal was a hoaxer and that large segments of its program were based on blatant and ludicrous pseudo science.... In fact, Jammal... has never been on Mount Ararat. ....[Jammal's] supposed venerable chunk of "ark" wood is a piece of contemporary pine Jammal soaked in juices and baked in the oven of his Long Beach, California, home.... But Jammal's tall tale was not the only misleading part of the special. Sun filled the two hours with a mixture of fact, conjecture, fantasy and arrant nonsense, while offering no clues as to which was which.... ...Larue [Gerald Larue, a professor emeritus of biblical history and archaeology at the University of Southern California] had been interviewed for an earlier Sun International production, and, after seeing that show, felt he had been set up as a straw man. It inspired him to coach George Jammal, an acquaintance, to perpetrate the hoax, intended to expose the shoddy research of Sun International... CBS defended it's role. `When we bought the special,' says a spokeswoman, `it was as an entertainment special, not a documentary.'..."
All through this book can be seen the same stories, (with Jammal's left out)- every kind of "word of mouth" claim is dramatically presented without tangible evidence. Then, in chapter 13 the tone changes from one of objectivity to disdain when speaking of Ron:
"The claims of self-proclaimed biblical archaeologist Ron Wyatt are nothing short of astonishing...."
They then list Ron's discoveries, the last of which reads-
"Noah's wife's grave. He claims he dug her up and found $75 million worth of gold in her grave-unfortunately later stolen by another."
Ron has NEVER claimed he dug up this grave. See page 23 of his book, "Discovered: Noah's Ark". These authors quote from Ron's book (their footnote on p. 293) which shows that they had the true facts but chose instead to make this libelous remark.
This book, while presenting all the theories about Noah's Ark which are based on no evidence other than eye-witness claims, (none of which agree with each other), then states about Ron,
"The bottom line seems to be that no hard evidence exists to prove any of his claims. When contacted during the preparation of this book, he refused to cooperate by supplying any evidence supporting his claims, whether related to the alleged ark site or any of his other finds."
This is simply not true. They never contacted us again after 1992 (when they ONLY asked for pictures and video of Noah's Ark for use in their documentary, which we refused to provide). They NEVER contacted us asking for information on ANYTHING ELSE for a book. And it is not true that "he [Ron] refused to cooperate by supplying any evidence supporting his claims, whether related to the alleged ark site or any of his other finds. These are simply false claims. No information was ever requested, nor were we even contacted.
Editors note: Now pay ATTENTION to the following regarding the Molecular Frequency Generator:
They go on to quote other people to refute the "evidence" which they claim Ron didn't have to start with. They quote John Baumgardner as saying that he doesn't believe in the pattern of metal lines in the site because he doesn't believe in the technique David Fasold used, which he called "a form of dowsing"- this refers to the molecular frequency generator. We have no problem with his stating his opinion; however, we want ALL of the facts told. What they DON"T tell you is that Ron found the metal lines in 1984 using conventional White's metal detectors AND that John and Ron used conventional metal detectors to verify the readings of the molecular frequency generator (mfg), (and this can be seen in both David's video, "1985 and 1986 Field Surveys", and our video, "Discovered- Noah's Ark." If you completely discount the use of the "mfg", the evidence of the metal lines is still present and verified by the conventional metal detectors.
Then, they quote him talking about the results of some later tests he participated in at the site using radar and taking core drills specimens, which led him to state:
"I've concluded that it's only a natural formation".
Yet, in his official report dated November 1987 on radar scans in July of that year, he wrote:
"We conclude that the data from our geophysical investigation in no way conflict with the proposition that the unusual boat-shaped site near Mahser village contains the remains of Noah's Ark."
After the core drills done in 1988, in his Aug. 19, 1988 form letter, he discussed finding "limonite" which is "hydrated oxide of iron" in the core drill specimens taken from the site:
"...during the months I have worked at the site, I have never seen this bright yellow material [limonite] anywhere in the fissures or exposures in the mudflow clay [the area around the ark site]. Because earlier investigations led us to suspect unusual amounts of iron in the site, these occurrences of limonite are of special interest as they could represent the rusted remains of metallic iron objects."
Furthermore, in this letter, written AFTER the tests which he claims led him to no longer believe in the site, he writes:
"We still cannot rule out the scenario that the ark of Noah had landed previously higher on the slope and during the mudslide event was swept downslope and caught on this ridge-shaped island of basement rock."
AFTER he had completed these tests, he still maintained that the results did not disprove that the site DID contain the ark.
They again quote him regarding a specimen he took from the site in 85, analyzed and reported was almost pure iron oxide- he sent the the analysis to Dave Fasold, which showed 60% - 91.84% FE2O3. Now keep in mind that he stated in his 1988 letter that he saw NO limonite (oxidized iron) OUTSIDE of the site and that it's presence IN THE SITE was :
"of special interest as they could represent the rusted remains of metallic iron objects".
But now, his conclusions are all different:
"There's absolutely nothing about this sample that would suggest it has anything to do with human activity or that it's man-made."
