Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Flood
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 91 of 188 (384761)
02-12-2007 10:16 PM


Water Canopy (windows of heaven opened)
The super heated water vapor simply cooled on the dark side of the earth above the atmosphere. Because of the lack of atmospheric pressure the water vapor can not exists as ice but exists as chilled water vapor.
The bible explains the windows of heaven were opened thus answers the atmosphere was opened not in the way to molecularly reheat the chilled water vapor that was returning to the earth as rain, ice, snow, etc...
Edited by Charley, : No reason given.

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 188 (384764)
02-12-2007 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by jar
02-12-2007 7:45 PM


Re: Repetion
Repetition of your postion does not make it any more substantial than the first time you said it.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by jar, posted 02-12-2007 7:45 PM jar has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 188 (384765)
02-12-2007 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by sidelined
02-12-2007 8:06 PM


Re: Canopy
sidelined writes:
Water vapour can only exist in the atmosphere as a result of the evaporation of water which requires a measureable amount of heat energy in order to accomplish such.
Not if it was created intact in such a manner that the conditions were just right for it to remain there until the flood when some change occured to change it. As I said before, the atmosphere was likely much more expansive and different than what is observed today.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by sidelined, posted 02-12-2007 8:06 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by sidelined, posted 02-12-2007 11:32 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 188 (384766)
02-12-2007 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by DrJones*
02-12-2007 8:18 PM


Re: Nothing Empirical
Dr Jones: "Faith's posts consisted of the fingers-in-her-ears-head-in-the-sand willfull ignorance so typical of religious fundamentalists. Such gems like:"
Faith: "I just don't accept radiocarbon dating
but no way to know that I can see since radiocarbon dating is as good as wild guessing."
Dr Jones: "This one is great, she admits she's being willfully ignorant:"
Faith: "I don't accept carbon dating, never have. It proves nothing. I have said, however, that I don't understand it well enough to discuss it and will concede the point when the discussion gets technical."
Dr Jones: "Why would people need to empirically refute her posts? It was her job to refute the evidence given to her with something more substantial than "radiocarbon dating is wrong cause I say so".
Dr Jones, 2 things:
1. She is not being willfully ignorant. She admits if when all the tech stuff is out she is willing to concede her position.
2. I, Dr Baumgardner and others have for a long time argued that if there were a different pre-Biblical flood atmosphere carbon and nitrogen properties in the atmosphere and in all preflood fossils et al would not be the same as post flood rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by DrJones*, posted 02-12-2007 8:18 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by jar, posted 02-12-2007 11:17 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 99 by DrJones*, posted 02-13-2007 12:02 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 105 by PaulK, posted 02-13-2007 2:50 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 188 (384767)
02-12-2007 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by RAZD
02-12-2007 10:08 PM


Re: Genesis Flood Evidence
That can work both ways Razd. Also what one may think has been determined doesn't necessarily make it empirically proven.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by RAZD, posted 02-12-2007 10:08 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by RAZD, posted 02-13-2007 9:13 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 96 of 188 (384769)
02-12-2007 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 11:11 PM


Re: Nothing Empirical
I, Dr Baumgardner and others have for a long time argued that if there were a different pre-Biblical flood atmosphere carbon and nitrogen properties in the atmosphere and in all preflood fossils et al would not be the same as post flood rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?
We have acknowledged you believe that bullshit, but it is simply FALSE, wrong, inaccurate, crap.
There is NO evidence there was a Flood, and so NO such thing as a pre-flood atmosphere. We also KNOW as a fact that the atmosphere for the last 10,000 years or so has been basically the same as it is today.
As pointed out to you in this very thread, the pollens found with Oetzi show that the atmosphere was the same as it is today.
What is it called when someone keeps repeating something that has been shown to be false?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 11:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied

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


Message 97 of 188 (384773)
02-12-2007 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 10:58 PM


Re: Canopy
buzsaw
Not if it was created intact in such a manner that the conditions were just right for it to remain there until the flood when some change occured to change it
It does not matter that it be created intact. When it falls as rain it still must release heat in order to become rain. However since you brought it up it remains your problem to solve as to how such conditions came to occur.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 10:58 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4115 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 98 of 188 (384777)
02-12-2007 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 7:14 PM


Re: Black Sea Et Al
quote:
I'm not trying to argue that the Black Sea had anything to do with Genesis.
On the contrary, it looks like you're trying to argue that the flood was a local event that history blew up into a world wide event. That's not surprising as a global flood is scientifically impossible to defend.
quote:
I said the amount of water for that event may be regarded as evidence for a great flood of some great magnitude.
Define "great."
quote:
I've gone into this before in other threads but in all of the layers of the atmosphere and all that could have changed it's just too vast to be able to come to any concrete conclusion on the heat factor.
And others have refuted you as they have here. Simply saying you've done something despite a history of being proven wrong doesn't make you right.
quote:
Baumgardner is not the last word on anything though I agree with much of what he claims.
Like the fact that he admitted his idea requires a miracle?
The flood itself has been poked and prodded from virtually every angle here. You're much better off arguing that the black sea had a flood and that was the basis for Gilgamesh which Christanity stole.
But since you keep harping about empirically, how about you deal with the massive amounts of empirical experiments, numbers and calculations that refute the flood?
Edited by obvious Child, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 7:14 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 99 of 188 (384779)
02-13-2007 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 11:11 PM


