Re: I LOVE making fools of evolutionists. :)

[Tom McDonald]

On 5/17/2013 4:44 PM, Brother Love wrote:
> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".

Maybe soon:

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/hominids/2012/03/mystery-of-the-lost-peking-man-fossils-solved/

Or:

http://tinyurl.com/cykutjg

> "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
> Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!
> Yes! Each and every one of you!
>

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 17, 5:56 pm, Tom McDonald <kilt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/2013 4:44 PM, Brother Love wrote:
>
> > Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> > pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> > It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> > cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
> Maybe soon:
>

> http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/hominids/2012/03/mystery-of-the-lost-...

>
> Or:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cykutjg
>
>
>
> > "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
> > Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!

> > Yes! Each and every one of you!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

We may not have every last piece of the fossil evidence
for evolution, but what we do have is a lot more compelling
than the bible version. Or do folks still believe the earth
was created in a few days six thousand years ago,
man existed together with dinosaurs and
that some guy loaded two of every animal from every place on
earth onto a boat he built, saving them from a flood?

[Tom McDonald]

You are quite correct. I was only referring to the fact that the Chinese
fossils of Peking Man were lost in WWII, and that BL was, probably
slyly, as is the wont of not-entirely-stupid trolls, referring to that
fact when he wrote:

"...that evolutionists

cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".

We have plenty of Homo erectus fossils, so the lack at present of the
Chinese fossils is an inconvenience and a historical sidenote at best.

[Bob F]

Brother Love wrote:
> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>

> "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
> Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!
> Yes! Each and every one of you!

You are making fun of yourself, moron.

[Mitchell Holman]

Brother Love <BrotherLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:109dp8tdnha27o8i5...@4ax.com:

> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".

How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?

[recycl...@gmail.com]

On Friday, May 17, 2013 2:44:07 PM UTC-7, Brother Love wrote:
> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
>
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
>
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
>
>

> "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
>
>
> Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!
>
> Yes! Each and every one of you!

You’re not so far off from the woods yourself; you still know how to cover them “there” tracks:

“Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in May 24”

[kni...@baawa.com]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 17:44:07 -0400, Brother Love
<BrotherLo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
>It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
>cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".

This web site has something you don't, honesty and peer reviewed
information. Does Paluxy River ring a bell? For shame....

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[harry]

On May 17, 10:44 pm, Brother Love <BrotherLove4TheL...@yahoo.com>

wrote:
> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>

> "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
> Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!

> Yes! Each and every one of you!Ads not by this site

You are a brainwashed half wit. Go and get yourself an
education.

[Meanie]

Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
desperate souls.

[Attila Iskander]

"Meanie" <meani...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kn7prh$kg0$1...@dont-email.me...

>

>
> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the facts
> of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are desperate
> souls.

I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you, who have
a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your opponents
And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows you to be
the "desperate soul"..

[harry k]

On May 17, 2:44 pm, Brother Love <BrotherLove4TheL...@yahoo.com>

wrote:
> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>

> "Professing themselves to be wise they became fools"
>
> Always remember: Jesus love's you and so do I!
> Yes! Each and every one of you!

Your thread title has a serious error. We have seen no evidence where
you have
ever made a fool of evolutionists. Now making a fool of yourself,
that evidence abounds.

As to Homo Erectus - there are a lot of fossils thereof.

Hawrry K

[Bob F]

LOL!!!

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 18, 9:31 am, "Bob F" <bobnos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Attila Iskander wrote:
> > "Meanie" <meanie.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Apparently he believes that man and dinosaurs hung out
together and some guy loaded up a boat with two of every
animal on the planet. Must have been one hell of a job
going around the globe, getting all those dinosaurs, lions,
and birds and cramming them into a boat. Even with
the technology of today, it would be an impossible task.

[linuxgal]

tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> Apparently he believes that man and dinosaurs hung out
> together and some guy loaded up a boat with two of every
> animal on the planet. Must have been one hell of a job
> going around the globe, getting all those dinosaurs, lions,
> and birds and cramming them into a boat. Even with
> the technology of today, it would be an impossible task.

Well, they have a theory that God done brung 'em.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[SMS]

On 5/18/2013 6:40 AM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:

> Apparently he believes that man and dinosaurs hung out
> together and some guy loaded up a boat with two of every
> animal on the planet. Must have been one hell of a job
> going around the globe, getting all those dinosaurs, lions,
> and birds and cramming them into a boat. Even with
> the technology of today, it would be an impossible task.

Don't forget that a) the earth is flat, and b) the sun revolves around
the earth.

[Meanie]

I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact. You'll get over it. Perhaps
reading the good book will ease your pain. Run along.

[Andrew]

"Meanie" wrote in message news:kn8l6j$86k$1...@dont-email.me...
> Attila Iskander wrote:

>> "Meanie" wrote:

>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
>>> desperate souls.
>>
>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you, who
>> have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your opponents
>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows you to
>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>
> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.

If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
have a different position than yours. This you have done.

Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
contrary to what you have been taught.

Just study it out with a sincere desire for the truth.

Then renounce the deceptions that they fed you.


Andrew

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

> Brother Love wrote:
>
>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>>
>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
>> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?

If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:PMOdnfnxOK3tZQrM...@earthlink.com:

Nope.

That is where fundies SAY it is.
So far no proof. Why is that, do you
think?

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:mPudnWYbeZmQagrM...@earthlink.com:

> "Meanie" wrote in message news:kn8l6j$86k$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Attila Iskander wrote:
>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>
>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
>>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
>>>> desperate souls.
>>>
>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you,
>>> who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your
>>> opponents
>>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows
>>> you to
>>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>>
>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>
> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>
> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
> contrary to what you have been taught.
>

What evidence is that?

[Les]

Well their whole theory depends on their being a creator and when
last I heard they have not yet found one or any evidence to show
there ever was one.

