Startling Evidence That Noah's Flood Happened - Oard - YT - 1 Hr.

[curtjester1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related

CJ

[sully]

On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>

thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.

Where did the water go?

Was the global flood salt water or fresh water? If salt, what
happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?

What about plants? how did they survive?

How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?

There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE, why?

Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE, how did a global flood
skip China?

[Andrew Robertson]

On 6/06/2012 11:19 a.m., sully wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related

<snip>

> How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?

This way!

http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/kangaroo-swim.html


Andrew

[Peter Schilte]

On 5 jun, 23:09, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>

> CJ

Where did the population of Africa come from? Did they evolve from
Noah's sons in only a few thousand years?
Where did the population of Australia and New Zealand come from? Did
they also evolve from Noah's sons in only a few thousand years?
The Native Americans, where did they come from? Did they also evolve
from Noah's sons in only a few thousand years?
How did they get there?
And why did all these peoples survive the flood, as there is no
evidence they didn't?
Why didn't the flood wash away the wall paintings in caves like
Chauvet (France, 33,000 BCE), or Lacaux (France, 15,000 BCE), or many
others in Spain, Australia or Africa?


Sir Peter

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

sully wrote:

> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> Where did the water go?

Oh Black Water, Keep on Rollen, Mississippi Moon won't'cha keep on
Shining on me!

[•R.Measures]

In article
<d048e303-bc6f-4317...@n16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
curtjester1 <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> CJ

АА The Jews plagiarized the story of the Great Flood from "pagan"
religions in the area.

[Steve O]

On 05/06/2012 22:09, curtjester1 wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> CJ

Neither startling nor evidence

[•R.Measures]

In article <a3a1o4...@mid.individual.net>, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
wrote:

• With enough faith, evidence doesn't count.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

"紐.Measures" wrote:

> In article
> <d048e303-bc6f-4317...@n16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
> curtjester1 <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Court,
Jester is a lil Moldy!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

What "Pat Robertson", and Albie, "COUNT ON"!

[curtjester1]

On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> Where did the water go?
>
> Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>

Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
it would surely mix with the waters below. And I am sure the torrid
runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....

> What about plants?   how did they survive?
>

Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?

> How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>

I think someone gave a link to that.

> There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>


> Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> skip China?

There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
in their cultures. I would check your dating methodologies. They're
quite debated upon.

CJ

[curtjester1]

Why?

CJ

[curtjester1]

On Jun 6, 7:25 am, r...@somis.org (•R.Measures) wrote:
> In article
> <d048e303-bc6f-4317-8f2d-445d9c4d9...@n16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,

>
> curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>

> > CJ
>
>  €€  The Jews plagiarized the story of the Great Flood from "pagan"
> religions in the area.

Gilgamesh is thought to have been taken from the Noah account. I
would read Charles Martin's, Flood Legends.

CJ

[curtjester1]

On Jun 6, 12:18 am, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole"

That was covered in the video.

CJ

[sully]

On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > Where did the water go?

Thanks for responding cj. You didn't answer this question. For
the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
etc). Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.

But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?

Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies, Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.

Where did it go?

>
> > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....

So a mix of salt and fresh water. Basically you've killed off most
of the fish.

>
> > What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?

Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive. But now
you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.

>
> > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> I think someone gave a link to that.

Yes, they can swim. How good a swimmer is a Koala? Say a life span
of a Kangaroo is about 25 years. How many years would it take for
a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
back to Aussieland?

Same for a Koala?

>
> > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > skip China?
>
> There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> quite debated upon.

The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
documented as such through the flood time period. Why would the
Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
completely eliminated all of the Chinese?

thanks again.

[Honest Abe]

If the Noah myth is really true, I'm ready to believe the Tooth Fairy will
pay all my future dental bills.
Or should Santa Claus be doing that?

[John Manning]

On 6/5/2012 6:09 PM, curtjester1 wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> CJ

What a load of horse shit.

[Kat]

On Thursday, June 7, 2012 10:48:35 AM UTC-4, curtjester1 wrote:

> Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> it would surely mix with the waters below. And I am sure the torrid
> runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....

And would have created geological evidence of their presence.

>
>
> > What about plants?   how did they survive?
> >
> Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?

Again, if there was a mass extinction of plants there would be evidence for it.

>
> > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
> >
> I think someone gave a link to that.

Bottom line is, they weren't on any ark. Noah's flood is a myth. Sure there very well might have been seasonal flooding or a tsunami or something to that effect that inspired the myth in the first place, but it's not fact.

>
> > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
> >
>
>
> > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > skip China?
>
> There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> in their cultures. I would check your dating methodologies. They're
> quite debated upon.

Of course there is. There has been continuous cultural blending between european and chinese culture for a VERY long time. Major Chinese waterways have a long and documented history of flooding.

It doesn't make the Noah myth true.

[Andrew Robertson]

On 8/06/2012 2:48 a.m., curtjester1 wrote:

>> How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>>
> I think someone gave a link to that.

Once upon a time, around 184 million years ago, East Gondwana,
comprising Antarctica, Madagascar, India, Australia and New Zealand
began to separate from Africa and drifted slowly south taking the
kangaroos with it.

The earth is approximately four and a half thousand million years old,
and to treat the Bible as in anyway an accurate record of our planet's
past would not seem sensible considering that it was not written by
geologists.

That there are those who eschew the remarkable analytic and deductive
powers of their own brains and choose to live in a world of superstition
and myth would be a worthy study for evolutionary biologists.


Andrew

[•R.Measures]

In article <-aKdnS22HpjcyE3S...@posted.gcicommunications>,

"Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole" <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

• Indeed. The salvation business is the slickest scam ever invented by man.

[•R.Measures]

In article
<a294a539-dc3f-4739...@w24g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
curtjester1 <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 6, 7:25=A0am, r...@somis.org (=95R.Measures) wrote:
> > In article
> > <d048e303-bc6f-4317-8f2d-445d9c4d9...@n16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DKGeULHljDn8&feature=3Drelated
> >
> > > CJ
> >
> > =A0=80=80 =A0The Jews plagiarized the story of the Great Flood from "paga=

> n"
> > religions in the area.
>
> Gilgamesh is thought to have been taken from the Noah account. I
> would read Charles Martin's, Flood Legends.
>
> CJ

*** Legends is the right word. There is no geological evidence of a
worldwide flood.

[•R.Measures]

In article <-qmdndH_HamRaE3S...@giganews.com>, John Manning

** it Was startling John.

[•R.Measures]

In article <jqrp8r$i3$1...@dont-email.me>, Andrew Robertson

• guffaw. Good one Andrew.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

curtjester1 wrote:

> On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > Where did the water go?
> >
> > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water? If salt, what
> > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?

Fresh, as for the Salt Water, Whales, Fish and other Sea Creatures, piss in
the water Daily, and Man, flushes Mucho Galore down the Tubes!

>
> >

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Yours, maybe!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Mayan, are equally s good!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

sully wrote:

> On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > Where did the water go?
>
> Thanks for responding cj. You didn't answer this question. For
> the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> etc). Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
>
> But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?

"Day they Broke the World"!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Honest Abe wrote:

> If the Noah myth is really true, I'm ready to believe the Tooth Fairy will
> pay all my future dental bills.

Not even if you have a GREAT Lawyer!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Like the KJV??

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Andrew Robertson wrote:

> On 8/06/2012 2:48 a.m., curtjester1 wrote:
>
> >> How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?

"God, made the Creatures of the Field", before Man!
Making Man, "GOD" said go fuck yourself, and Left!
Returning to see how things were going GOD, found All but MAN, had
Procreated, so God Separated Man from Woman.
Worst Mistake Ever Made!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Yep, you want Eternal Life Here?
Or consider the Idea that "There is a Door", right over there, and personally I
intend to go through it, alive or dead

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Ice Age Sea Breeches Did Happen!
There is Evidence of "World Wide Flooding, from such!
Great Lakes, Mediterranean, the Texas Plains, are Ancient River Beds!
Salt Lake, is an Ancient Seaway. . . . . . . . . .

[•R.Measures]

In article <Ccydnaqkoqrzk07S...@posted.gcicommunications>,

"Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole" <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

• Continents rise, fall and slide but the Himalayas were never submerged
by a high tide.

[curtjester1]

There's a lot written on uniformitarianism and the million year this
and that theories. I did post some of John Morris' The Young Earth in
a previous thread. Don't have time to retrieve. This might do.

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/earthage.html

CJ

[curtjester1]

On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > > Where did the water go?
>
> Thanks for responding cj.    You didn't answer this question.   For
> the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> etc).   Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
>

I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
high because of the water and other factors. Biblicists cite Psalms
104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.

> But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
>
> Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
>
> Where did it go?
>
>

Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
beds, new rain cycles. etc.

>
> > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
>
> So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> of the fish.
>
>

No problem there. Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
up a good Flood book.

>
> > > What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> > Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?
>
> Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
> Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive.    But now
> you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.
>
>

You could have seeds coming off the boat. You could have seeds on
debris. You could have seeds buried and sprouting.

>
> > > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> > I think someone gave a link to that.
>
> Yes, they can swim.   How good a swimmer is a Koala?   Say a life span
> of a Kangaroo is about  25 years.    How many years would it take for
> a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
> back to Aussieland?
>
> Same for a Koala?
>
>

Australia could have been formed by the flood, or people just could
have boated them over.

>
> > > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> > > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > > skip China?
>
> > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> > in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> > quite debated upon.
>
> The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
> documented as such through the flood time period.   Why would the
> Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
> same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
> completely eliminated all of the Chinese?
>
> thanks again.

Because their civilization didn't start until after the Flood. Why
would they have a prevalent flood myth dated agreeably before the
flood account of the Bible account in 1500 BC when it was written?

CJ

[Peter Schilte]

On 9 jun, 19:43, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > > > Where did the water go?
>
> > Thanks for responding cj.    You didn't answer this question.   For
> > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > etc).   Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
>
> I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> high because of the water and other factors.  Biblicists cite Psalms
> 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
>

What "other factors"? So far you make statements that are in no way
supported by science, evidence or geology. Mountains became high
because of tectonic movements that are going on for billions of years.
Not because of something that supposedly happened 3500 years ago.

> > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
>
> > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
>
> > Where did it go?
>
> Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> beds, new rain cycles. etc.
>

Really? Well, those "many" most certainly do not include geologists.
Mainly flat earthers like yourself, not bothered by any science,
support it.

>
>
> > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
>
> > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > of the fish.
>
> No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> up a good Flood book.
>

LOL! Most fossils, if not all, are dated millions of years before the
supposed flood.

> > > > What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> > > Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?
>
> > Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
> > Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive.    But now
> > you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.
>
> You could have seeds coming off the boat.  You could have seeds on
> debris.  You could have seeds buried and sprouting.
>

You could also have no flood at all, which by the way is a much more
acceptable theory.

>
>
> > > > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> > > I think someone gave a link to that.
>
> > Yes, they can swim.   How good a swimmer is a Koala?   Say a life span
> > of a Kangaroo is about  25 years.    How many years would it take for
> > a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
> > back to Aussieland?
>
> > Same for a Koala?
>
> Australia could have been formed by the flood, or people just could
> have boated them over.
>

Could have, could have: Is that all you have to support your religious
theories? What about some science? Or history? Either have an agenda
to defend.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> > > > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > > > skip China?
>
> > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> > > in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> > > quite debated upon.
>
> > The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
> > documented as such through the flood time period.   Why would the
> > Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
> > same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
> > completely eliminated all of the Chinese?
>
> > thanks again.
>
> Because their civilization didn't start until after the Flood.

If so, please explain how Chinese civilization started thousands of
years BEFORE the flood, which by your suggestions was only 3500 years
ago?

> Why
> would they have a prevalent flood myth dated agreeably before the
> flood account of the Bible account in 1500 BC when it was written?
>

You tell me. As you are the one claiming the flood supposedly was 3500
years ago.....

> CJ

Sir Peter

[Kat]

On Saturday, June 9, 2012 1:47:25 PM UTC-4, curtjester1 wrote:

>
> http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/earthage.html
>
> CJ

What a load of crap that webpage was!

"We can not look at current rates of rock formation, erosion, etc to determine the age of the earth because there may have been factors in the past that are not happening in the present."

False. Radiometric dating isn't phased by broken rocks.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

Shoot, yearly buildup of icebergs and tree ring counting projects for forests date back thousands of more years (hundreds of thousands in some cases) than what you are claiming the earth is.

"Everything we know of Science (entropy etc..) tells us that even if the world was millions or even billions of years old, evolution would still be impossible"

Except that we have recently evolved as a species right under the noses of the mass media and science. A whole new blood type has emerged in africa that is HIV resistant, in a place where HIV has ravaged the population. They. Evolved.

We didn't turn into humans overnight, sunshine.

"Can we tell how old the earth is by looking at this strata? "

If that thin blue line was a volcanic ash layer, easily. Tephrochronology is a very reliable and easily verified science.

"If there was a world wide flood (as described in Genesis) then many layers of soft sediments would stratify at one time."

Geologists can isometrically date the minerals in flood beds in the strata. Let me put that in laymen speak for ya: They can tell which dirt is older when floods spread things around.

Floods leave sediment in layers. Look at the seasonal flooding of the Nile that has sustained farmers for countless years. Look what happens when the Mississippi or another huge river floods. What is left behind? Sediment. The next flood dumps sediment on top of THAT- it doesn't wash it all away or make it cease to be the element that it is.

"If there was a flood, then you could have what appeared to be "millions of years" of strata formed in a period of a few months. "

Radiometric dating would reveal it to have been formed in a short amount of time.

"The rock encasing polystrate fossils is sedimentary rock. It is rock that was once soft sediment laid down by water, that later hardened. "

First of all, polystrate fossils (and that term is only used by evolutionists) are easily explained by geology and the location of where those fossils are found. A giant ass supervolvano that has blown before is sitting right next to a large number of these supposedly questionable fossils. Roots formed on the trunks of these trees after they were buried... they were alive after a sudden dump of sediment from a catastrophic geological event.

"Bristle cone pines are the oldest living things in the world. However they should not be used to determine the age of the earth, as they have been known to produce more than one tree ring per year. Using Bristle cone pines to determine the age of the earth would then be erroneous."

There is more than one kind of tree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tjikko

carbon dating of roots > bible.

""In the 1970s, the late creationist physics professor Dr Thomas Barnes noted that measurements since 1835 have shown that the field is decaying at 5% per century (also, archaeological measurements show that the field was 40% stronger in AD 1000 than today). Barnes, the author of a well-regarded electromagnetism textbook, proposed that the earth’s magnetic field was caused by a decaying electric current in the earth’s metallic core.

Barnes calculated that the current could not have been decaying for more than 10,000 years, or else its original strength would have been large enough to melt the earth. So the earth must be younger than that."

Except that isn't true.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/29dec_magneticfield/

"According to Glatzmaier, the ongoing 10% decline doesn't mean that a reversal is imminent. "The field is increasing or decreasing all the time," he says. "We know this from studies of the paleomagnetic record." Earth's present-day magnetic field is, in fact, much stronger than normal. The dipole moment, a measure of the intensity of the magnetic field, is now 8 × 1022 amps × m2. That's twice the million-year average of 4× 1022 amps × m2."


This pile of tripe webpage then goes on to argue that the written record only goes back 6,000 years. 26 specific pictograms have been identified in use in cave paintings that stretch a 20,000 year time frame. This signifies a cultural attempt at writing. Archaeology AGAIN proving the bible wrong. I could go through the rest of the laughable claims on that webpage but I think this is a fair start to demonstrating that your claims are full of shit.