Re: Nothing Empirical
She is not being willfully ignorant.
She says that she doesn't beleive it but admits to not knowing anything about it. What do you call that but willfull ignorance?
I, Dr Baumgardner and others have for a long time argued that if there were a different pre-Biblical flood atmosphere carbon and nitrogen properties in the atmosphere and in all preflood fossils et al would not be the same as post flood rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?
They can argue all they want but if they dont have evidence its bullshit. We do have evidence about the past atmosphere and it doesnt support their arguements.
rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?
Carbon dating is not used to date fossils. How many times do you need to be reminded of this?
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 11:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:01 AM DrJones* has replied

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4115 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 100 of 188 (384798)
02-13-2007 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by DrJones*
02-13-2007 12:02 AM


Re: Nothing Empirical
quote:
They can argue all they want but if they dont have evidence its bullshit. We do have evidence about the past atmosphere and it doesnt support their arguements
It doesn't even make sense. If the past atmosphere was different, then the organism today would be different (never mind genesis = no evolution). How they can think that organisms could survive under two extremely different atmospheres and their subsequent effects on the enviroment reeks of ignorance and serious lack of education.
It's like taking a polar bear out of the artic and putting in the tropics. HELLO.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by DrJones*, posted 02-13-2007 12:02 AM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by DrJones*, posted 02-13-2007 2:08 AM obvious Child has replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 101 of 188 (384801)
02-13-2007 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by obvious Child
02-13-2007 2:01 AM


Re: Nothing Empirical
It doesn't even make sense
Of course not, its the curse of religious fundamentalism.

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:01 AM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:30 AM DrJones* has not replied

  
iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 102 of 188 (384803)
02-13-2007 2:15 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Archer Opteryx
02-11-2007 4:19 PM


Re: Uplift R Us
From your description it sounds like the fundamentalist Christian groups in Taiwan have evolved beyond the original stock.
Is this a demonstration biogeography???
I must confess my complete ignorance of Taiwan until you prompted me to investigate the interesting geology there. Yup, the island of Taiwan of refutes the whole notion of a global flood all by itself. Here in places you have km of limestone based rocks metamorphized and uplifted out of the ocean. This prompts several questions:
  • Just how the hell did all the limestone form as the result of a global flood? Even if the limestone is the result of geochemical reaction just how many km of solution would you need to form a several km thick precipitate? If the limestone is biogenic then the problem just became more improbable.
  • Just how long did it take for the mountains to uplift to the present towering condition? If you buy into to some tectonic overactive decades after the flood, you then have to explain the metamorphosis.
    I would more easily believe in the theory that God formed in situ to confuse and humble the wise.
    As a side note, either I have not been paying attention or the people of Taiwan have not done a good job promoting their country. I mean everyone has heard of Mt Fuji but few have heard of Jade Mountain. Hope to someday visit.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 59 by Archer Opteryx, posted 02-11-2007 4:19 PM Archer Opteryx has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 109 by Archer Opteryx, posted 02-13-2007 12:44 PM iceage has not replied

      
    obvious Child
    Member (Idle past 4115 days)
    Posts: 661
    Joined: 08-17-2006


    Message 103 of 188 (384804)
    02-13-2007 2:30 AM
    Reply to: Message 101 by DrJones*
    02-13-2007 2:08 AM


    Re: Nothing Empirical
    Of course.
    You'd think they would get the picture after corollating fossils of huge insects with massive amounts of oxygen in ice cores from the same time period. [sarcasm]I wonder if atmosphere plays a role in what organisms are around![/sarcasm] Geez...

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 101 by DrJones*, posted 02-13-2007 2:08 AM DrJones* has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 106 by RAZD, posted 02-13-2007 9:09 AM obvious Child has replied

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17822
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 104 of 188 (384805)
    02-13-2007 2:43 AM
    Reply to: Message 85 by Buzsaw
    02-12-2007 7:41 PM


    Re: Genesis Flood Evidence
    quote:
    1. The first stages of the flooding likely had somewhat diluted seawater.
    2. Likely sealife was scattered via the flood to include the Black Sea.
    3. How can we be positive it took a year to flood Black Sea?
    To answer the last first - we don't know that it happened anything like that quickly. There's signfiicant evidence that it did not. That is the FASTEST of the estimates, and one that is probably way too fast.
    The other two points are null. Noah's flood according to the Bible is far more rapid and widespread and certainly not dominated by a single point of infill flowing into a depression - and it certainly didn't last up until the present day ! The Black Sea Flood event - if it even happened (and it probably didn't) - does not bear any signficiant resemblance to the Bible story other than being a big flood.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 85 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 7:41 PM Buzsaw has not replied

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17822
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 105 of 188 (384806)
    02-13-2007 2:50 AM
    Reply to: Message 94 by Buzsaw
    02-12-2007 11:11 PM


    Re: Nothing Empirical
    quote:
    1. She is not being willfully ignorant. She admits if when all the tech stuff is out she is willing to concede her position.
    But it didn't stop her categorically declaring that radiocarbon dating didn't work, did it ?
    So I think you mean that she admits her ignorance only when she needs to find a way out of supporting her false assertions.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 11:11 PM Buzsaw 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