Withut their wannahave god being show to exist their entire
theory is worthless

They claim their god 'fine tuned 'the Universe so it could
create us but they do not explain the need for such fine
tuning. Fine tuning implies twiddling the knobs to get
things right, a trial and error process. Surely a wannahave
god would not need to do that as it would know exatly what
the settings are? I just query the need for such exact settings
and wonder if the advocates of this process could explain
why.

--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu






>
>

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA1C4AEF221932...@216.196.121.131...
> "Andrew" wrote:

>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>> Attila Iskander wrote:
>>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>
>>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
>>>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
>>>>> desperate souls.
>>>>
>>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you,
>>>> who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your
>>>> opponents
>>>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows
>>>> you to
>>>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>>>
>>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>>
>> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
>> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>>
>> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
>> contrary to what you have been taught.
>>
>
> What evidence is that?

If you study it out with a sincere desire for the truth
you will find it. Then you will want to renounce the
deceptions that they fed you; and then help others to
escape the falsehoods that have deceived the masses.

~ Andrew


"We must concede that there are
presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any
biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations."
~ Franklin M. Harold,
Professor Emeritus Biochemistry

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:IsOdnZz4c8HZngXM...@earthlink.com:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> news:XnsA1C4AEF221932...@216.196.121.131...
>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>>> Attila Iskander wrote:
>>>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming
>>>>>> the facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism.
>>>>>> They are desperate souls.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you,
>>>>> who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your
>>>>> opponents
>>>>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows
>>>>> you to
>>>>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>>>>
>>>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>>>
>>> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
>>> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>>>
>>> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
>>> contrary to what you have been taught.
>>>
>>
>> What evidence is that?
>
> If you study it out with a sincere desire for the truth
> you will find it.

So you have no evidence.

> Then you will want to renounce the
> deceptions that they fed you; and then help others to
> escape the falsehoods that have deceived the masses.

What evidence do YOU believe, and why?

[Mitchell Holman]

Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote in news:r40gp8deeqhj7n27bfg4hciijloj7b78of@
4ax.com:

The most I can get out of the Creationists
here is the watchmaker fallacy.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 14:53:56 -0700, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

It is not there.

You have been lied to and ignorantly or mendaciously repeated those
lies.

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 15:40:10 -0700, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

Why do you worship falsehoods?

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA1C4AECEAF5CF...@216.196.121.131...
> "Andrew" wrote:

>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>>> Brother Love wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>>>>
>>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
>>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
>>>> Man".
>>>
>>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>>
>> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
>> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
>> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
>> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>>
> Nope.
>
> That is where fundies SAY it is.

No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
"Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
US government.

> So far no proof.

Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:1O2dnYmEAKV2lgXM...@earthlink.com:

Funny know Christians have gone there and
return with remains of the One True Ark.

[linuxgal]

Les wrote:
> They claim their god 'fine tuned 'the Universe so it could
> create us but they do not explain the need for such fine
> tuning. Fine tuning implies twiddling the knobs to get
> things right, a trial and error process.

Not to take the theists' side in this argument, but in the interest of
accuracy, fine tuning does not necessarily imply twiddling the knobs.
Their god could have executed a creation in one go with all the various
physical laws in that exquisite balance necessary to accommodate life,
and "fine tuning" is the term used to describe that balance. Naturally
the anthropic principle tears the argument apart.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 18, 6:59 pm, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
> "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote innews:IsOdnZz4c8HZngXM...@earthlink.com:

>      What evidence do YOU believe, and why?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

They have no evidence or facts. It's all based on a belief system
that for most is driven into their brains at an early age,
in what amounts to brainwashing.
If someone came to most of them at age 40 when they are educated
adults and presented for the first time the religious story of how God
created the earth and man, they would laugh them out of the room.

For the most part, believing in what amounts to fairytales is
harmless. But when some can pervert the fairytales into motivation
for violence, then it has serious repercussions.

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 16:17:06 -0700, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

That photo is not evidence for an ark.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 18, 7:21 pm, Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
> "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote innews:1O2dnYmEAKV2lgXM...@earthlink.com:

>     Why is that, do you think?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

The photo could be of almost anything. Do people really
believe that a guy could round up two of every animal on the
planet, polar bears, monkeys, tigers, every kind of bird, and
put them on a boat? A boat the size of Noah's ark? A boat
the size of that sat pic? Feed them, have enough food, water,
deal with all the waste, disease..... Even today it would be an
impossible task. Good grief!

I suppose they'll tell us that because God told Noah to do it,
that God then made it possible, no further explanation needed.
Curious thing. This God that
can create the universe out of nothing wants to screw around
with Noah filling a boat up with animals......

[Meanie]

LMFAO! The scary part is you truly believe it.

[Meanie]

LMFAO! The scary part is you actually believe it.
>

[Bob F]

LOL!!!

[Andrew]

"Meanie" wrote in message news:kn93r5$g27$2...@dont-email.me...
> Andrew wrote:

>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>>>>> Brother Love wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>>>>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
>>>>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
>>>>>> Man".
>>>>>
>>>>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>>>>
>>>> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
>>>> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
>>>> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
>>>> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>>>>
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> That is where fundies SAY it is.
>>
>> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
>> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
>> US government.
>>
>>> So far no proof.
>>
>> Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
>> IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.
>
> LMFAO! The scary part is you actually believe it.

Mr. Holman inquired as to the Ark. I simply provided
evidence that would be of interest to him. The fact of
the Ararat anomaly's existence is acknowledged by the
CIA.

[linuxgal]

Andrew wrote:
> Mr. Holman inquired as to the Ark. I simply provided
> evidence that would be of interest to him. The fact of
> the Ararat anomaly's existence is acknowledged by the
> CIA.

There was an ark up there, sure. But all that gopher firewood above the
tree line was irresistable to the goat herds over the last 5,000 years.
A man gets cold up there most nights.

