I guess it just doesn't pay to contribute something to help out. I have no idea what the complaints are all about, they make no sense to me. ICANT was talking about a single land mass as described by science, not just the Bible, and to me that's Pangaea which is pretty standard stuff, THE supercontinent as found on any number of science sites. So I found A map of it and posted it only to hear how wrong it is.
So Boof put up another map which has more detail and declared it right and mine wrong, though it's simply a more detailed version of Pangaea. Now ringo is accusing me of cherry-picking for some nefarious purpose having to do with the Bible, which hadn't entered my mind. I honestly don't get this. All the maps are maps of Pangaea, some are more detailed than others. The fact that passages of water appear more clearly in the more detailed one does not make it any less a supercontinent and it's always called a supercontinent, one land mass, as far as I've ever seen.
(I really don't know what to make of Pangaea, how it was put together; I don't have any reason to affirm or dispute it. I accept that befpre the Flood there was one land mass that split up but whether Pangaea is a fair representation of it or not I have no opinion, and I certainly have no reason to choose one map of it over another.)
Weird but just another typical weird day at EvC.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.