He has a right to his opinion, however the true facts are NOT presented to the reader. The test results have not changed. The pattern of metal readings is still present whether he believes the mfg is "dowsing" or not. Iron is found within the site but NOT directly outside of it.[
Then, there is the claim that
"Dr. Shockey, ark expeditioner and cultural anthropologist",..."actually clandestinely tested a chip off the `petrified wood exhibit' Wyatt shows at his speaking engagements.... The lab test results: `This is a sedimentary rock that has undergone metaporphism. It consisted of three distinct layers."
Now for the complete story. In July 1992, we saw a video program in which Carl Baugh of Glenrose, Texas, showed a fossilized human footprint (removed from the Paluxy River bed). The fossilized footprint had been cut into two sections, showing the inner compression marks. When Ron saw the quality of the cut, he called this man, whom we did not know, and asked him what facility sectioned his specimen. We had been unable to find a someone we felt comfortable enough with to allow them to cut a section off of the deck timber. Carl Baugh wouldn't tell Ron where he had this done, but he agreed to arrange to have our specimen sectioned if we brought it to Glenrose.
So, on July 21, 1992, Ron, Richard Rives, Randy Osborn and I all went to Texas. When we arrived, we found that no arrangements had been made to cut our deck timber. Carl then told us he had a friend who could cut it, but before we left to do this, he also said he would be happy to have the specimen tested for us at a "certain university" which did free testing for him. Since the specimen had already been tested and we knew the results, we were more than happy to allow him to do this. He then told us that the only stipulation was that we couldn't tell anyone the name of this "university" or else they would not continue to do free work for him. We all four agreed to keep the "university's" name confidential.
We then went to his friend's garage and I have 2 hours of video of them trying to cut the deck timber with every kind of saw imaginable, but with no success. Finally, a small ragged section was removed after going through 19 hacksaw blades. Carl agreed to send the specimen to the certain "university", have it tested, and return the specimen to us. When several months passed and nothing was heard from him, Richard Rives called him. He told Richard that "they" hadn't been able to determine what the specimen was and were now doing what was called, "the extra-terrestrial analysis", which he explained was a "test" performed on substances that couldn't be identified with conventional analyses. He said it was the most "thorough testing" a specimen could undergo.
More time passed. Richard called again and Carl said the tests were STILL not complete. Then, 6 months after our trip to Texas, we received a flimsy envelope in the mail. In it was a shattered glass slide and 2 letters- one from Carl Baugh and another proposing to be a "lab analysis". The slide with the thin-section of our specimen was shattered since it had been mailed unprotected in a paper envelope. The "analysis" was NOT from the "university" he had claimed he was going to send it to, but INSTEAD was from "Universal Petrographic, Geologic & Geochemical Consultants, Inc., 48 Rockridge Drive, N.E., Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87122." It was NOT addressed to Carl Baugh but to "Dr. M.D. Shockey, 7210-B Menaul Blvd., N.E., Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87110". It did NOT state that ANY analysis had been done but that the specimen had been given to them to be "thin sectioned".
Here is the entire "report"- "Dr. Shockey, Please be advised that the rock which was GIVEN TO ME FOR THIN SECTIONING APPEARS TO BE a meta-sediment. That is, a sedimentary rock that has undergone metamorphism. It consisted of three distinct layers." Signed, "Thomas Servilla, Director". Yet, in this book, the report is claimed to state: "`This IS a sedimentary rock that has undergone metaporphism.... There's a BIG difference between "IS" and "APPEARS TO BE".
Our complete specimen has never been returned to us by Carl Baugh and we have heard reports of Don Shockey and Carl Baugh appearing on TV programs displaying a piece of "wood from Noah's Ark", which they claim is laminated wood. Is this piece of "ark wood" the missing section from our deck timber? And remember that these men are actively involved in raising money to continue looking for Noah's Ark.
One last comment about this book- the next to the last photo in the photo section is claimed to have been taken "In 1986" when:
"...Colonel James Irwin returned to Mount Ararat having obtained a permit to fly a light plane around the mountain. A Dutch National Television crew headed by Jan Van der Bosch went with Colonel Irwin and shot a documentary. This amazing photograph was taken of what Dutch National Television believes is a portion of the ark protruding out of the icy snow."
This SAME PHOTOGRAPH is shown on p. 31 of John D. Morris' book, "Noah's Ark and the Lost World", 1988. But let's read what HE says about the same photo:
"A friend of mine took this photo by holding his camera out over the edge of a cliff. It was too dangerous for him to reach the edge and look over, but he was able to take several pictures of the hidden canyon below. When the film was developed and the pictures examined, a strange object that looks like Noah's Ark could be seen, just as these enlargements show...."
Friends, those who accept the "word" of ANYONE, regardless of their "credentials", without seeing THOROUGH documentation WILL BE DECEIVED.
http://www.wyattnewsletters.com/articles/bythywords.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------
The above post was provided primarily on the basis regarding the arguments made about the Molecular Frequency Generator. The above article establishes the fact that the Hieronymous machine was not all that was utilized on the site. So whether the Hierronymous machine is a joke or not, it is irrelivant in regard to the synonymous outputs made by the White's metal detectors and conventional versions.
This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-10-2004 03:42 PM