[Tom McDonald]

On 5/18/2013 8:31 PM, linuxgal wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>> Mr. Holman inquired as to the Ark. I simply provided
>> evidence that would be of interest to him. The fact of
>> the Ararat anomaly's existence is acknowledged by the
>> CIA.
>
> There was an ark up there, sure. But all that gopher firewood above the
> tree line was irresistable to the goat herds over the last 5,000 years.
> A man gets cold up there most nights.
>

Depends entirely on how close he is to his goat.

[Attila Iskander]

"SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:51978d28$0$52781$742e...@news.sonic.net...

Funny how there is no mention of dinosaurs in the Ark
Why are atheists so ignorant ?
And more important, why do they need to keep on proving it ?

[Attila Iskander]

"Meanie" <meani...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:kn8l6j$86k$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 5/18/2013 9:21 AM, Attila Iskander wrote:
>> "Meanie" <meani...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:kn7prh$kg0$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
>>> desperate souls.
>>
>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you, who
>> have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your opponents
>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows you to
>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>
> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.

Actually you didn't
You just gave me an opportunity to demonstrate that you are stupid and
hypocritical and that your deoragtion applies just as well to you..
If in fact you had the truth on your side, you would have no need for
behaving as you do.
Funny that.

>You'll get over it.

Nothing to get over.
50% of the population fall to the left side of the bell curve.
Clearly, that's your side.

> Perhaps reading the good book will ease your pain.

You confuse your fantasies and projections with reality
I have read the "good book" a few times. In 4 different languages too.
I have also read a variety of books discussing the contents of it as well
Most likely, you haven't even read it once.

> Run along.

Why don't you demonstrate how it's done...

Or better yet
I'll let you have the last word
You obviously are in great need to have it, even though it will have
absolutely no value to any.

Go for it..
And enjoy being sent back to where you really belong

[Attila Iskander]

"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:2s2gp8tqpg61726ui...@4ax.com...

Why are you reduced to strawman arguments ?

[Attila Iskander]

"Meanie" <meani...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:kn93l1$g27$1...@dont-email.me...

Clearly your belief is not based on knowledge
A couple of other words for that are, bigotry, ignorance, prejudice.
There are a few more, but all seem to have far more syllables than you
can handle.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 18, 8:58 pm, "Attila Iskander" <Attila.Iskan...@live.com>
wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:51978d28$0$52781$742e...@news.sonic.net...

>
> > On 5/18/2013 6:40 AM, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> >> Apparently he believes that man and dinosaurs hung out
> >> together and some guy loaded up a boat with two of every
> >> animal on the planet.  Must have been one hell of a job
> >> going around the globe, getting all those dinosaurs, lions,
> >> and birds and cramming them into a boat.  Even with
> >> the technology of today, it would be an impossible task.
>
> > Don't forget that a) the earth is flat, and b) the sun revolves around the
> > earth.
>
> Funny how there is no mention of dinosaurs in the Ark
> Why are atheists so ignorant ?
>     And more important, why do they need to keep on proving it ?

They don't have to mention the dinosaurs in the ark.
From the timeline of the rest of the bible, you'd have
to believe that dinosaurs were on the earth at the same
time as man. Why, the creationists have even tried to
use some lame fossil evidence of tracks recorded in
mud, to try to prove exactly that

So, forget about the dinosaurs. You really believe a
guy could build a big old honking boat, go around the entire
globe, rounding up two of every species of everything,
from every corner of every jungle? Figure out what they
all eat? What it takes for them to survive? Put enough food of all
the necessary types and water for them all?
Maintain the correct climate conditions? Deal
with all the waste, all the disease thay one could only
imagine would exist on such a vessel? For even the
best zoos they can only do that today for a very limited
number of species. And you want to talk about dinosaurs?
Really?

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:2qCdnTSI0_H5hgXM...@earthlink.com:

1) Explain why no Christian has gone up to
Noah Ark and photographed it, much less brought
back a piece of it.

2) IF Noah's Ark existed, explain how all
the animals native to Japan and Australia and
the Western Hemisphere got TO Noah's Ark and
then back again.

3) Explain what all the animals ate when
returned to dry land empty of all flora and
fauna.

4) If all humanity comes from Noah where
did all the different human races come from?

[linuxgal]

Andrew wrote:
> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> US government.

It's a rock outcropping in the shape of a boat. There's a dog's head on
Mt. St. Helens and a face on Mars.

[Bob F]

WOW!!

Pot, kettle, black......

Why do right wing wackos always accuse others of exactly the traits they
themselves display so accuratly.

[Bob F]

Don't be stupod. They have had thousands of years to evolve.

[Harry K]

On May 18, 2:48 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Meanie" wrote in messagenews:kn8l6j$86k$1...@dont-email.me...

> > Attila Iskander wrote:
> >> "Meanie" wrote:
> >>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
> >>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
> >>> desperate souls.
>
> >> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you, who
> >> have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your opponents
> >>     And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows you to
> >> be the "desperate soul"..
>
> > I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>
> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>
> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
> contrary to what you have been taught.
>

> Just study it out with a sincere desire for the truth.
>
> Then renounce the deceptions that they fed you.
>
> Andrew

In order to believe what you think is evidence one must stuff his head
in a veryi dark place and ignore all of science.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 18, 6:07 pm, "Attila Iskander" <Attila.Iskan...@live.com>
wrote:
> "Meanie" <meanie.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Too bad for you that atheists do not "believe" - they accept moutains
of hard evidence and facts. All you have is one ancient book of
myths, lies and contradictions.

cf lies: Archaeology has _proven_ that there were no Jewish slaves in
the Egypt - every_
cf lies: Geology amongst many other "ologies" has _proven_ there was
no world wide flood
cf lies: archaeology has _proven_ that the battle of Jericho did not
happen. Per your bible timeline Jericho was nothing but a rubble heap
with a few rude huts at the supposed time.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 18, 2:53 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Mitchell Holman"  wrote in messagenews:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

> > Brother Love wrote:
>
> >> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> >> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> >> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
> >    How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> east longitude.  http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

Odd that in all these centuries of looking, noone has found it. Oh
there are many "stories" of having found it but zero evidence of such.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 18, 4:17 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in messagenews:XnsA1C4AECEAF5CF...@216.196.121.131...

And only you fundy kooks think it is a boat instead of the geologic
formation that it is.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 18, 5:23 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Meanie" wrote in messagenews:kn93r5$g27$2...@dont-email.me...

Good, give us a cite where they say it is a boat.

Harry K

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <PMOdnfnxOK3tZQrM...@earthlink.com>,

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message

> news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

> > Brother Love wrote:
> >
> >> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
> >>
> >> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> >> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
> >
> > How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

Wow. Talk about fantasies!

The only thing found on Mt. Ararat is a big rock.

You do realize that if t his article had any validity at all, there
would have been more news in the intervening 10-1/2 years. Don't you?

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <5r2gp890j11s897k4...@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 May 2013 14:53:56 -0700, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>

> >"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> >news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...
> >> Brother Love wrote:
> >>
> >>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
> >>>
> >>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> >>> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
> >>
> >> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
> >
> >If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> >on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> >42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> >east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>

> It is not there.
>
> You have been lied to and ignorantly or mendaciously repeated those
> lies.

An article more than 10 years ago and nothing since.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <1O2dnYmEAKV2lgXM...@earthlink.com>,

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message

> news:XnsA1C4AECEAF5CF...@216.196.121.131...

> > "Andrew" wrote:
> >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:

> >>> Brother Love wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
> >>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
> >>>> Man".
> >>>
> >>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
> >>
> >> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> >> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> >> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> >> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
> >>

> > Nope.
> >
> > That is where fundies SAY it is.
>
> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> US government.

The US government acknowledged a rock?

> > So far no proof.
>
> Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
> IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.

It's not evidence until it's confirmed. And since there's more than 10
years since the photo, it seems there has been no verification in all
that time.

Looks like you still have no evidence.

But at least it was a halfway decent attempt at it.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <2qCdnTSI0_H5hgXM...@earthlink.com>,

But it's not the Ark. It's a rock. A big rock.

It's been 10-1/2 years since this was published. So why has there been
no follow-up. Why aren't there masses of photos in every magazine on the
planet? Why are there no reports of the analyses of the object?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <XnsA1C4D383AA2B4...@216.196.121.131>,

AND soil to grow any new flora.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <mPudnWYbeZmQagrM...@earthlink.com>,
"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:

> "Meanie" wrote in message news:kn8l6j$86k$1...@dont-email.me...

> > Attila Iskander wrote:
> >> "Meanie" wrote:
>
> >>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
> >>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
> >>> desperate souls.
> >>
> >> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you, who
> >> have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your opponents
> >> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows you to
> >> be the "desperate soul"..
> >>
> > I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>
> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
> have a different position than yours. This you have done.

We only denigrate liars after they've had the facts explained quite
clearly to them and still continue to spew their lies.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <IsOdnZz4c8HZngXM...@earthlink.com>,

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message

> news:XnsA1C4AEF221932...@216.196.121.131...
> > "Andrew" wrote:
> >> "Meanie" wrote:

> >>> Attila Iskander wrote:
> >>>> "Meanie" wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
> >>>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
> >>>>> desperate souls.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you,
> >>>> who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your
> >>>> opponents
> >>>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only shows
> >>>> you to
> >>>> be the "desperate soul"..
> >>>>
> >>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
> >>
> >> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
> >> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
> >>

> >> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
> >> contrary to what you have been taught.
> >>
> >
> > What evidence is that?
>
> If you study it out with a sincere desire for the truth
> you will find it.

Stupid deflection.

Answer the damned question. You claim to have evidence. Well, then,
present it. If you have it, you will present it.

[Not X]

On 05/18/2013 08:52 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:

[snip]

>
> 1) Explain why no Christian has gone up to
> Noah Ark and photographed it, much less brought
> back a piece of it.
>
> 2) IF Noah's Ark existed, explain how all
> the animals native to Japan and Australia and
> the Western Hemisphere got TO Noah's Ark and
> then back again.
>
> 3) Explain what all the animals ate when
> returned to dry land empty of all flora and
> fauna.
>
> 4) If all humanity comes from Noah where
> did all the different human races come from?
>

And what happened to all the fish? Fish are very sensitive to the
environment, and that rain would've made a mess of the salinity (and
probably temperature too).

--
"[Timothy Leary] was asked whether drugs were a bad influence on young
kids, and he said, 'This is nothing. In a few years kids are going to be
demanding septal electrodes.'"

[Not X]

On 05/18/2013 05:17 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:

[snip]

>> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
>> contrary to what you have been taught.
>>
>
> What evidence is that?
>

Apparently, there IS evidence. What they won't tell you is that it's all
locked up in theists' fantasy worlds (where God is too).

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA1C4D383AA2B4...@216.196.121.131...
> "Andrew" wrote:

There are some photographs and pieces of it. Consider that
the mountain, including the anomaly (Ark), is snow and ice
covered almost all year round, especially at the 13,000 foot
level.

Also such efforts are hindered since the Turkish government
closed off the area to visitors citing problems with Kurdish
rebels and the site's proximity to borders of Iran and Armenia.

> 2) IF Noah's Ark existed, explain how all
> the animals native to Japan and Australia and
> the Western Hemisphere got TO Noah's Ark and
> then back again.

My understanding is that the antediluvian world did not
have such isolated geographical areas that you mention.

> 3) Explain what all the animals ate when
> returned to dry land empty of all flora and
> fauna.

It says that some things were already growing by the time
they de-arked (Genesis 8:11). Some plants grow rapidly.

> 4) If all humanity comes from Noah where
> did all the different human races come from?

They came through the natural, God-given laws of genetics
with such factors as selection, isolation and environmental
pressure.

[Andrew]

"Not X" wrote in message news:ga0mt.88881$3F4...@fed04.iad...

> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> 1) Explain why no Christian has gone up to
>> Noah Ark and photographed it, much less brought
>> back a piece of it.
>>
>> 2) IF Noah's Ark existed, explain how all
>> the animals native to Japan and Australia and
>> the Western Hemisphere got TO Noah's Ark and
>> then back again.
>>
>> 3) Explain what all the animals ate when
>> returned to dry land empty of all flora and
>> fauna.
>>
>> 4) If all humanity comes from Noah where
>> did all the different human races come from?
>>
>
> And what happened to all the fish? Fish are very sensitive
> to the environment, and that rain would've made a mess of
> the salinity (and probably temperature too).

Many of them were engulfed in the sediment, buried quickly
and became fossilized.

Notice evidence here of rapid fossilization >> http://alturl.com/2dah9

[Andrew]

"Harry K" wrote in message news:99161a8a-8b52-40af...@d8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com...

> "Attila Iskander" wrote:
>> "Meanie" wrote:
>> > Andrew wrote:

>> >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>> >>> "Andrew" wrote:
>> >>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>> >>>>> Attila Iskander wrote:
>> >>>>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of disarming the
>> >>>>>>> facts of evolution or other theories opposing creationism. They are
>> >>>>>>> desperate souls.
>>
>> >>>>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as you,
>> >>>>>> who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as your

>> >>>>>> opponents. And denigration and demonization of your opponents

>> >>>>>> only shows you to be the "desperate soul"..
>>
>> >>>>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>>
>> >>>> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
>> >>>> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>>
>> >>>> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
>> >>>> contrary to what you have been taught.
>>
>> >>> What evidence is that?
>>
>> >> If you study it out with a sincere desire for the truth
>> >> you will find it. Then you will want to renounce the
>> >> deceptions that they fed you; and then help others to
>> >> escape the falsehoods that have deceived the masses.
>>
>> >> ~ Andrew
>>
>> > LMFAO! The scary part is you truly believe it.
>>
>> Clearly your belief is not based on knowledge
>> A couple of other words for that are, bigotry, ignorance, prejudice.
>> There are a few more, but all seem to have far more syllables than you
>> can handle.
>
> Too bad for you that atheists do not "believe" - they accept moutains
> of hard evidence and facts.

"Hard evidence and facts" such as, that the entire Universe
with all of the rich diversity of life therein created itself?

No, this is your fantasy, your belief.

[Andrew]

"August Rode" wrote in message news:212805b1-f20d-44bb...@googlegroups.com...
> On Saturday, May 18, 2013 5:53:56 PM UTC-4, Andrew wrote:
>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

>> > Brother Love wrote:
>> >
>> >> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>> >> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>> >>
>> >> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
>> >> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>> >
>> > How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>>
>> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
>> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
>> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
>> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>

> That geographic location is nowhere near accurate enough, Andrew.
> I went to that precise location in Google Earth and there's nothing
> there except for the mountain. Nothing that looks like a huge ark.

It is visible only when conditions permit. With its summit at over
16, 000 feet of elevation, Mt. Ararat is snow and ice covered most
of the year. Viewing conditions of the area will vary by the season.
Late July and August would be the months of the least snow and
ice cover. If global warming turns out, then we could all just go
to Google Earth.

[Andrew]

"Harry K" wrote in message news:6e2050fa-bfa2-438e...@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

"Andrew" wrote:
> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > "Andrew" wrote:
> >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> >>> Brother Love wrote:
>
> >>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> >>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
> >>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
> >>>> Man".
>
> >>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> >> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> >> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> >> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> >> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>
> > Nope.
>
> > That is where fundies SAY it is.
>
> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> US government.
>
> > So far no proof.
>
> Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
> IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.

-
- And only you fundy kooks think it is a boat instead
- of the geologic formation that it is.

One of the photo analysts for the CIA believed that
it was -the- Ark. They have photos of the area going
back for decades.

[Andrew]

"linuxgal" wrote in message news:saadnfWl8PCp2gXM...@giganews.com...

> Andrew wrote:
>> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
>> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
>> US government.
>
> It's a rock outcropping in the shape of a boat.

Yeah, it's not really a boat. It just "looks like"
a boat.

[Andrew]

"Harry K" wrote in message news:1473af01-1bcc-4208...@hc4g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
"Andrew" wrote:

-
- Good, give us a cite where they say it is a boat.

They call it an "anomaly".

[Wombat]

On May 19, 11:01 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in messagenews:XnsA1C4D383AA2B4...@216.196.121.131...

So how did the Tree sloth return to S. America and the Koala return to
Australia in the POST diluvial world? You can have it both ways.

Wombat

snip

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <6-adnXb6_-jGNAXM...@earthlink.com>,

Vaguely. In the right light and from the right angle.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <G4ydnTOBpI62NAXM...@earthlink.com>,

It's been over 10-1/2 years. Where are all the reports from all the
visits to the location in those years?

If they had found the Ark over 10 years ago, it would have been all over
the news for all of that time.

The fact that it hasn't is pretty strong evidence that you believe in a
fantasy.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <loSdnQsHBZ1lCQXM...@earthlink.com>,

Sure it did. Hundreds of millions of years ago.

Are you suggesting that Noah lives hundreds of millions of years ago?
Are you suggesting that humanity existed hundreds of millions of years
ago?

> > 3) Explain what all the animals ate when
> > returned to dry land empty of all flora and
> > fauna.
>
> It says that some things were already growing by the time
> they de-arked (Genesis 8:11). Some plants grow rapidly.

How can ANYthing have grown when all the soil had been washed to the
bottom of the oceans? You can't grow crops on bare bedrock, you know.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <DdSdnWOZEd_0NAXM...@earthlink.com>,

Then why are you claiming it's a boat?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <StadnQnpt5zTNAXM...@earthlink.com>,

So nobody but this one guy thinks it's a boat. So why do you believe
him? Do you really know him well enough to trust what he says?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <HaKdnZg5n7inAwXM...@earthlink.com>,

No, it's not.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <Oq2dndNUX8O7BAXM...@earthlink.com>,

There's nothing on that page was photographs.

Where is the evidence of rapid fossilization?

[Les]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 17:16:20 -0500, Mitchell Holman

<nomailverizon.net> wrote:

>"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in

>news:PMOdnfnxOK3tZQrM...@earthlink.com:

>
>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message

>> news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

>>> Brother Love wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
>>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>>>>
>>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
>>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
>>>> Man".
>>>
>>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>>
>> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
>> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
>> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
>> east longitude. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>>
>
>
> Nope.
>
> That is where fundies SAY it is.

>So far no proof. Why is that, do you
>think?

They are looking in the wrong place. It came to rest
in fantasy land on top of the marizipan mountain near the
treacle mine and all the animals two-by live together happily
ever after.



--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 19, 8:21 am, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article <loSdnQsHBZ1lCQXMnZ2dnUVZ_qudn...@earthlink.com>,

I'd also ask, it's Andrew's understanding that the antediluvian (pre-
flood)
world did not have animals all over the globe is based on what
exactly?
Not science, that's for sure.....

>
> > >   3) Explain what all the animals ate when
> > > returned to dry land empty of all flora and
> > > fauna.
>
> > It says that some things were already growing by the time
> > they de-arked (Genesis 8:11). Some plants grow rapidly.
>
> How can ANYthing have grown when all the soil had been washed to the
> bottom of the oceans? You can't grow crops on bare bedrock, you know.
>

Let's assume for a moment that "some" plants do indeed
start to grow quickly. What percentage of the animals of the
world could survive eating those plants as opposed to what
they actually required? While we're at it, what did all the
carnivores on the big old boat eat, eh? Lions don't eat
hay...... And aside from the requirement of plants for food,
plants also form most of the habitat for many species.
Do people really believe you could kill off all the vegetation,
all the trees in a rainforest, create what would be an enormous
rotting mass of dead vegetation, then put two of each animal
back there and everything would be fine? Good grief!

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 19, 6:28 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Harry K" wrote in messagenews:6e2050fa-bfa2-438e...@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

>  "Andrew" wrote:
> > "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > > "Andrew" wrote:
> > >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > >>> Brother Love wrote:
>
> > >>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> > >>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> > >>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
> > >>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
> > >>>> Man".
>
> > >>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> > >> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> > >> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> > >> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes

> > >> east longitude.http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

>
> > > Nope.
>
> > > That is where fundies SAY it is.
>
> > No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> > "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> > US government.
>
> > > So far no proof.
>
> > Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
> > IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.
>
> -
> - And only you fundy kooks think it is a boat instead
> - of the geologic formation that it is.
>
> One of the photo analysts for the CIA believed that
> it was -the- Ark. They have photos of the area going

> back for decades.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Typical of the stretching.... If it's what's said in the article you
provided that you are now referring to, no one at CIA said it was
the ark. As I recall, it said there were 7 "experts" recruited by the
magazine,
who analyzed the CIA photos, not sure where those experts came from.
They could have come from a theological college for all we know.
Of the 7, it said 4 believed the object in the photo is" man-made", 2
believe it's
a rock, 1 said it was inconclusive. At most you have a slight
majority of
a group of 7 that say they "think" it's "man-made".

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 19, 3:40 am, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article <5r2gp890j11s897k4ic1o3eevecjeb8...@4ax.com>,
>  Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 18 May 2013 14:53:56 -0700, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net>
> > wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

>
> > >"Mitchell Holman"  wrote in message

> > >news:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

> > >> Brother Love wrote:
>
> > >>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> > >>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> > >>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> > >>> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
> > >>    How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> > >If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> > >on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> > >42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> > >east longitude.  http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>

> > It is not there.
>
> > You have been lied to and ignorantly or mendaciously repeated those
> > lies.
>
> An article more than 10 years ago and nothing since.
>
> --

This article isn't the first of the CIA satellite photo story either.
It apparently goes all the way back to 1949, when a US military
plane first took a pic of an anomaly. Subsequently it's been
photographed by not only aircraft, but satellites too.
This article is a rehash and some further investigation of the issue,
conveniently leaving out much of the long, long history of it all.

And what's up with global warming? If part of a Noah's ark
was sticking out in 1949, or even 1990, then you would think
the whole thing would be visible by now. Yet, oddly here we
are.....

[tra...@optonline.net]

On May 19, 6:27 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "August Rode" wrote in messagenews:212805b1-f20d-44bb...@googlegroups.com...

> > On Saturday, May 18, 2013 5:53:56 PM UTC-4, Andrew wrote:

> >> "Mitchell Holman"  wrote in messagenews:XnsA1C3D6905EFF9...@216.196.121.131...

> >> > Brother Love wrote:
>
> >> >> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> >> >> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> >> >> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that evolutionists
> >> >> cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking Man".
>
> >> >    How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> >> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> >> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> >> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes
> >> east longitude.  http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/
>
> > That geographic location is nowhere near accurate enough, Andrew.
> > I went to that precise location in Google Earth and there's nothing
> > there except for the mountain. Nothing that looks like a huge ark.
>
> It is visible only when conditions permit. With its summit at over
> 16, 000 feet of elevation, Mt. Ararat is snow and ice covered most
> of the year. Viewing conditions of the area will vary by the season.
> Late July and August would be the months of the least snow and
> ice cover. If global warming turns out, then we could all just go

> to Google Earth.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

This "anomaly" story apparently traces all the way back to 1949,
when a US military plane first photographed it. IF global warming
turns out? There are countless places where we have glaciers
receeding, the snow line on mountains moving up, etc.
We don't need all of the mountain to be bare, do we? I know.
It's just by misfortune or God's hand that hasn't happened on
Mt. Ararat, where just a tiny bit less snow should expose the
rest of a partly exposed boat that's already been visible at times
for the last 60 years.

