|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Does the evidence support the Flood? (attn: DwarfishSquints) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
end of story It's not the end of the story. Demonstrate why there should be asingle homogeneous layer of sediment or concede that a flood was possible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Just get yourself a Geology textbook - it's all in there. Why would I want to get myself a geology text book? So I can learn to conform, and not have to think for myself?
Try it yourself, put a small portion of fine sand into a glass of water and stir. Leave it to settle and see what happens - it isn't rocket science. Ok, now take your glass of water add a mixture of all minerals, ores, rocks, bones and tip it out down your driveway. Do we end up with a homogeneous layer of silt? No. Just give me some convincing evidence that disqualifies a global flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Coyote writes: I am an archaeologist, and in the areas I work there is no erosional discontinuity, nor are there flood sediments or other evidences of a flood, at the appointed time of 4,350 years ago. Who appointed the time?Have you found any erosional discontinuities within the last 10 thousand years?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes: Wow. You'd rather be a non-comforming ignoramus than an edjucated "conformist"!? To me, that is just crazy. So it's more important to conform and fill your head with garbage, than it is to think for yourself. What happened to the real scientists?
The lack of a genetic bottleneck. Genetics will shed light on human ancestral history. Edited by LucyTheApe, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
But what about the lack of a genetic bottleneck discounting the flood? I see you avoided that... No I didn't you just beat my edit to post.The way I see it is that genetics should teach us a lot about our history. I don't understand though, according to genetics, we are all derived from one Y male and one mitochondrial female. So how do we tell if a bottleneck has occurred if we all have the same genes? Do we contain somewhere in our genes all the alleles for every possible physical trait?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Give it a couple of years and it will look like this.This town was under water a couple of years ago.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
That we don't see that bottleneck shows that there wasn't a flood. Ok. I'll have to do some reading to get an understanding of bottlenecks. However, if what I read is speculative, say to three degrees of 95% probability, ie (Ap(Bp(Cp))) where C is dependent on B which is dependent on A, then to me it just becomes junk I reject it and I'll wait for the geneticists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
PsuedoCatholic writes: The lack of a genetic bottleneck. Bottlenecks Mossie parasite Not surprising that mossies would have a field day after the flood. TB Interesting conclusions 2006 Cat Parasite Human bottleneck. very interesting CS your bottlenecks are nothing more than a deliberate diversion.
Coragyps writes: If you're vaporising the freakin' ocean, the atmosphere will all be above 100C by a considerable margin. We can have as much mantle exposed as we need to vaporise just as much of the ocean that we need to raise the temperature just enough to melt the ice and make it rain just enough. I wans't there I didn't see it. I'm just interested to know if it was possible. But the brain dead scientists are drowning in their own irony. Moose you should suspend yourself for breaking rules 2, 8 and10 Edited by LucyTheApe, : grammar
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
G'day Granny,
Granny writes: First of all, I would like to say that I'm sorry No need to apologize Granny, I personally thought it was funny, "Blunt head trauma", I'll have to use that on some of my mates. Moose was a bit quick on the mouse I think. Anyway welcome back.
Granny writes: Secondly, I am confused as to where you now stand on your claim that..
LucyTheApe writes:
Stone and metal tools would be found where they were dropped.
Granny writes: In Re: Timeline of the flood (Message 191) you seem less sure; Given the right conditions just about anything can be dragged along. Consider the diagram below. In the first case the hammer is sitting on top of a raised plane. Regardless of how fast the water rose, the forces acting on the hammer will cancel themselves out. The same when the water recedes. In the second case the hammer should be dragged down by rapidly receding water due to the force of gravity pulling the water and the hammer in one direction, down. Your boulder. d=CAv2 (approx) Where the drag d is a product of some coefficient C (dependent on, among others, solids in the water), the area of the object A, and the speed of the water v2 Notice that the speed of the water has an exponential effect on drag, that is, the increase in the speed of the water results in an exponential increase in the drag effect. That's why they can land things on Mars even though the atmosphere there is much thinner than earths,(I'm not mentioning the supposed moon landings with NO atmosphere?? Maybe another thread). In the boulder diagram the forces acting on the boulder are much greater, both d and g (mass*gravity) than the forces acting on the hammer. The boulder would move much more easily than the hammer. But given enough speed in the water, it will move a mountain. Edited by LucyTheApe, : No reason given. Edited by LucyTheApe, : grammar
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Nuggin writes: The "bunch of junk" would ALWAYS be on top of the driveway layer no matter where you looked at it. Ok Nuggin, now sweep up the junk, hire some earth moving equipment, dig up your driveway, the dirt, the clay, the sand and the bedrock. Now put it all in the glass of water and tip it out down a slope. Now do a cross section.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Nuggin writes: Since the Bible is the one and only source of data for the Flood, you are prohibited from excluding parts of the Bible you find inconvenient. Let's establish whether a flood was possible or not and whether the evidences supports it before we get down to the specifics. If the flood was not possible, its timing makes no sense. Have you been hibernating Nuggin, the bible is NOT the only source of data for the Flood. Edited by LucyTheApe, : added
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Nuggin writes: Firstly, mitochondrial "eve" and Y "adam" were not a mating pair, just to be clear. You don't know that Nuggin.
Nuggin writes: Secondly, OBVIOUSLY we do not all have the "same genes" since clearly there are obvious physical difference between the various "races", not to mention different non-observable genetic markers (lactose tolerance, malaria immunity, etc). "Race" is a concept dreamt up by people that wanted to put themselves on the top of the evolutionary ladder. There's only one race, the "Human Race".
Nuggin writes: Thirdly, no it is NOT possible that everyone carries all the genes. You either have a gene or you don't. In the case of adult lactose tolerance, those groups which first domesticated cattle have it, those groups which didn't, don't. Are you saying that we don't have the ability to adapt, create new enzymes and other proteins? I would give more credence to the body rearranging its genetic dynamics than the absolutely ridiculous mechanism of "Random mutation".
Nuggin writes: There are genetic bottlenecks which can be determined by the amount of variation in a genome. Bottlenecks, whether they seem to exist or not, tell us nothing. Read up on it. Just another theory.
But that's not what we see. Why? Because the flood story is a myth. I agree the story is a myth; doesn't make it wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LucyTheApe Inactive Member |
Again, you're not thinking this through - dirt ain't just "dirt", you know..... Granted, I should think a bit more before posting. Edited by LucyTheApe, : tag
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024