~Lysimachus

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by PaulK, posted 08-10-2004 4:58 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 382 of 603 (132434)
08-10-2004 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by CK
08-10-2004 3:59 PM


Re: Moller's video...
quote:
You are still missing the point - we don't want an article, we don't want a lengthy essay - we just want a really simple list of the primary evidence and where it had been tested.
That will give us a basic to take this forward.
It is short compared to what it could be. We're stressing ourselves enough as it is to not overdue the article. There is just too much valuable info to disregard. It's not so much lengthy, but time consuming. A lot of highlights must be presented in systematic order. It's pretty basic.

~Lysimachus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by CK, posted 08-10-2004 3:59 PM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 383 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 4:45 PM Lysimachus has replied

Asgara
Member (Idle past 2324 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 383 of 603 (132437)
08-10-2004 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 382 by Lysimachus
08-10-2004 4:38 PM


Re: Moller's video...
Post 330 when you have the time please.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 382 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:38 PM Lysimachus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 385 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:58 PM Asgara has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 384 of 603 (132439)
08-10-2004 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by Lysimachus
08-10-2004 4:35 PM


I have to say that I am amused by the problems with Carl Baugh. Baugh's another creationist phoney, much like Kent Hovind although to the best of my knowledge, unlike Hovind, he does not take the attitude that he is above the law. Like Hovind he touts a worthless "doctorate".
I'll also point out that near pure FE2O3 occurs as haematite - limonite is the softer hydrated form. http://mineral.galleries.com:/...XIDES/HEMATITE/hematite.htm
Baumgardner's comments are probably best explained as being due to his own eagerness to believe, and perhaps Wyatt's plausiblity. Baumgardner is also a geophysicist rather than a geologist and he may well have missed problems with the "Ark" until he talked to someone with a better knowledge of geology (like his fellow creationist Andrew Snelling). Baumgardenr was convinced and then changed his mind. THat does not mean that his later comments should be rejected - they may well be more considered and better informed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:35 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 385 of 603 (132440)
08-10-2004 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 383 by Asgara
08-10-2004 4:45 PM


Re: Moller's video...
quote:
I would be interested in exactly how far south from the main resort area this would be. Exactly how far out are we talking? How deep were the waters the wheels were found in?
I don't know. Email W.A.R., Bill Fry, Aaron Sen, Jonothan Grey, Moller...or anyone of them. I'm sure they know the exact spots. I've never been there.
If they don't give you an answer, it's probably because they don't want people disturbing the data until they've gotten the chance to get the appropriate permission to excavate the stuff. That would be devistating if someone went out there and broke all the parts to pieces--making it impossible for the researchers to properly investigate the material.
There are future plans regarding this stuff you know. If I were them, I wouldn't just blab out to the public the location of these wheels...would you really want careless people messing with them? Now I'm not saying you are careless...but you get my point, right?
This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-10-2004 04:03 PM

~Lysimachus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 383 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 4:45 PM Asgara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 5:01 PM Lysimachus has replied
 Message 389 by CK, posted 08-10-2004 5:08 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Asgara
Member (Idle past 2324 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 386 of 603 (132442)
08-10-2004 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by Lysimachus
08-10-2004 4:58 PM


Re: Moller's video...
In other words, your claim that their dives were farther out, farther south, and deeper were just a guess? Thanks for verifying.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:58 PM Lysimachus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 387 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 5:03 PM Asgara has not replied
 Message 388 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 5:05 PM Asgara has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 387 of 603 (132444)
08-10-2004 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 386 by Asgara
08-10-2004 5:01 PM


Re: Moller's video...
Reread Message 385. I edited it.

~Lysimachus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 5:01 PM Asgara has not replied

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5212 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 388 of 603 (132446)
08-10-2004 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 386 by Asgara
08-10-2004 5:01 PM


Re: Moller's video...
quote:
In other words, your claim that their dives were farther out, farther south, and deeper were just a guess? Thanks for verifying.
No, that's what I read somewhere. However, just because I was informed they were off the south end of the beach, and in deeper waters, does not mean I was informed exactly how far south, or how far out.

~Lysimachus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 5:01 PM Asgara has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 389 of 603 (132447)
08-10-2004 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by Lysimachus
08-10-2004 4:58 PM


Re: Moller's video...
There are future plans regarding this stuff you know. If I were them, I wouldn't just blab out to the public the location of these wheels...would you really want careless people messing with them? Now I'm not saying you are careless...but you get my point, right?
Even worse if people go "hey there is nothing here!" or "ah my test reveal that those are actually...."
when is this essay intended to appear? As a rule of thumb if it's about evidence, the name "ron wyatt" should not appear in it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Lysimachus, posted 08-10-2004 4:58 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by PaulK, posted 08-10-2004 5:29 PM CK 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