Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
28 online now:
AZPaul3, Faith, PaulK, Tangle, Tanypteryx (5 members, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,537 Year: 18,573/19,786 Month: 993/1,705 Week: 245/518 Day: 9/60 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 372 (418547)
08-28-2007 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:41 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but I heard about the giant tsunami on the Science Discovery Channel and then again on the History cChannel. So it absolutely did come from scientists.

Try not to be naive. Scientists don't write TV shows. TV show writers and producers write TV shows.

You're talking about channels that have shows about ghosts, for Christ's sake. Why didn't that indicate to you that the History Channel isn't a reliable source for the views of scientists?

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:41 PM Refpunk has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 10:39 PM crashfrog has responded

Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4338 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 152 of 372 (418548)
08-28-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by crashfrog
08-28-2007 10:04 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but you're grasping at straws. The Science Channel introduces these scientists and explain where they got their degrees. All it shows is that scientists are great science fiction writers. They incessantly contradict history and make up their own. All it takes is common sense & a basic knowledge of the birds & the bees to see why monkeys can't breed humans descendant and what causes sediment in rock layers all over the world. Since scientists don't even have common sense, then you're right, the Science Channel is nothing more than science fiction.

Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 10:04 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2007 10:43 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 154 by molbiogirl, posted 08-28-2007 10:47 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 153 of 372 (418549)
08-28-2007 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 10:39 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
The Science Channel introduces these scientists and explain where they got their degrees.

What scientists? Which degrees?

Which show was this?

"Cuz some science guy said so on TV" doesn't rise to any sort of standard of proof.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 10:39 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 927 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 154 of 372 (418550)
08-28-2007 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 10:39 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Science Channel is nothing more than science fiction.

How much y'all wanna bet this is what he is talking about:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/12/04/tsunami_arc.html?category=archaeology&guid=20061204094500


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 10:39 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Chiroptera, posted 08-28-2007 10:49 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded
 Message 156 by jar, posted 08-28-2007 11:04 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded
 Message 159 by dwise1, posted 08-29-2007 2:42 AM molbiogirl has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6802
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 155 of 372 (418551)
08-28-2007 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by molbiogirl
08-28-2007 10:47 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Hard to say. He isn't even sure what he's talking about.


I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by molbiogirl, posted 08-28-2007 10:47 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 31468
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 156 of 372 (418554)
08-28-2007 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by molbiogirl
08-28-2007 10:47 PM


Med tsunami
If so, the important point is that they cannot find the evidence for it on land, so not only did it not "cover the earth", it did not even effect as far inland as today's coastline.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by molbiogirl, posted 08-28-2007 10:47 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3896
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 157 of 372 (418555)
08-28-2007 11:09 PM


Let's put further tsunami discussion on hold...
until Refpunk comes up with some substance on the matter.

Refpunk, in message 143, writes:

In fact, some scientists have tried to explain that by saying there was a giant tsunami that once covered the whole earth. Other scientists claim it's snow melt from a huge ice age.

We need a link to some page about the above. Otherwise, it's a dead issue.

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC

Admin writes:

It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.

There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.

Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source


  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 158 of 372 (418574)
08-29-2007 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:41 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but I heard about the giant tsunami on the Science Discovery Channel and then again on the History cChannel. So it absolutely did come from scientists

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.

And the only "evidence" for evolution is looking at skulls and bones and imagining what they could be. That's called science fiction, not science. So it's about as much evidence as looking at a woman who looks like someone I know then claiming that she's related to that person. That's called speculation, not fact.

Fortunately, that's not all evolution relies on. The bones are one small piece of the puzzle - evolution would stand WITHOUT any fossils at all, simply from OBSERVED CHANGES IN EXTANT SPECIES. If you'd like to discuss all of this, start another thread - it's not really relevant to the flood, except in noting that fossils are sorted as evolution predicts in the geologic column, and nowhere near what would be predicted in a massive flood model.


Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:41 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by NosyNed, posted 08-29-2007 2:45 AM Rahvin has not yet responded

dwise1
Member
Posts: 3768
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 159 of 372 (418575)
08-29-2007 2:42 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by molbiogirl
08-28-2007 10:47 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
So what is that supposed to have to do with any "world-wide flood"?