[•R.Measures]

In article
<d266f84d-6f6b-4bc9...@k5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, Peter

Schilte <peters...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9 jun, 19:43, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 7, 11:08=A0am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 7, 7:48=A0am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jun 5, 5:19=A0pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:0=

> 9=A0pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DKGeULHljDn8&feature=3Drelated
> >

> > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > > Where did the water go?
> >

> > > Thanks for responding cj. =A0 =A0You didn't answer this question. =A0 F=

> or
> > > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,

> > > etc). =A0 Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephan=

> t
> > > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
> >
> > I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became

> > high because of the water and other factors. =A0Biblicists cite Psalms

> > 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
> >
>
> What "other factors"? So far you make statements that are in no way
> supported by science, evidence or geology. Mountains became high
> because of tectonic movements that are going on for billions of years.
> Not because of something that supposedly happened 3500 years ago.

> ... ... ...
• One "other factor" is denial of reality Peter S.

[Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.]

"Kat" <lady...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fb178f46-1265-4638...@googlegroups.com...

On Saturday, June 9, 2012 1:47:25 PM UTC-4, curtjester1 wrote:

>
> http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/earthage.html
>
> CJ

What a load of crap that webpage was!

"We can not look at current rates of rock formation, erosion, etc to
determine the age of the earth because there may have been factors in the
past that are not happening in the present."

False. Radiometric dating isn't phased by broken rocks.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

Shoot, yearly buildup of icebergs and tree ring counting projects for
forests date back thousands of more years (hundreds of thousands in some
cases) than what you are claiming the earth is.

<trim the rest of Kat's illogical thinking>

Kat, what you atheists and agnostics call proof fails utterly to consider
the fact that God is most certainly capable of creating 10,000 years ago a
world that has a history in the rocks of billions of years. Duh! God is
omnipotent. It's child's play for the Creator to create a world that seems
to mankind's tests to be billions of years old when it could, indeed, have
been created 10,000 years ago.

Now run along, your conformist, liberal idiocy has just been debunked.

--
Sir Gregory

[curtjester1]

On Jun 9, 9:36 pm, Peter Schilte <peterschi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 jun, 19:43, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > > > > Where did the water go?
>
> > > Thanks for responding cj.    You didn't answer this question.   For
> > > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > > etc).   Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
>
> > I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> > high because of the water and other factors.  Biblicists cite Psalms
> > 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
>
> What "other factors"? So far you make statements that are in no way
> supported by science, evidence or geology. Mountains became high
> because of tectonic movements that are going on for billions of years.
> Not because of something that supposedly happened 3500 years ago.
>

All issues are presented in many of the global flood books on the
market, which take in account 'old science' thinking of their geology
theories supported by many arguments that counteract the old
thinkings. Tectonic movements alone didn't account for the mountain
risings as they have found many sea fossils atop of them.

> > > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
>
> > > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
>
> > > Where did it go?
>
> > Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> > beds, new rain cycles. etc.
>
> Really? Well, those "many" most certainly do not include geologists.
> Mainly flat earthers like yourself, not bothered by any science,
> support it.
>
>

Well, many of your pals don't know where the water came from to begin
with, so make them account for that, eh? Most geologists make their
hay by going along with old age happenings. You should take issue
with them, the global floodists spell out their beliefs and attack
them one by one.

>
> > > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> > > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
>
> > > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > > of the fish.
>
> > No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> > up a good Flood book.
>
> LOL! Most fossils, if not all, are dated millions of years before the
> supposed flood.
>

That's why they study them. How they got there, and why some are
newer or fresher fossils vs. older ones. I think it's called
tephanology or something closely spelled to that.

> > > > > What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> > > > Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?
>
> > > Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
> > > Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive.    But now
> > > you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.
>
> > You could have seeds coming off the boat.  You could have seeds on
> > debris.  You could have seeds buried and sprouting.
>
> You could also have no flood at all, which by the way is a much more
> acceptable theory.
>
>

You could also hide your head in the sand while there is a local flood
going on and say what you want.

>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> > > > I think someone gave a link to that.
>
> > > Yes, they can swim.   How good a swimmer is a Koala?   Say a life span
> > > of a Kangaroo is about  25 years.    How many years would it take for
> > > a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
> > > back to Aussieland?
>
> > > Same for a Koala?
>
> > Australia could have been formed by the flood, or people just could
> > have boated them over.
>
> Could have, could have: Is that all you have to support your religious
> theories? What about some science? Or history? Either have an agenda
> to defend.
>
>

I'm here to get some interest up, not babysit people or look stuff up
for them. Googling is quite inexpensive and so are the many books on
the market. You could actually watch the video and comment on some of
the observation/proofs if you would like, too.

>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> > > > > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > > > > skip China?
>
> > > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> > > > in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> > > > quite debated upon.
>
> > > The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
> > > documented as such through the flood time period.   Why would the
> > > Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
> > > same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
> > > completely eliminated all of the Chinese?
>
> > > thanks again.
>
> > Because their civilization didn't start until after the Flood.
>
> If so, please explain how Chinese civilization started thousands of
> years BEFORE the flood, which by your suggestions was only 3500 years
> ago?
>

It didn't. Having a flood story that can be attributed to no other
story or person is quite irrefutable.

> > Why
> > would they have a prevalent flood myth dated agreeably before the
> > flood account of the Bible account in 1500 BC when it was written?
>
> You tell me. As you are the one claiming the flood supposedly was 3500
> years ago.....
>

It's because Moses was inspired to write of things well before his
life, Creation, The GoE, Geneolgies of mankind and details about them,
as well as the Flood, and Tower of Babel where different languages
arose.

CJ

> > CJ
>
> Sir Peter

[curtjester1]

On Jun 10, 8:35 am, r...@somis.org (•R.Measures) wrote:
> In article

> <d266f84d-6f6b-4bc9-9a19-20079144f...@k5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, Peter

Or the denial to know issues and read upon them?

CJ

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <8cfd3b41-fee1-41b0...@h9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
curtjester1 says...

>
>> > > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a
>> > > > very close name of Noah in their cultures.

That's a pretty vague claim that I would bet comes from
a religious apologist tract source. Amateurs like you who
dabble in history and science for religious-defense purposes
and repeat patent nonsense among your fellow-travellers
are responsible for a marked rise in general stupidity in
these areas.

[Kat]

On Sunday, June 10, 2012 11:55:02 AM UTC-4, Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq. wrote:
> "Kat" <lady...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:fb178f46-1265-4638...@googlegroups.com...
> On Saturday, June 9, 2012 1:47:25 PM UTC-4, curtjester1 wrote:
>
> >
> > http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/earthage.html
> >
> > CJ
>
> What a load of crap that webpage was!
>
> "We can not look at current rates of rock formation, erosion, etc to
> determine the age of the earth because there may have been factors in the
> past that are not happening in the present."
>
> False. Radiometric dating isn't phased by broken rocks.
> http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html
>
> Shoot, yearly buildup of icebergs and tree ring counting projects for
> forests date back thousands of more years (hundreds of thousands in some
> cases) than what you are claiming the earth is.
>
> <trim the rest of Kat's illogical thinking>
>
> Kat, what you atheists and agnostics

I'm not atheist OR agnostic, sunshine.

> call proof fails utterly to consider
> the fact that God is most certainly capable of creating 10,000 years ago a
> world that has a history in the rocks of billions of years. Duh! God is
> omnipotent. It's child's play for the Creator to create a world that seems
> to mankind's tests to be billions of years old when it could, indeed, have
> been created 10,000 years ago.
>
> Now run along, your conformist, liberal idiocy has just been debunked.

No. It hasn't. If you genuinely believe this, Snot Boy, I feel bad for you. I suspect you do not actually believe it and are just trolling, but either way... you are simply an obsessed retard.

Evidence based science, with results that can be duplicated by others over time, simply have more appeal to me than "What if?" statements made by religious fanatics. Science and faith can co-exist, but not if you deny the workings of the physical universe by sticking your head in the sand and saying "God did it". THAT just makes you lazy.... and stupid.

[Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.]

"Kat" <lady...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:f0210916-fdea-4e46...@googlegroups.com...

================[reply]===================

Distill it down, Kat. Distill it down. Sooner or later, no matter the
time, no matter the place it all comes down to a creator. However, the age
of the Earth has little relevance to the age of the Universe we observe.
So does not your obsession with the paltry amount of time mankind has
walked the Earth indicate how parochial your beliefs really are? So what
if the Earth is thought to be about five or six billion years old. BFD!
How Homo sapiens-centric is that?

The age of the universe is extrapolated to be around 13.7 billion years by
winding the motion picture scientists observe backwards. It all indicates
a singularity that birthed the known universe. So who created this
singularity? Was it God? or does the universe we see only cycle back and
forth forever. If it does, then who created the cycles? God? Random
happenstance? And, how about recent theories that the universe we see is
but one of billions of universes we don't see?

At any rate it all has to have a beginning. That beginning is the work of
the creator. Quibbling about some silly, flyspeck human understanding of
God's greater glory only proves arrogance and ignorance - not knowledge.

--
Sir Gregory

[curtjester1]

On Jun 10, 11:28 am, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer <Lydig_mem...@newsguy.com>
wrote:
> In article <8cfd3b41-fee1-41b0-9621-ff1b2c15d...@h9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,

There is no vague claim. The flood account with ship, passengers,
testing birds, some intricate some woven with their own versions are
in a huge amount of cultures. The retribution via judgment, animals,
and survivors are quite commonplace and I would recommend getting a
little grip on yourself, and actually reading up on the subject.
Also, there are many cultures with old age claims like length of years
accounts for Noah and his precedessors, and generations afterwards, as
well as huge people labelled as giants in the Bible are in culture
lore. I would recommend the Charles Martin book for getting a toehold
that you don't seem to have yet, and I don't adhere to any of their
religious believings.

CJ

[curtjester1]

On Jun 10, 5:06 pm, Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.
<gregh...@home.fåke> wrote:
> "Kat" <ladyas...@comcast.net> wrote in message

>
> news:f0210916-fdea-4e46...@googlegroups.com...
> On Sunday, June 10, 2012 11:55:02 AM UTC-4,   Sir · Gregory · Hall,  Esq.
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > "Kat" <ladyas...@comcast.net> wrote in message

There are religous, Bible belivers that don't put a time limit on the
universe or earth according to what they read in Genesis. That is
attributed to a happening before day one. And since the 'days' of
Genesis are nowhere specified as a concrete length, and the seventh
day is still ongoing, it surely can relegate the time periods to many
more years than a 24 hr. day.

CJ

[sully]

On Jun 9, 10:43 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > > > Where did the water go?
>
> > Thanks for responding cj.    You didn't answer this question.   For
> > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > etc).   Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
>
> I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> high because of the water and other factors.  Biblicists cite Psalms
> 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.

So curtis, you completely reject the science of
Geology?

>
> > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
>
> > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
>
> > Where did it go?
>
> Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> beds, new rain cycles. etc.

you are making that up. I don't think you are treating this topic
very honestly.

>
>
>
> > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
>
> > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > of the fish.
>
> No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> up a good Flood book.

You skipped my question entirely. The saline water of the flood
would have killed off all of the freshwater fish.

You don't believe in biology either.

>
> > > > What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> > > Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?
>
> > Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
> > Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive.    But now
> > you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.
>
> You could have seeds coming off the boat.  You could have seeds on
> debris.  You could have seeds buried and sprouting.

You seem to reject botany as well. There is no mention of Noah
collecting seeds, saplings, cuttings, spores, or any of the complex
mechanisms for plant propogation. Most of that would have been
destroyed in the flood. Like I said,
there are only a few hundred of the millions of plant species that
would survive a year long drowning in salt water.

>
>
>
> > > > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> > > I think someone gave a link to that.
>
> > Yes, they can swim.   How good a swimmer is a Koala?   Say a life span
> > of a Kangaroo is about  25 years.    How many years would it take for
> > a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
> > back to Aussieland?
>
> > Same for a Koala?
>
> Australia could have been formed by the flood, or people just could
> have boated them over.

What people? There were just 1/2 dozen people left on earth 3500
years ago according to you.

Did they boat snails and slugs from Turkey to the Americas? How long
did it take for snails to cover the whole continents of north and
south America?

Did they boat all the drowned orchids to the Amazon? Spiders?

Very very silly idea.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> > > > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > > > skip China?
>
> > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> > > in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> > > quite debated upon.
>
> > The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
> > documented as such through the flood time period.   Why would the
> > Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
> > same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
> > completely eliminated all of the Chinese?
>
> > thanks again.
>
> Because their civilization didn't start until after the Flood.  Why
> would they have a prevalent flood myth dated agreeably before the
> flood account of the Bible account in 1500 BC when it was written?

A continous cultural record of chinese
culture goes back BEFORE the flood.
This record would have been wiped out,
and there would be a record of how
chinese culture started from a couple
descendants who arrived in China some
time after 3500 BC.
There are copious other
records instead.

You reject history as well.

[sully]

You and Logan would get along great.

Are you just putting us on, or do you really
believe this?

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
>
> > > > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > > > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > > > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > > > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
>
> > > > Where did it go?
>
> > > Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> > > beds, new rain cycles. etc.
>
> > Really? Well, those "many" most certainly do not include geologists.
> > Mainly flat earthers like yourself, not bothered by any science,
> > support it.
>
> Well, many of your pals don't know where the water came from to begin
> with, so make them account for that, eh?  Most geologists make their
> hay by going along with old age happenings.  You should take issue
> with them, the global floodists spell out their beliefs and attack
> them one by one.

There was no global flood, so we don't have to account
for where the water came from.

That's your job.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> > > > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
>
> > > > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > > > of the fish.
>
> > > No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> > > up a good Flood book.
>
> > LOL! Most fossils, if not all, are dated millions of years before the
> > supposed flood.
>
> That's why they study them.  How they got there, and why some are
> newer or fresher fossils vs. older ones.  I think it's called
> tephanology or something closely spelled to that.

Taphonomy. You can't possibly accept taphonomy without
first accepting geology. Taphonomy explains the chemical
processes for a biological organism becoming a fossil. This
describes processes that can happen over millions of years.

That pretty much eliminates all of your version
of the way the world works.

That video, nor any world-flood book or talk has any scientific
evidence at all.

Why couldn't he keep his creation stories straight? Why are there
two very different versions?

[curtj...@hotmail.com]

Why would I make that up? Do you always make irrational, knee-jerk statments? People DO have that point(s) of view and have devoted a lot of time researching and expressing about that. Do you think the earth was created all for your liking with oceans and mountains all in tact, never to change for just the way you want it to?

>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
> >
> > > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
> >
> > > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > > of the fish.
> >
> > No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> > up a good Flood book.
>
> You skipped my question entirely. The saline water of the flood
> would have killed off all of the freshwater fish.
>

It's a ridiculous question and needs no real thought to answer it. You don't know how much fresh and salt waters existed and to think that there wouldn't be a great amount of both during the flood would give anyone a thought to believe that many would live and many would die.

> You don't believe in biology either.
>
>
> >
> > > > > What about plants?   how did they survive?
> >
> > > > Why wouldn't the seed process continue on?
> >
> > > Some seeds could survive drowning, but many seed species would not.
> > > Some species propagate by bulb which wouldn't survive.    But now
> > > you've got a saline land mass from all the salt water sitting on it.
> >
> > You could have seeds coming off the boat.  You could have seeds on
> > debris.  You could have seeds buried and sprouting.
>
> You seem to reject botany as well. There is no mention of Noah
> collecting seeds, saplings, cuttings, spores, or any of the complex
> mechanisms for plant propogation. Most of that would have been
> destroyed in the flood. Like I said,
> there are only a few hundred of the millions of plant species that
> would survive a year long drowning in salt water.
>
>

He planted a vineyard afterwards so you reject common sense and knowledge. And look at all those things in the ocean that live in the ocean and grow and survive. When you just want to think of things to disprove and try so hard at it, you seem to back yourself into easy logic corners.

>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
> >
> > > > I think someone gave a link to that.
> >
> > > Yes, they can swim.   How good a swimmer is a Koala?   Say a life span
> > > of a Kangaroo is about  25 years.    How many years would it take for
> > > a Kangaroo to swim and hop from Aussieland to Israel, then from Turkey
> > > back to Aussieland?
> >
> > > Same for a Koala?
> >
> > Australia could have been formed by the flood, or people just could
> > have boated them over.
>
> What people? There were just 1/2 dozen people left on earth 3500
> years ago according to you.
>

Well, 8 is not a 1/2 dozen and people did and do mulitply very fast.

> Did they boat snails and slugs from Turkey to the Americas? How long
> did it take for snails to cover the whole continents of north and
> south America?
>
> Did they boat all the drowned orchids to the Amazon? Spiders?
>
> Very very silly idea.

Not really when so many have taken the time to show you exactly where and why of the things you pose.

>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
> >
> > > > > Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> > > > > skip China?
> >
> > > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a very close name of Noah
> > > > in their cultures.  I would check your dating methodologies.  They're
> > > > quite debated upon.
> >
> > > The point is that Chinese civilization has existed continuously and
> > > documented as such through the flood time period.   Why would the
> > > Chinese have a flood myth that is in their history, and exactly the
> > > same cultural history that precedes that flood if that flood
> > > completely eliminated all of the Chinese?
> >
> > > thanks again.
> >
> > Because their civilization didn't start until after the Flood.  Why
> > would they have a prevalent flood myth dated agreeably before the
> > flood account of the Bible account in 1500 BC when it was written?
>
> A continous cultural record of chinese
> culture goes back BEFORE the flood.
> This record would have been wiped out,

But since it wasn't wiped out and the record was incorporated, it means you have a faulty premise.

> and there would be a record of how
> chinese culture started from a couple
> descendants who arrived in China some
> time after 3500 BC.
> There are copious other
> records instead.
>
> You reject history as well.

There are suppostions that Noah is 5000 B.C. IN Chinese culture. It doesn't mean they are right, but it means that there is a Flood account that people like you must account for.

CJ

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <e3b43c74-2b34-4e19...@e20g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
curtjester1 says...
>
>On Jun 10, 11:28=A0am, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer <Lydig_mem...@newsguy.com>

I guess that "Discovery of Genesis" by
Kang and Nelson and its bullshit "Chinese Noah"
claims are out of fashion now -- it was pretty hot stuff
there on the web and usenet until it got its ass handed
to it by people who actually know Chinese languages
and culture.

Throw it on the pile of "inspired Christian proofs"
that turned out to be not so inspired -- and bring on
the next one, eh?

I've read Martin's book, putz. It's a stroke book for
Biblical literalist zealots disguised as "serious scholarship"
that proves nothing whatsoever.

You actually think that there is something amazing that
most if not all cultures have come up with stories involving
floods when most if not all cultures have experienced floods
as important and traumatic events?

I would recommend that you ought to get a grip
-- on what critical thinking means.

[curtj...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, June 11, 2012 11:44:52 AM UTC-6, sully wrote:
> On Jun 10, 9:10 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 9:36 pm, Peter Schilte

You don't think a massive amount of water coming from above and below the earth wouldn't impact the tectonics of the earth??!!

They have meteors that have hit the earth on one side and created earthquakes on the other side.

>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
> >
> > > > > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > > > > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies,  Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > > > > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > > > > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
> >
> > > > > Where did it go?
> >
> > > > Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> > > > beds, new rain cycles. etc.
> >
> > > Really? Well, those "many" most certainly do not include geologists.
> > > Mainly flat earthers like yourself, not bothered by any science,
> > > support it.
> >
> > Well, many of your pals don't know where the water came from to begin
> > with, so make them account for that, eh?  Most geologists make their
> > hay by going along with old age happenings.  You should take issue
> > with them, the global floodists spell out their beliefs and attack
> > them one by one.
>
>
> There was no global flood, so we don't have to account
> for where the water came from.
>
> That's your job.

Your claiming the water arriving via flood is impossible, and yet you are willing to accept that the water arrived here somehow without any qualms or theory. What is wrong with that picture?

>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> > > > > > > happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
> >
> > > > > > Not sure its relevant but assuming the waters from above were fresh,
> > > > > > it would surely mix with the waters below.  And I am sure the torrid
> > > > > > runoff would have created all sorts of situations.....
> >
> > > > > So a mix of salt and fresh water.   Basically you've killed off most
> > > > > of the fish.
> >
> > > > No problem there.  Lots of fish fossils to prove the flood if you pick
> > > > up a good Flood book.
> >
> > > LOL! Most fossils, if not all, are dated millions of years before the
> > > supposed flood.
> >
> > That's why they study them.  How they got there, and why some are
> > newer or fresher fossils vs. older ones.  I think it's called
> > tephanology or something closely spelled to that.
>
> Taphonomy. You can't possibly accept taphonomy without
> first accepting geology. Taphonomy explains the chemical
> processes for a biological organism becoming a fossil. This
> describes processes that can happen over millions of years.
>
> That pretty much eliminates all of your version
> of the way the world works.
>
>

Not quite, it actually makes science answer for the newer fossils. You do know that you can get fossils quite quickly don't you, in a matter of weeks and don't need millions of years? If you don't, you might have a whole new science area you can look at, and when you put a flood into the picture you can add all sorts of criteria than just new vs. old fossil to describe the fossil. I do say that for the masses and not for stubborn, obstinate, folk...

You would reject the findings of a video of a local flood, by your way of dealing with things.

I am sure Adam and Eve aren't in your area of science as I am sure you believe that some evolutionary God created the path to them.

On Monday, June 11, 2012 11:44:52 AM UTC-6, sully wrote:
> On Jun 10, 9:10 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 9:36 pm, Peter Schilte

[curtj...@hotmail.com]

I don't find it too critical that a local flood account would never get water to go over a mountain as water seeks its own level, and people never build boats suddenly with all sorts of detail and animal safety and food gathering as any source of behavior that would relate to what they would in local floods. Of course too, they wouldn't concoct a story about local floods either like that, nor would it spread around to a common story earth-wide. I am sure you can pick up your Martin book and look for more Bible stuff that hit the earth culture list too, but I don't think you will.

CJ

[sully]

The Indian flood myth (India, not NA), goes back
thousands of years before Noah. Keep in
mind, there were a great many floods, still are,
the truth is that there are floods, big ones. The myth
is the story that makes it what it isn't, a worldwide,
universal flood that covers all land.

What's pretty funny, is that a lot of the rationalization
for world-wide floods in various cultured comes from
ancient peoples finding sea life fossils high in the
mountains. They had no clear idea how mountains
rose, continents moved, sea beds were buried and
thrust up over the geologic eons, so decided there
must have been water over everything.

Biblical literalists have to discard every single thing
we've learned in science for a couple thousand
years in order to adhere to their peculiar set
of beliefs.

[Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.]

"curtjester1" <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:297d2ca2-004e-4c5b...@j9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 10, 5:06 pm, Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.

===============[reply]=================

Yes, and the ultimate irony is fools like Kat argue that fundamentalists
are just plain stupid and blindly believe. What does Kat do? Why, she
blindly believes scientists who blindly believe their theories calling
them fact. The only difference between a fundamentalist and Kat, who
belittles fundamentalists, is the length of time chosen to embrace, as if
choosing a longer period of time somehow makes the likes of Kat superior?
How droll.

Kat cannot even comprehend her folly. Her usual arrogance blinds her.

--
Sir Gregory

[Kat]

On Monday, June 11, 2012 1:11:52 PM UTC-4, curtjester1 wrote:


> There are religous, Bible belivers that don't put a time limit on the
> universe or earth according to what they read in Genesis. That is
> attributed to a happening before day one. And since the 'days' of
> Genesis are nowhere specified as a concrete length, and the seventh
> day is still ongoing, it surely can relegate the time periods to many
> more years than a 24 hr. day.
>
> CJ

Yes, there are. But that wasn't what you were claiming. You weren't referring to a document that suggested 'days' of the bible relate to periods of time longer than a 24 hour cycle. That website gave a very set number of years old- marked, measured periods of time- that the earth could be. There is absolutely no evidence for this and all of the evidence presented was either out of date, lying or flat out sloppy guesswork. The evidence to the contrary, however, is based on replicable experiments, mathematics and physics.


Secondly, 'What if's do not constitute proof, particularly since many civilizations have vastly different creation myths. There is nothing whatsoever to indicate that one religion, which are ALL the creation of man and reflect cultural values (at the time) of the civilization that spawned them, is correct where the others are false. I'll dumb that down for you sunshine - just cause the Bible says it's so, doesn't MAKE it so.

I find it rather interesting that you didn't respond to me ripping apart the vast majority of that website's claims. What's the matter sunshine- scared of a little fact based science?

[Sir · Gregory · Hall, Esq.]

"Kat" <lady...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:f33d7a70-c70f-4229...@googlegroups.com...

=================[reply]=======================

Fact-based science? LOL! If you knew anything about science you'd know
scientific *facts* are subject to frequent revision because idiots like
you confuse scientific fact with scientific theory.

You're no different than a religious fundamentalist, Kat. Your religion
just happens to be science. You are every bit as biased, however. Here's a
clue. Science cannot be substituted for religion no matter how hard you
try, Kat.

If you would debate religion, try sticking to religion instead of
attempting to refute religion using science. Are you really too stupid to
understand that your attempting to refute religion using science is
tantamount to trying to refute philosophy using tautology.

--
Sir Gregory

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Why a Buddha, chose such as Home Base!@

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

curtjester1 wrote:

> On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > Where did the water go?
> >
> > Thanks for responding cj. You didn't answer this question. For
> > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > etc). Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
> >
> I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> high because of the water and other factors. Biblicists cite Psalms
> 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
>
> > But that is a huge mass of water, where did it go?
> >
> > Even 3 mile depth covering Mt Araphat and leaving the Himalayas,
> > Sierras, Alps, Caucausus, Pyrenees, Rockies, Cascades, Atlas, Andes,
> > etc ranges exposed, would be an additional mass of water that doesn't
> > exist anywhere on earth or in the atmosphere.
> >
> > Where did it go?
> >
> >
> Many surmize the waters as accountable in the newer developed ocean
> beds, new rain cycles. etc.
>

Ancients, talked of the "Day they Broke the World"!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

curtjester1 wrote:

> On Jun 7, 8:49 pm, Andrew Robertson <adrobert...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> > On 8/06/2012 2:48 a.m., curtjester1 wrote:
> >
> > >> How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
> >
> > > I think someone gave a link to that.
> >
> > Once upon a time, around 184 million years ago, East Gondwana,
> > comprising Antarctica, Madagascar, India, Australia and New Zealand
> > began to separate from Africa and drifted slowly south taking the
> > kangaroos with it.
> >
> > The earth is approximately four and a half thousand million years old,
> > and to treat the Bible as in anyway an accurate record of our planet's
> > past would not seem sensible considering that it was not written by
> > geologists.
> >
> > That there are those who eschew the remarkable analytic and deductive
> > powers of their own brains and choose to live in a world of superstition
> > and myth would be a worthy study for evolutionary biologists.
> >
> > Andrew
>
> There's a lot written on uniformitarianism

Black Water, "Hackers", "Aryan's" of WWII, Anglo Saxon's against "NORMANS",
Rome against ALBA, . . . . . . . . .

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Peter Schilte wrote:

> On 9 jun, 19:43, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > > Where did the water go?
> >
> > > Thanks for responding cj. You didn't answer this question. For
> > > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > > etc). Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
> >
> > I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> > high because of the water and other factors. Biblicists cite Psalms
> > 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
> >
>
> What "other factors"? So far you make statements that are in no way
> supported by science, evidence or geology. Mountains became high
> because of tectonic movements that are going on for billions of years.
> Not because of something that supposedly happened 3500 years ago.

No 3500 BCE, or some 5,500 Years ago!
What happened to the "Land Bridge"?
The Point in the Middle of the Oceans, where ALL THE WORLD, Connected?

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer wrote:

> In article <8cfd3b41-fee1-41b0...@h9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
> curtjester1 says...
> >
> >> > > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a
> >> > > > very close name of Noah in their cultures.
>
> That's a pretty vague claim that I would bet comes from
> a religious apologist tract source.

NO!
Comes from the Magh, O'Bae's, of the SCYTHIAN Culture!
"White Boy's of the North"!
The Left or "RED HAN'D'S" of the Han Dynasty!
Seems that to Lucifer's Tribe, the Right Hand was the "White Hand", the Seat of
Military Might, the Left or Red Hand was the one "Closest to the Heart", saved
for the Most Beloved!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

curtjester1 wrote:

> On Jun 10, 11:28 am, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer <Lydig_mem...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
> > In article <8cfd3b41-fee1-41b0-9621-ff1b2c15d...@h9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
> > curtjester1 says...
> >
> >
> >
> > >> > > > There is a Chinese Noah's account, even with a
> > >> > > > very close name of Noah in their cultures.
> >
> > That's a pretty vague claim that I would bet comes from
> > a religious apologist tract source. Amateurs like you who
> > dabble in history and science for religious-defense purposes
> > and repeat patent nonsense among your fellow-travellers
> > are responsible for a marked rise in general stupidity in
> > these areas.
>
> There is no vague claim. The flood account with ship, passengers,
> testing birds,

Odin and his damned Raven's, "Jesus", is "GOD"!
Don't believe it, the Fundies will come execute ya!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

sully wrote:

> On Jun 9, 10:43 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 7, 11:08 am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 7, 7:48 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jun 5, 5:19 pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > > Where did the water go?
> >
> > > Thanks for responding cj. You didn't answer this question. For
> > > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,
> > > etc). Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an elephant
> > > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
> >
> > I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became
> > high because of the water and other factors. Biblicists cite Psalms
> > 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
>
> So curtis, you completely reject the science of
> Geology?
>
> >

Most Fundies Do!
Dinosaur's walked with Man!
World is ONLY, some 10,000 Years old!
Creationist, Fundi "Mental"!
GOD, made MAN, before the Creatures of the Earth, eh what!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

YES, the people, who just Breached National Security!
Black Water Hackers, who can't understand why the Black Swans say Saint Maghomud, Freed them from their Bondage!
Or why Sen Faie, would support Muslim's!
Damned "Moor's", anyway!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

FUCK the "NUN'S", the Church is gonna "turn the Bear, into an Ass, and use it as a
Beast of Burden for the Church"!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Wrong, is too!
Same as the Totemic Relation, to Hindu Myth!

[�R.Measures]

In article
<3530bcf0-1fc8-485f...@b21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
curtjester1 <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 10, 8:35=A0am, r...@somis.org (=95R.Measures) wrote:
> > In article

> > <d266f84d-6f6b-4bc9-9a19-20079144f...@k5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, Peter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Schilte <peterschi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 9 jun, 19:43, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 7, 11:08=3DA0am, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jun 7, 7:48=3DA0am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > On Jun 5, 5:19=3DA0pm, sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jun =
> 5, 2:0=3D
> > > 9=3DA0pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3DKGeULHljDn8&feature=3D3Drel=
> ated

> >
> > > > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > > > > Where did the water go?
> >

> > > > > Thanks for responding cj. =3DA0 =3DA0You didn't answer this questio=
> n. =3DA0 F=3D

> > > or
> > > > > the entire earth to be covered with water as the bible claims, it
> > > > > would have to cover a height of nearly 7 miles (over Everest, K-2,

> > > > > etc). =3DA0 Never mind that at those altitudes, an animal like an e=
> lephan=3D

> > > t
> > > > > couldn't breathe, and the air is consistently well below freezing.
> >
> > > > I think if you watch the video, the mountains that are high became

> > > > high because of the water and other factors. =3DA0Biblicists cite Psa=

> lms
> > > > 104 for the mountains forming after the waters came up high.
> >
> > > What "other factors"? So far you make statements that are in no way
> > > supported by science, evidence or geology. Mountains became high
> > > because of tectonic movements that are going on for billions of years.
> > > Not because of something that supposedly happened 3500 years ago.

> > > ... ... ...
> >
> > =A0=95 =A0One "other factor" is denial of reality Peter S.
>
> Or the denial to know issues and read upon them?
>
** C. All of the above.

[Logan Sacket]

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:44:52 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

How do you know what position I have on this.

I am not a word-for-word wooden Bible Literalist.

[sully]

On Jun 12, 4:41 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:44:52 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

I don't believe you are. But the anti-science position taken
by world-wide flood advocates is precisely the same as science
deniers, just more extreme. Instead of just having to discredit
the dozens of sciences related to climate, they have to dismiss all
of science.

If you were going to convince Curtis that sea life fossils
found on mountains 8000 feet high came from ancient sea
beds that rose over millions and millions of years, you'd have
to employ the same sort of arguments I make with you
over climate. You would be asking him to "please read a
geology textbook".

Furthermore, Curtis, by rejection of ALL science, is at
least self consistent. Where you reject only the world wide
sciences that conflict with your view on climate and evolution,
you have irreparable internal illogics.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

The Plagiarists around here, Read Up on Your Topic, so they can tell you how wrong You are, while they do the cut and paste to another Hollywood Script!
Lousy Grammar, screws em up!
Especially when they MUST, go Research you idea!
o};-)

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Just another Churcher, on a Witch Hunt?

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

"KNOWLEDGE IS EVIL", and they just gotta KILL IT!

[Logan Sacket]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:59:50 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I however, reject that which I know about, not that which I don't.
You however, seem to accept that which you really don't know about and
in the process deny yourself plausable ignorance..
You should be ashamed of yourself. At best you show
ignorance of facts.

[Logan Sacket]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 20:22:48 -0800, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North

Pole" <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

>
>

Another atheist that knows everything?

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Willful Blindness!
Man will hear only that which Tickles his Ear!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

No, the BEAST, in person!

[sully]

On Jun 13, 5:17 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:59:50 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

You are correct about me. I do accept a great many
things that I don't really know about. For example, when
a doctor proscribes a particular treatment, I generally
will trust them, ask some questions about it, but I won't
go get a medical degree.

Similarly, I'm not really clear how the electronics in my
car work in detail, but I drive my car. I also don't know
what every driver is going to do, but I drive down the freeway,
I generally trust other drivers (but watch out).

I know pretty much every mechanism on all the
various types of bicycles I have, I can fix anything
on them, but I don't know how to make aluminum
handlebars, nor how to make my own ball bearings.

In my job, I know my DB application inside out, but
I don't know exactly how we do the bit swapping when
I install it on a Unix vs a Linux box. The guy that wrote
that code did it well, I suppose, I never have to worry
about it.

I could go on, hopefully you get the idea.

But you seem to see my acceptance of
my ignorance as some sort of flaw, where
I see it as a sign of reason. Yes, it is
admittedly embarrassing at times when
I have to admit my ignorance in a great
many areas. What is very frustrating is
there are some areas that I was quite
knowledgeable at one point, but now I've
forgotten most of it.

Should one be ashamed of having forgotten
things?

There are also a great many
areas where I'm very expert at it, and
I'm proud of that.

I accept things that come from the process
of science. When something new comes along,
I look at the process that makes the claim.
If it comes out of the process of science, I'll
trust it more. Some things I'll investigate, some
I won't, depending on the claim.

Climate is a good example. When climate
was hitting the headlines years ago, I saw
the competing claims. So I went to mainstream
science journals in the library and read them.

I forgot a lot about it, as well. shameful,
I suppose.

But I observe you have a sense that you
know all about something when you are
really every bit as ignorant about it as I am.

You are not ashamed of it, you are actually
proud of your denial of knowledge and evidence

This is why I enjoy our discussions, as there
are lots and lots of people like that, good people,
smart people, and I am totally intrigued by their
sense of certainty that has no basis in evidence.

[sully]

On Jun 13, 5:17 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:59:50 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

BTW, Logan, did I make a wrong assumption here?

Do you believe in a world wide flood as biblically described?

[Logan Sacket]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:06:14 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Actually I have no idea whether there was or not, as it is not high on
the priority list.

I suspect though that if there were a flood as massive as described it
would have to be WW. Else why would Noah not just travel to a place
that was out of the flood district instead of taking a century or more
to build the Ark?

[sully]

On Jun 14, 4:04 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:06:14 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

Well, we are just talking here.

>
> I suspect though that if there were a flood as massive as described it
> would have to be WW.  Else why would Noah not just travel to a place
> that was out of the flood district instead of taking a century or more
> to build the Ark?

I dunno, why didn't Frodo just get flown to Mt Doom
by eagles and drop off the ring?

You don't find the WW flood as described
in Genesis scientifically impossible?

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

One who Swims the Warm Waters, of Sin's of the Life!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Making "ASSUMPTIONS' causes Critical Error, eh what!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Nothing to waste life fretting over anyway!
But according to the BOOKS, which "I" didn't write, "I" am a Direct Descendant of NIMROD!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

NOT, to the Witch Hunters around here you aren't!

[Logan Sacket]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:36:37 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Don't know. Educate me.

[sully]

On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:36:37 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

The video at the very top of the thread.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Ouch, that gave me fucking cramps man!
ROFL!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Parrot's What?

[OT]

On Jun 9, 1:39 am, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole"

<laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

> curtjester1 wrote:
> > On Jun 6, 12:18 am, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole"

> > <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

> > > sully wrote:
> > > > On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
>
> > > > Where did the water go?
>

> > > Oh Black Water, Keep on Rollen, Mississippi Moon won't'cha keep on
> > > Shining on me!
>
> > That was covered in the video.
>
> > CJ
>
> Yours, maybe!

Did you guys ever watch "Ancient Aliens" on TV. The archeologists
that have
done many of the digs feel that "Gods" in depictions of "the divine"
in paintings and
sculpture, in both pagan and Christian cultures, were in fact from
other worlds, possibly.

I don't know if this is true, but the symbology is a disc with wings
in many of the cases.
Also, you see "angels" depicted in old paintings and sculture, and in
some cases these "angels" wore helmets which could have been
spacesuits. Who knows but something to think about!

OT

[Logan Sacket]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>

wrote:

>On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>>

Interesting video. I have yet to finish it.

Just for kicks, I'll attempt to answer your questions without reading
the rest of the threads in this chain.

>Where did the water go?

It went to form the oceans

>Was the global flood salt water or fresh water? If salt, what
>happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?

Who says there were freshwater fish before the flood?

>What about plants? how did they survive?

Seeds.

>How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?

Don't have a clue. Maybe they traveled there during an ice age, or
since the oceans have been rising, maybe there was passage.

>There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE, why?

Dates are just dates, just like tree ring data.

>Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE, how did a global flood
>skip China?

By definition, it couldn't.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

OT wrote:

> On Jun 9, 1:39 am, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole"
> <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:
> > curtjester1 wrote:
> > > On Jun 6, 12:18 am, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole"
> > > <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:
> > > > sully wrote:
> > > > > On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > thanks, just a few questions since this is a discussion forum.
> >
> > > > > Where did the water go?
> >
> > > > Oh Black Water, Keep on Rollen, Mississippi Moon won't'cha keep on
> > > > Shining on me!
> >
> > > That was covered in the video.
> >
> > > CJ
> >
> > Yours, maybe!
>
> Did you guys ever watch "Ancient Aliens" on TV.