[diy savant]

On 5/19/2013 8:21 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <DdSdnWOZEd_0NAXM...@earthlink.com>,
> "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:
>
>> "Harry K" wrote in message
>> news:1473af01-1bcc-4208...@hc4g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

[snip]

>> - Good, give us a cite where they say it is a boat.
>>
>> They call it an "anomaly".
>
> Then why are you claiming it's a boat?
>

It's a boat alright but it's not Noah's Ark. It's actually an old
Carnival Cruise ship that lost power and ran aground on the side of the
mountain.

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote in
news:loSdnQsHBZ1lCQXM...@earthlink.com:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> news:XnsA1C4D383AA2B4...@216.196.121.131...
>
>
>

>> 1) Explain why no Christian has gone up to
>> Noah Ark and photographed it, much less brought
>> back a piece of it.
>
> There are some photographs and pieces of it. Consider that
> the mountain, including the anomaly (Ark), is snow and ice
> covered almost all year round, especially at the 13,000 foot
> level.
>
> Also such efforts are hindered since the Turkish government
> closed off the area to visitors citing problems with Kurdish
> rebels and the site's proximity to borders of Iran and Armenia.
>

People routinely climb Mt Ararat. None
have seen any "Ark".

http://www.mountararattrek.com/

>> 2) IF Noah's Ark existed, explain how all
>> the animals native to Japan and Australia and
>> the Western Hemisphere got TO Noah's Ark and
>> then back again.
>
> My understanding is that the antediluvian world did not
> have such isolated geographical areas that you mention.

The Earth has had the same continents
in their current positions (save for a few
hundred feet worth of drift) since the Bronze
Age when this "flood" supposedly happened.

>> 3) Explain what all the animals ate when
>> returned to dry land empty of all flora and
>> fauna.
>
> It says that some things were already growing by the time
> they de-arked (Genesis 8:11). Some plants grow rapidly.

1) It takes years for trees to mature that
are needed for some species (sloths, koalas).
What did they eat in the meantime?

2) What did the carnivores eat? They could
not have eaten the sole breeding pairs of
herbivores, which would have take decades to
multiply into sustainable herds.

>
>> 4) If all humanity comes from Noah where
>> did all the different human races come from?
>
> They came through the natural, God-given laws of genetics
> with such factors as selection, isolation and environmental
> pressure.

Genetics - you mean....evolution?

[Harry K]

On May 19, 2:41 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Harry K" wrote in messagenews:99161a8a-8b52-40af...@d8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com...

So in your fantasy, the entire universe sprang into being in an
instant with all life, etc in place. That is even more fantastic than
what you consider the "big bang" to be.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 19, 2:01 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in messagenews:XnsA1C4D383AA2B4...@216.196.121.131...

You realize you just summed up the actions of evolution? Also, just
how did all that evolving take place in such a short period, only a
few thousand years?

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 19, 3:28 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Harry K" wrote in messagenews:1473af01-1bcc-4208...@hc4g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

>  "Andrew"  wrote:
> > "Meanie" wrote:
> > > Andrew wrote:
> > >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > >>> "Andrew" wrote:
> > >>>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > >>>>> Brother Love wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> > >>>>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> > >>>>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
> > >>>>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
> > >>>>>> Man".
>
> > >>>>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> > >>>> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> > >>>> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> > >>>> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes

> > >>>> east longitude.http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

>
> > >>> Nope.
>
> > >>> That is where fundies SAY it is.
>
> > >> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> > >> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> > >> US government.
>
> > >>> So far no proof.
>
> > >> Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
> > >> IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.
>
> > > LMFAO! The scary part is you actually believe it.
>
> > Mr. Holman inquired as to the Ark. I simply provided
> > evidence that would be of interest to him. The fact of
> > the Ararat anomaly's existence is acknowledged by the
> > CIA.
>
> -
> - Good, give us a cite where they say it is a boat.
>
> They call it an "anomaly".

So every "anomaly" on earth is a boat? Can you get any more asinine?

Try again. Where did they say it _is a boat_?

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 19, 3:28 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:

> "linuxgal" wrote in messagenews:saadnfWl8PCp2gXM...@giganews.com...

And not very well at that. But we have been telling you cretinists
that for years. Thanks for finallyi admitting it

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 19, 3:28 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:

> "Harry K" wrote in messagenews:6e2050fa-bfa2-438e...@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

>  "Andrew" wrote:
> > "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > > "Andrew" wrote:
> > >> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
> > >>> Brother Love wrote:
>
> > >>>> Wikipedia tells us that so-called "Peking Man" was Homo erectus
> > >>>> pekinensis, is an example of Homo erectus
>
> > >>>> It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The truth is that
> > >>>> evolutionists cannot produce any evidence of there so-called "Peking
> > >>>> Man".
>
> > >>> How is that search for Noah's Ark coming along?
>
> > >> If you are interested, you may find it located in Turkey
> > >> on that big mountain called Ararat, located 39 degrees
> > >> 42 minutes north latitude and 44 degrees 16 minutes

> > >> east longitude.http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/15907/

>
> > > Nope.
>
> > > That is where fundies SAY it is.
>
> > No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
> > "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
> > US government.
>
> > > So far no proof.
>
> > Evidence, rather than proof. The photo is from the
> > IKONOS Space Imaging satellite.
>
> -
> - And only you fundy kooks think it is a boat instead
> - of the geologic formation that it is.
>
> One of the photo analysts for the CIA believed that
> it was -the- Ark. They have photos of the area going
> back for decades.