The closest thing to a real world-wide flood is the rising of the sea level by about 200 feet when the ice cap of the last ice age melted. As I understand, it started about 11,000 years ago and ended around 5500 BCE with our current sea level. Again, nothing at all like what creationists are looking for, but I'm sure that sea-shore settlements throughout the world would have noticed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by molbiogirl, posted 08-28-2007 10:47 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by IamJoseph, posted 11-23-2007 10:12 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8863
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.6


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

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1883 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 161 of 372 (418577)
08-29-2007 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Refpunk
08-27-2007 9:44 AM


Refpunk:

I wonder why there ar exactly ZERO accounts of ancient peoples describing their ancestors being cavemen. Why do you think that is?

Actually, a number of ancient stories trace the ancestry of human beings to other species of animals.

Since ancient legends are so important to you in assessing the worth of modern scientific ideas, I knew you would want this information so you can take it into account.

It may comfort you to know, though, that no ancient cultures had legends about microwave ovens.

___


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Refpunk, posted 08-27-2007 9:44 AM Refpunk has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Refpunk, posted 08-29-2007 7:14 PM Archer Opteryx has responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 18871
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 162 of 372 (418666)
08-29-2007 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:41 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Refpunk writes:

Sorry, but I heard about the giant tsunami on the Science Discovery Channel and then again on the History cChannel. So it absolutely did come from scientists.

Either you're making this up, or you misunderstood. No scientist would ever propose that the sedimentary layers of the planet came from a worldwide tsunami, or from a giant ice melt, because such possibilities are inconsistent with the evidence. I explained this before but it bears repeating, because what I'm telling you is the accurate information about what scientists actually believe about the origins of sedimentary layers, and this is what you actually have to address. We agree with you that a worldwide tsunami or a giant ice melt are ridiculous explanations for the origin of the planet's sedimentary layers. Trust me that you will find no such proposals in any geology textbook.

What scientists actually believe is that these ancient sedimentary layers formed in the same way sedimentary layers form today, which is gradually through the process of erosion in higher regions and deposition in lower regions. That deposition takes place most easily in low lying regions explains why most sedimentary deposits are marine in nature, since nothing is lower in any given area than seas. The fossils we find in sedimentary layers tell us what life existed when the layers formed.

And the only "evidence" for evolution is looking at skulls and bones and imagining what they could be.

You're drifting off-topic when you start addressing the evidence for evolution. There are other threads for that.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:41 PM Refpunk has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Refpunk, posted 08-29-2007 7:16 PM Percy has responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4338 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 163 of 372 (418670)
08-29-2007 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Archer Opteryx
08-29-2007 2:46 AM


And which of these "theories" were all consistent with one another like the flood story is?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-29-2007 2:46 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-31-2007 2:05 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 187 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-31-2007 2:46 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 4338 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 08-17-2007


Message 164 of 372 (418671)
08-29-2007 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Percy
08-29-2007 6:25 PM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
Sorry, but it can't be erosion because the sedimentary layers are IN THE MIDDLE of the rock layers. If it was erosion then the top parts of the rock layers would have eroded away. So that's another example of scientists not thinking things through well enough because of their eagerness to deny the bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Percy, posted 08-29-2007 6:25 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Vacate, posted 08-29-2007 8:26 PM Refpunk has responded
 Message 167 by Percy, posted 08-29-2007 8:29 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 168 by Chiroptera, posted 08-29-2007 8:32 PM Refpunk has not yet responded
 Message 169 by bluegenes, posted 08-29-2007 8:51 PM Refpunk has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 455 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 165 of 372 (418672)
08-29-2007 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by Refpunk
08-28-2007 8:45 AM


Re: 'Out of Bedrock' theory
quote:
That's because there were no neanderthals or ape-men. The theory of evolution is so absurd that it's an emparrassment to people who call themselves educated.

I have a thread devoted to discussion exactly what you have stated, Refpunk, and I would be most interested to read your response to the OP. It deals with the implications of such a statement.

Come on over here, and I look forward to your response.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Refpunk, posted 08-28-2007 8:45 AM Refpunk 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