Should be able to compare Notes on your Ancestors with their Research!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Tibetan History Boy's!
Oh Forgot, Orkhan's didn't exist, just more Eastern Fairy Tales!!

[sully]

On Jun 19, 5:25 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> Interesting video.  I have yet to finish it.

me too. But the early points he was
making basically dismissed all of the
science of geology.

>
> Just for kicks, I'll attempt to answer your questions without reading
> the rest of the threads in this chain.
>
> >Where did the water go?
>
> It went to form the oceans

But the oceans were already there. Noah's flood happened
on top of the oceans. That's a LOT of extra water if it
covers the tops of the the mountains.

>
> >Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
> >happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> Who says there were freshwater fish before the flood?

Do you mean to say there were no freshwater fish
prior to 3500 BC?

>
> >What about plants?   how did they survive?
>
> Seeds.

Did Noah collect all species of seeds from all over
the earth?

many plants do not propogate by seed.

>
> >How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>
> Don't have a clue.  Maybe they traveled there during an ice age, or
> since the oceans have been rising, maybe there was passage.

fair enough

>
> >There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>
> Dates are just dates, just like tree ring data.

fair enough.

>
> >Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
> >skip China?
>
> By definition, it couldn't.

fair enough, so these are all admitted
problems for a world-wide flood.

You previously stated that you hadn't
given it much thought, but it appears that
you do accept that there was a world wide
flood as described in Genesis.

Dozens of different sciences show no
evidence of such a thing, and indeed there
are massively obvious logical problems with
the Noah myth being fact.

So if you do get around to thinking about
this, are you going to reject all of the sciences
or perhaps question what it is you believe?

[Logan Sacket]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:15:09 -0800, "Lady Azure, Baroness of the North

Pole" <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:

>
>

Shoo.

[Logan Sacket]

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:51:17 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Jun 19, 5:25 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>>
>> Interesting video.  I have yet to finish it.
>
>me too. But the early points he was
>making basically dismissed all of the
>science of geology.
>
>
>
>>
>> Just for kicks, I'll attempt to answer your questions without reading
>> the rest of the threads in this chain.
>>
>> >Where did the water go?
>>
>> It went to form the oceans
>
>But the oceans were already there. Noah's flood happened
>on top of the oceans. That's a LOT of extra water if it
>covers the tops of the the mountains.

But were the mountains there? When the earth erupted, that water had
to go somewhere.

>> >Was the global flood salt water or fresh water?   If salt, what
>> >happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>>
>> Who says there were freshwater fish before the flood?
>
>Do you mean to say there were no freshwater fish
>prior to 3500 BC?

I didn't say that, I was just asking the question.

>> >What about plants?   how did they survive?
>>
>> Seeds.
>
>Did Noah collect all species of seeds from all over
>the earth?

I doubt he traveled that far.

>many plants do not propogate by seed.

True.

>> >How did Kangaroos get to Australia after they got off the ark?
>>
>> Don't have a clue.  Maybe they traveled there during an ice age, or
>> since the oceans have been rising, maybe there was passage.
>
>fair enough
>>
>> >There was continuous Chinese civilization dating back 4000 BCE,  why?
>>
>> Dates are just dates, just like tree ring data.
>fair enough.
>>
>> >Noah's flood supposedly happened 3500 BCE,  how did a global flood
>> >skip China?
>>
>> By definition, it couldn't.
>
>fair enough, so these are all admitted
>problems for a world-wide flood.
>
>You previously stated that you hadn't
>given it much thought, but it appears that
>you do accept that there was a world wide
>flood as described in Genesis.
>
>Dozens of different sciences show no
>evidence of such a thing, and indeed there
>are massively obvious logical problems with
>the Noah myth being fact.
>
>So if you do get around to thinking about
>this, are you going to reject all of the sciences
>or perhaps question what it is you believe?

Don't know. Something would have to convince me one way or another.
I don't know if there is enough information available to quantify an
answer. Either way I consider it folly to invest the time.

[sully]

On Jun 20, 3:18 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:51:17 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 19, 5:25 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> >> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGeULHljDn8&feature=related
>
> >> Interesting video. I have yet to finish it.
>
> >me too.  But the early points he was
> >making basically dismissed all of the
> >science of geology.
>
> >> Just for kicks, I'll attempt to answer your questions without reading
> >> the rest of the threads in this chain.
>
> >> >Where did the water go?
>
> >> It went to form the oceans
>
> >But the oceans were already there.   Noah's flood happened
> >on top of the oceans.   That's a LOT of extra water if it
> >covers the tops of the the mountains.
>
> But were the mountains there?  When the earth erupted, that water had
> to go somewhere.

When did you think Noah's flood happened?

For example the Himalayas rose
as a mountain range beginning 50
million years ago when the India land
mass plate pushed into the Eurasian
plate.

During Noah's time, the highest peaks
were 27000-28000 ft.

>
> >> >Was the global flood salt water or fresh water? If salt, what
> >> >happened to the fresh water fish and vice versa?
>
> >> Who says there were freshwater fish before the flood?
>
> >Do you mean to say there were no freshwater fish
> >prior to 3500 BC?
>
> I didn't say that, I was just asking the question.

Evidence of fresh water fish prior to Noah is
documented in written history, don't even need
a fossil record. The Egyptians, Sumerians,
Chinese all had written histories dating back to
5000 BC. Fishing on the major rivers was a
primary source of food.

>
> >> >What about plants? how did they survive?
>
> >> Seeds.
>
> >Did Noah collect all species of seeds from all over
> >the earth?
>
> I doubt he traveled that far.

so is that possibly a seed of doubt?
( ha, I pulled a Measures pun) :^)

When I ask about questioning what you believe,
it's not a matter of whether or not there is God,
but an understanding of the nature of the universe.

Is it all just magic, or is there a rational reality?

I know lots of people who believe in God, but accept
science. Their thinking is that God created the laws
of the universe and set it in motion, this includes
evolution, cosmology, etc..

I don't think it folly. Religious thinking, anti-science,
is authority based belief, you believe something because
you are told this is how it is.

There is no mechanism to question that authority.

If you accept science, there is a freedom to use its'
tools to actually figure out for yourself how something
works, and not have to rely on authority only.

I rely on authority of science, of course, because I
trust it. However, if science tells me something that
I don't think is so, I'm free to overturn it by doing science.
It's a lot of work, of course, but it's certainly not folly
to try to understand how the world really works.

Do you have a child? What if that child got hooked
into Scientology? Wouldn't you want your child to
have the rational tools to see the fraud, or have the
faith to accept that particular authority because it's
appealing?

Folly indeed!

[Logan Sacket]

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:57:40 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I've tried to convince a close friend that Mormonism is a contrived
religion, but I am 99% sure that it will never happen. If he does
eventually realize it, it will be because of a happening or
circumstances other than just me showing him the facts.

I rely on Science all the time, it is my job. Mathematics, science
and its relationship to the cosmos is unmistakable. Some science,
especially young science doesn't hold up or is too obtuse to depend
on. That is when you have to fall back on science that has more
history of being correct.

Scientology and my children? Never gave it a thought.
Won't happen.

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

sully wrote:

> On Jun 19, 5:25 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT), sully <sulsn...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Jun 5, 2:09 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting video. I have yet to finish it.
>
> me too. But the early points he was
> making basically dismissed all of the
> science of geology.

Oxford Group have to.
BP and friends want ANWR, "NOW"!
GIA, said: "NO"!

[Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole]

Almost, but your still mistranslating it!
Shua's of NUN, according to your View of things!
In Chinese the Name is CHI, as in A'Chi, the Foo Dog's, who Guard the
Citadel!
As opposed to the Cave Bheare's of Xion.
Born of BOTH, which is RIGHT?