And none of the photos show a "boat". They show a shape that only
very vaguely can be taken to be a boat...but that is all you
cretinists need.

Harry K

[Harry K]

On May 19, 6:17 am, "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net>
wrote:

But maybe it is God's hand keeping that area shaded to prevent anyone
from seeing the boat. He's probably using it as he did the fossils and
many other things "To test your faith".

Harry K

[Free Lunch]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 05:23:24 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

IT's amazing how Andrew assumes his conclusion and then gets upset that
we don't accept his indefensible claims.

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 20:30:12 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:

>Andrew wrote:
>> No, it is the exact location of what is referred to as the
>> "Ararat anomaly", acknowledged (unofficially) by the
>> US government.
>

>It's a rock outcropping in the shape of a boat. There's a dog's head on
>Mt. St. Helens and a face on Mars.

There are four presidents' heads in S. Dakota, too.

[linuxgal]

Not a lot of people know about this view. The road was a little icy though.

http://www.cleanposts.com/images/e/e4/Rushmore2.jpg

[Bob_Villa]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 8:52:25 AM UTC-5, Harry K wrote:

>
> So in your fantasy, the entire universe sprang into being in an
>
> instant with all life, etc in place. That is even more fantastic than
>
> what you consider the "big bang" to be.
>
>
>
> Harry K

Genesis doesn't say this...why would you or Andrew say it?
The huge point to me is Who or What initiated the "Big Bang"?

[k...@attt.bizz]

More importantly, what came before? IMO, both from the religious and
scientific aspects, it's unknowable and therefore, by definition,
religion. Take your pick. Only a bigot will tell you which one you
must take.

[Sjouke Burry]

Bob_Villa <pheeh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a0b3aa51-7983-4853-99df-
685915...@googlegroups.com:

tHE DOUBLE HUGE POINT IS:Who initiated the intiator???
Whats the difference between a universe initiating itself,
and a G*D initiating itself??
Or:who made G*D?????????????
Replacing one impossibility with another makes only sense to churches.
And replacing "I dont know" with "G*d dit it" has been shown in science
to be a rather stupid way to solve ones ignorance.
The current science answer is: We dont Know(yet),
for the first milli(micro?)second.

[tra...@optonline.net]

> must take.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

That's fine, but the big debate between creationist and science
isn't about what came before the big bang. Neither group even
has any claim, AFAIK, to what came before. The area of
disagreement is what happened after the big bang and more
specifically in the last billion years or so. I'm not sure what the
creationist story even is today with regard to the big bang?
Did it happen? When? etc

[k...@attt.bizz]

On 19 May 2013 16:14:40 GMT, Sjouke Burry <s@b> wrote:

>Bob_Villa <pheeh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:a0b3aa51-7983-4853-99df-
>685915...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Sunday, May 19, 2013 8:52:25 AM UTC-5, Harry K wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So in your fantasy, the entire universe sprang into being in an
>>>
>>> instant with all life, etc in place. That is even more fantastic than
>>>
>>> what you consider the "big bang" to be.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Harry K
>>
>> Genesis doesn't say this...why would you or Andrew say it?
>> The huge point to me is Who or What initiated the "Big Bang"?
>>
>>
>tHE DOUBLE HUGE POINT IS:Who initiated the intiator???
>Whats the difference between a universe initiating itself,
>and a G*D initiating itself??

The big difference is that God still affects the lives of his
believers.

>Or:who made G*D?????????????

No, that's the DOUBLE IRRELEVANT POINT.

>Replacing one impossibility with another makes only sense to churches.
>And replacing "I dont know" with "G*d dit it" has been shown in science
>to be a rather stupid way to solve ones ignorance.
>The current science answer is: We dont Know(yet),
>for the first milli(micro?)second.

More accurately, we will never know. What came before will *always*
be unknowable. If you believe otherwise, you're guilty of the charge
you make against other believers (which won't surprise them much).

[Meanie]

On 5/18/2013 11:58 PM, Bob F wrote:
> Attila Iskander wrote:

>> "Meanie" <meani...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:kn93l1$g27$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 5/18/2013 6:40 PM, Andrew wrote:
>>>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsA1C4AEF221932...@216.196.121.131...

>>>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>>>>>> Attila Iskander wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Meanie" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Religious zealots grasps many straws with attempts of
>>>>>>>>> disarming the facts of evolution or other theories opposing
>>>>>>>>> creationism. They are desperate souls.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would suspect that the real "religious zealots" are such as
>>>>>>>> you, who have a need to denigrate and demonize those you see as
>>>>>>>> your opponents

>>>>>>>> And denigration and demonization of your opponents only
>>>>>>>> shows you to
>>>>>>>> be the "desperate soul"..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I obviously hit a nerve stating a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have the truth, you need not denigrate those who
>>>>>> have a different position than yours. This you have done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Evidence best supports the Creation model of origins,
>>>>>> contrary to what you have been taught.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What evidence is that?
>>>>
>>>> If you study it out with a sincere desire for the truth
>>>> you will find it. Then you will want to renounce the
>>>> deceptions that they fed you; and then help others to
>>>> escape the falsehoods that have deceived the masses.
>>>>
>>>> ~ Andrew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> LMFAO! The scary part is you truly believe it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Clearly your belief is not based on knowledge
>> A couple of other words for that are, bigotry, ignorance, prejudice.
>> There are a few more, but all seem to have far more syllables than
>> you can handle.
>

> WOW!!
>
> Pot, kettle, black......
>
> Why do right wing wackos always accuse others of exactly the traits they
> themselves display so accuratly.
>
>
Perhaps due to my original comment which hit the nerve of our inferior
believer.

[Meanie]

More so is, "typical".