Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-26-2019 10:27 PM
24 online now:
AZPaul3, Dredge, foreveryoung, kjsimons (4 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,099 Year: 7,135/19,786 Month: 1,676/1,581 Week: 55/443 Day: 55/34 Hour: 3/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 12 of 372 (411108)
07-18-2007 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Repzion
07-18-2007 10:11 PM


Numbers
The story is of ONE mammoth. Where is your source for 1,000's frozen?

There are bones found but very, very few frozen. It appears the number is about 40. Your number was 5 million wasn't it? That is one major thing (you would agree that 40 is not near 5 million right?) utterly wrong. (btw, only about 5 or so are nearly complete).

You need to supply your source so it can be examined for accuracy. It is entirely possible that you have been lied to.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Repzion, posted 07-18-2007 10:11 PM Repzion has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 23 of 372 (411132)
07-19-2007 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Repzion
07-19-2007 12:29 AM


high dinos
If there wasn't a flood, how do you explain Dinosaur fossils found on Mt. Everest.

Once again: Please supply a reference to this. I think you will find that there aren't any dinosaur fossils on Everest.

However, as noted above you still have to explain how the flood put any fossils there are up there. You also have to explain why they are the kind of fossils they are and not other kinds.

You are being fed very bad information.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Repzion, posted 07-19-2007 12:29 AM Repzion has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 31 of 372 (411203)
07-19-2007 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Theagle
07-19-2007 2:05 AM


Furry Fellows
bison perhaps? T
North Dakota winter perhaps?

Before I explain this corrilation, I'd like to state that mammoths, dispite most artists seem to think, were NOT frozen tundra animals. The fur coat on the discovered wolly mammoths is not thick enough to have kept the animals warm in a Siberian winter as we see it today. In fact, it isn't much if any thicker then we see on many moderate climate animals today, bison perhaps? Therefore, it stands to reason that there was SOMEthing that happened to change the climate of northern Siberia while the mammoths were already there. It also stands to reason that that is what caused the mammoths (not to mention the other animals that have been found frozen in the Siberian wasteland) to have frozen with food still in their mouths (as was in the case of one of the Berezovka mammoths)

And your source that the fur isn't thick enough? And you explanation of the other indications of the climate at the time? Ice age remember?

Please supply references and clear reasoning. Your AiG paste doesn't support flash freezing. The conditions described would take days or weeks to cool the earth. No "frozen while eating" nonsense.

It also appears that AiG has decided that the Bible is missing a lot. It fails to mention anything of what they need to invent. I guess the God they believe in needs some help.

So how else would you suggust that a fossil made it to the top of a mountain?

Before you criticize modern science maybe you should find out something about it. You haven't heard of plate tectonics? Do you know what the nature of the fossils on tops of mountains are? (hint: they are NOT the clams you find on your beach today) If you look into these details you'll find that your flood hypothosis breaks down.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Theagle, posted 07-19-2007 2:05 AM Theagle has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 55 of 372 (411411)
07-20-2007 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Repzion
07-20-2007 1:20 PM


Meanders
You were asked to explain the flood formation of the meanders.

When I see a sudden change in the earth's features, I like to ask why. Why did a lazy, meandering river suddenly become a rushing rapids flowing as straight as a stick for four miles? And what made that river suddenly fall 185 feet, then again meander calmly down to the Snake River? ( Doesn't sound like uplift to me, taking billions of year to create such a fascinating site )

I don't see any such explanation in that paragraph. Did I miss it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Repzion, posted 07-20-2007 1:20 PM Repzion has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 99 of 372 (411713)
07-22-2007 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by iceage
07-22-2007 12:38 AM


Accounting for erosion
However take 25000 ft / 12000 yr gives around a 2 ft per year, double it to account for erosion and you have 4 ft/year.

That isn't correct, I don't think, erosion rates don't necessarily double just because uplift rates do. In fact, I think erosion rates are very limited by particular things (rock hardness being one and the eroding mechanism being another). I'd guess rock hardness predominates but even if (for some reason) doubling the uplift doubled the amount of, say, water flowing down the mountain I don't think that would double the erosion. My reasoning goes; only the water in contact with the rock erodes it. If you have a much deeper layer of water than the turbulent contact zone then no additional depth will bring more erosive force against the rock.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by iceage, posted 07-22-2007 12:38 AM iceage has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by iceage, posted 07-22-2007 1:30 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 160 of 372 (418576)
08-29-2007 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Rahvin
08-29-2007 2:20 AM


TV information
These are the same channels that regularly show programs on UFOs and ghosts. These programs are entertainment. None of what you see on these ridiculous shows are from scientific journals.

While these are not primary sources they often do a very good journalist job of presenting good information in a digestible way. Of course, there is junk on there too but it is not to be totally ignored; just used as a jumping off point to find out more.

You are neglecting the very real possibility that our source, Refpunk, has gotten this horridly wrong just like everything else he has posted.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Rahvin, posted 08-29-2007 2:20 AM Rahvin has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 328 of 372 (511087)
06-06-2009 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by Coyote
06-06-2009 1:13 AM


Resemblance
Peg thinks what she read says it resembles modern man. It does not say that! It says that the wrist bones do. Someone misread it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Coyote, posted 06-06-2009 1:13 AM Coyote has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 364 of 372 (511785)
06-11-2009 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 362 by Peg
06-11-2009 9:14 PM


Entire column
Is there any place on earth where the column exists in its entirety?

Why does it matter? How likely is it that it would?

(actually I think there are a couple of places, depending on how you define "entire")


This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by Peg, posted 06-11-2009 9:14 PM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by Peg, posted 06-11-2009 10:12 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019