Joined: June 2007
|Quote (Ftk @ July 11 2008,20:59)|
|Quote (Doc Bill @ July 11 2008,19:05)|
Going back in time a few score pages, you owe me an explanation of 66 million cubic miles of water needed for The Flood. Remember the geometry.
Did you run those equations, hon? Simple geometry you would have learned in the 10th grade. Pity you dropped out after the 5th grade.
Let me clue you in, oh, clueless hon. I don't have to give Waltie a ring-a-ling because he published his "thesis" and not only can I read (gasp!) but I understand physics and math (double gasp!) Therefore, and ergo, I read Walt's "thesis," the appendix, the footnotes and all that stuff.
Besides Walt's "geology" being totally non-descriptive of the earth we live on, his calculations are totally wrong, as has been pointed out many times before, and more to the point his most basic calculation involving how much water is needed to cover the earth to a depth of X feet yields the 66 million cubic miles of water for which you can't account.
Forget comets, FtK, you got a bad water problem.
Put up, FtK, or PLEASE STFU!
If you say you read all of it, then I'll just have to take your word for it I guess. But, simple 10th grade geometry wouldn't be a problem for Walt...try reading his credentials again.
You made want to consider having a second go at it. But, if it's just Walt's supposed difficulties with geometry you're worried about, you might drop him a line before the 8th edition of his book goes to print.
I'm not sure why I didn't see it earlier. Its staring me in the face...
The latest "Have you read *all* of it?" thing is just FTKs latest manifestation of the mental filter I mentioned.
If you haven't read every single page the barely coherent stream of consciousness he calls a book, you obviously can't critique any of his points, no matter how ludicrous.
It's what allows her to completely ignore evidence like comets.
She insists he has a point to counter everything, but has no idea what that point is. I get the district feeling FTK hasn't actually read it.
But there is nothing that can counter the comet evidence. It's a show stopper all on its own. If all comets came from the earth, we could not possibly see long period comets, because they will still be on the way out, and we wouldn't see them for a million years or so. Yet they're here. We see them. You can't ignore that.
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris