Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Can you do geology and junk the evolution bits ?

Pages: (46) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,21:49    lou i thought clownshoes told you not to start with the maths. -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,21:51    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 15 2009,22:49) lou i thought clownshoes told you not to start with the maths. You evilutionists just ignore the odds of there being exactly three exclamation points at the end of that sentence because you know you can't explain it. Therefore (Clownshoes' particular) god. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,21:59    I guess I can use a bit of scripture too. (NIV) 17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. [b] , [c] Now, Mount Hermon is the highest point in Isreal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Hermon) at 9230 feet.  [Since no other culture mentions a great flood around this time, I guess it's fair to exclude their mountains.  God probably put a shield around Isreal and Judea at that time... but he must include Turkey.]  Ignore all of the above, Greater Ararat in Turkey has a height of 16,800 feet  or 5178 meters. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Ararat) So the water had to be that deep.  Since that's roughly  half of Bill's calculation, then you still have to contend with 500 feet (152 meters) of water per day. The area of Turkey, Syria, and Isreal combined is rough 390,000 km^2 (ignoring the minor countries around them). 390,000 km^2 * 150m/day = 58,800 cubic kilometers of water per day for 40 days.  That means that the entire Gulf of Mexico was dropped on 3 countries if 40 days.   Hurricane Katrina dropped almost 15 inches of water on LA.  Thats .380 meters. So where did that water come from again? Keep in mind that fresh water has a mass of 1g/cm^3.  That's the same as 1,000,000,000 kilograms per cubic kilometer.  So that comes to 58,800,000,000,000 kilograms of water per day for 40 days.  Moving at 1 meter per second... that equals 29,400,000,000,000 Joules of energy. A kilowatt hour is 3,600,000 Joules, so that's 8.16 million kilowatt hours... more than 8 times the energy use of the state of California in one year (2008). That's a lot of energy. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Reed Posts: 274 Joined: Feb. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,22:14    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,19:01) Third, in reference to other comments--no one here can do any math without variables--and no one has them--because it is in the past. Earlier in this thread, you made arguments concerning alleged evidence for the flood. Now you are basically saying that evidence is irrelevant, because you just can't know what happened in the past. Brilliant

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,22:17    yw Ogre please don't start with math -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,22:28    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 15 2009,22:17) yw Ogre please don't start with math Sorry.  I like math. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,22:41    Quote Texas Teach, posted 10/15/09 8:37 PM   Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 15 2009,21:36) Asteroids are not rubber balls. Henry Were you there? Henry

Scienthuse Posts: 43 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:07    Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 15 2009,21:59) I guess I can use a bit of scripture too. (NIV) 17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. [b] , [c] Now, Mount Hermon is the highest point in Isreal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Hermon) at 9230 feet.  [Since no other culture mentions a great flood around this time, I guess it's fair to exclude their mountains.  God probably put a shield around Isreal and Judea at that time... but he must include Turkey.]  Ignore all of the above, Greater Ararat in Turkey has a height of 16,800 feet  or 5178 meters. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Ararat) So the water had to be that deep.  Since that's roughly  half of Bill's calculation, then you still have to contend with 500 feet (152 meters) of water per day. The area of Turkey, Syria, and Isreal combined is rough 390,000 km^2 (ignoring the minor countries around them). 390,000 km^2 * 150m/day = 58,800 cubic kilometers of water per day for 40 days.  That means that the entire Gulf of Mexico was dropped on 3 countries if 40 days.   Hurricane Katrina dropped almost 15 inches of water on LA.  Thats .380 meters. So where did that water come from again? Keep in mind that fresh water has a mass of 1g/cm^3.  That's the same as 1,000,000,000 kilograms per cubic kilometer.  So that comes to 58,800,000,000,000 kilograms of water per day for 40 days.  Moving at 1 meter per second... that equals 29,400,000,000,000 Joules of energy. A kilowatt hour is 3,600,000 Joules, so that's 8.16 million kilowatt hours... more than 8 times the energy use of the state of California in one year (2008). That's a lot of energy. Did you calculate all the water in the oceans and where that came from--water vapor wasn't it--I believe the Archaen era--not looking--may be wrong.  Water vapor, methane, nitrogen, CO2 all from volcanoes--and the earth cooled how again?  Where did all the greenhouse gases go--the CO2 and water vapor?  How did the earth cool so that the water vapor could form an ocean.  That's alot of water vapor--it expands 1600 times the volume of liquid water.   So you have the same problem accounting for water--only you have no God in your equations--no creator who might be catalyst for some phenomena.   Again as I said no one knows the height of any mountains 4000 years ago. Your math is without variables when it is based on today's data. It might be more pertinent to know something of thermal runaway in silicate and other minerals.

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:12    so scienthuse, the seashells on everest, did they get there 4000 years ago or did jesus and satan have an oyster roast during the temptation? AAAAAAND I thought we weren't going to get into the maths since Henry J wasn't there... -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

Reed Posts: 274 Joined: Feb. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:30    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,21:07) Again as I said no one knows the height of any mountains 4000 years ago. Yes, you did say it. It was extraordinarily stupid the first time, and repetition didn't make it any less so. If we can't figure out something basic like that from observable evidence, how do you come to the conclusion the flood is real ? If there is no way to come to reasonable conclusions based on evidence, why have you spent so much time arguing about evidence ?

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:35    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,23:07) Did you calculate all the water in the oceans and where that came from--water vapor wasn't it--I believe the Archaen era--not looking--may be wrong.  Water vapor, methane, nitrogen, CO2 all from volcanoes--and the earth cooled how again?  Where did all the greenhouse gases go--the CO2 and water vapor?  How did the earth cool so that the water vapor could form an ocean.  That's alot of water vapor--it expands 1600 times the volume of liquid water.   So you have the same problem accounting for water--only you have no God in your equations--no creator who might be catalyst for some phenomena.   Again as I said no one knows the height of any mountains 4000 years ago. Your math is without variables when it is based on today's data. It might be more pertinent to know something of thermal runaway in silicate and other minerals. True, but science has 4.5 billion years to dissipate the heat.  That's well within the rules for thermodynamics. The Bible has to deal with that and do it in 40 days and not fry the 8 humans left. CO2: hmmm... ever heard of carbon sinks?  Life (especially photosynthetic bacteria) take in CO2 and use sunlight to convert it to energy and structure.  Basic Biology.   Mountain height: are you honestly telling me that mountain ranges (even in just say Turkey) grew so much in just 4000 odd years?  Even halving the height 4000 years ago creates some insurmountable problems for you.  That means that Mount Ararat had to increase in height an average of 2 feet per year for 4000 years. Basically, you depend on God to do these amazing miracles and then turn them all off, just in time for science to really start to be able to explain them. You use a lot of fancy words, but I don't think they mean that you think they mean. Thermal runaway in silicates was a hypothesis to explain the magnetic field on Ganymede.  However, "We find that, contrary to expectations, there are no physically plausible scenarios in which tidal heating in the silicates is sufficient to cause the thermal runaway necessary to prevent core cooling." (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008Icar..198..384B) Some (very quick) research also indicates that Ganymede has significantly more silicon in its composition than Earth does.  Plus, the Earth doesn't have sufficient tidal interaction to generate the heat needed to begin a silicate thermal runaway.  I mean, the articles in question are discussing changes in the orbit of Ganymede, not just friction rubbing. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:40    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,23:07) Again as I said no one knows the height of any mountains 4000 years ago. Your math is without variables when it is based on today's data. It might be more pertinent to know something of thermal runaway in silicate and other minerals. I don't have to convince you of the correctness of any calculations I (or anyone else arguing against your stupidity) do. All that YOU have to do is show that you have any calculations at all. From your last two posts, it appears you're going to TRY to use Baumgardner's "runaway subduction" model, which you allude to twice. Did you bother to check his "calculations?" Did you know his model for a 1-year global catastrophe would release (from each square cm of the Earth's surface per second) roughly about 40,000 times the energy that the Earth receives per surface centimeter^2  each second from the sun? The kind of heat that Baumgardner eventually has to say "oh, well, a miracle happened" to explain why the whole Earth didn't just melt into a ball of lava? How could ANY water exist during that kind of episode, goober, much less your "ark"? Why don't you do your homework before trying to pimp this laughable creationist crap, kid? Earlier I posted you a link to a Theology Web "debate" where John Baumgardner actually showed up and got his stupid fuckin' clock cleaned, so he ran off yapping about God's punishment and similar crap. http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=103916 I was amazed to even see the weasel since the RATE/ICR/AIG people are notorious for refusing to even TRY to post at websites that are not their own. It's your job to show, to demonstrate that the creationist crap you're going to TRY to use...is valid. Let's see you actually do that. Ogre: he's appealing to John Baumgardner's crap at ICR: http://www.icr.org/research/jb/runawaysubduction.htm/ See also the Talk Origins response here: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH430.html -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:51    what was it Loose said about massive anti-idiot guns?  yeah.  that. -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

Doc Bill Posts: 1039 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:54    Math is a bit of a stretch, SciMoron.  It's more like arithmetic. I didn't exactly need Dr. Dr. Dembski to postulate a "probability" to figure out that to reach a depth of 400 feet in 40 days, let's see, drop the naughts, four into four goes one time, move the naught, ah ha!, 10 feet per day! So, you're pulling the old "nobody knows how high the mountains were 4000 years ago," eh?  Doesn't matter, S'Moron, you've got the same problem. You see, your problem is you don't know how to think. Let's puzzle this one together.  Where does rain come from?  Well, we know from third grade science class (you did make it through the third grade?), anyway, we know there's something called the Rain Cycle!  Water evaporates from over there, flies over here in a cloud and rains.  Water runs downhill back to there where it starts all over again. Now, pay attention to this part because it's critical.  In order to cover a sphere to any depth whatsoever you're going to need MORE WATER than  you have on the sphere to begin with.   Oh, I'm sorry, I said "sphere."  Thoughtless of me!  Think of a ball instead if that makes it easier for you. You think I'm kidding but Great Creationist Scientists, smarter than you and me combined* have tried to figure this out.  Hovind envisioned an Ice Shield which, unfortunately, would have blocked all sunlight thus killing the planet before the ice shield collapsed which would have incinerated the planet. Brown hypothesised (I use the misspelled term loosely) a "vapor barrier" which, unfortunately, would have been 3000 miles thick thus blocking out all sunlight, and blah, blah, blah like Hovind. EVERYBODY, except you apparently, knows about Baumgartner's model which B-gart admits has a "heat problem."  Yeah, it melts the planet. OK, let's get back to the subject at hand, SciMoron, which is where did the water come from and where did it go.  So far you suck at an answer.   Do better. *combining my IQ (138) with yours (-200 estimated) yields -68 which even the absolute value of which would be a few points less than Hovind and Brown.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,23:55    Quote (deadman_932 @ Oct. 15 2009,23:40) Ogre: he's appealing to John Baumgardner's crap at ICR: http://www.icr.org/research/jb/runawaysubduction.htm/ See also the Talk Origins response here: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH430.html Ah, I see.  Garbage in the simulation, garbage out of the simulation.  Got it.  Thanks for the links. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Dr.GH Posts: 2333 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,00:07    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,21:07) It might be more pertinent to know something of thermal runaway in silicate and other minerals. "thermal runaway" WTF? Is that like creatinist runsaway? Are you (I am being too lenient) making up some bullshit? Maybe some extrapolation of specific or latent heat? Maybe? -------------- "Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy." L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,01:28    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,21:07) Did you calculate all the water in the oceans and where that came from--water vapor wasn't it--I believe the Archaen era--not looking--may be wrong.   Well, you are wrong, but allow me to point something out to you:  water vapor is....water.  So, what?  You're contention is that it's somehow a problem that all that water came from all that water?   But, he typed magnanimously, here's the quick version: when an oxygen really likes a hydrogen molecule, it'll get up all close like and then the hydrogens will extend valence electrons towards the oxygen's special orbital place and they make sweet, sweet covalent love.  So anyway, this happened about a gajillion-trillion times in the solar system of uber-yore, like way before Earth even formed and so it was right there for the taking and Earth was all like "Dude, gotta get me some of that."  And it did, with its amazing gravity superpowers.  Oh, and some comets and other stuff with even more water kept falling onto the planet.  It was sort of fad there for awhile. Quote Water vapor, methane, nitrogen, CO2 all from volcanoes--and the earth cooled how again? Same way everything does? You know, losing heat because it was, like, way warmer than outer space and stuff?  Thermodynamics, entropy...ringing any bells yet? Quote Where did all the greenhouse gases go--the CO2 and water vapor? Well, um, the water vapor mostly turned into that lame "liquid" water stuff, whatever that's all about. Tends to do that once it cools. I think that thermodynamics crap is involved somehow.  Seems like it's got its fingers in everything. But whatever... So, OK, like a lot of CO2 got broken down (by The Man, of course). The carbon, which you may have noticed is prone to forming all that biochemical stuff, eventually formed a bunch of biochemical stuff.  Plus some of the less fortunate atoms got mixed-up with mineral and other inorganic manufacturing cartels ( I don't want to talk about the poor bastards that radioactively decayed.  Too fucking sad, man.  Not goin' there). The O2 went solo (or I guess duo) and just sort of roamed the atmosphere, gathering numbers and waiting for when the time was right to strike.  Or rather, when the time was right start getting consumed in all sorts of newfangled biochemical reactions.  Some CO2 managed to escape this chemical doom and went on the lam, hiding in the oceans and suchlike.  Similar epic sagas can be recited for other components of the early atmosphere.  Hey, I just had an idea: try looking this stuff up, man.  I would totally bet someone's looked into this already. Anyway, all this water talk's got me thirsty.... -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Cubist Posts: 558 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,04:50    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,21:01) Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,22:52) Hey, SciMoron, how's the water going? Every creationist I've cornered with this question about water has run to Mama because he/she can't do the math. Poor baby. So, where did the water come from and where did it go? Also, you've got a time problem.  You've got to get to 30,000 feet in 40 days.  That's roughly 1000 feet per day of rain. Slowly?  You can't go slowly and flood the earth, moron.  Srsly, does it hurt being stupid? I take it since we are talking about the flood, we can use just a bit of scripture--just this one. Genesis 7:11, 12 -- In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.  12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. First, Doc Bill, don't be fooled by the simplicity of the narrative--it is speaking to people of all generations--what makes us think our scientific culture is so special?  The arrogant scorn of these last generations at texts that were here long before we were ever thought of amazes some people. Second, we don't know if the water level was 30,000 feet--that's based on today's figures.  We don't know ocean levels or how much tectonic movement has occurred in orogeny since then.  By the figure you mentioned you're referring to the narrative saying the water went above the mountains. Third, in reference to other comments--no one here can do any math without variables--and no one has them--because it is in the past. Please don't start with math since evolutionists are notorious at turning a deaf ear to the improbability of unguided mutation as a mechanism for macroevolution. Fourth, there were obviously two major water sources and a third may be considered.  Hard rain by the metaphor "floodgates,"  and the "springs (or fountains) of the great deep" being the second.  This could refer to oceanic and/or subterranean origin of the waters.   The third could be only considered--it seems that the water "bursting forth" or being "broken up" in other translations--KJV (NIV is a modern accurate translation--not a paraphrase but not quite as literal as KJV) could imply (inductively only) tectonics.  And many creationists include this possibility throughout the deluge--not only during the rain, but during the drainage period. Fifth, Where did it go?  I'm not an expert on creationist theories but the general gist is that tectonic uplift would have been involved here.  Baumgardner did a computer model for his PhD--I couldn't find it.  I'll look for it.  The model is one of the Atlantic ocean during the  deluge.  It's not just a video.  He seems to be quite advanced in his knowledge of computers. Sixth, can you let me ask a question. This is off the subject of the flood. During the formation of the earth why did the rocks and asteroids in open space defy Newton's third law?     If I take a bat and hit a ball it rebounds from the bat in reaction--I understand we are talking about very large objects. i understand this is based on Einstein's theory--gravitational attraction pulls the objects together. But meteorites come to us from our asteroid belt regularly as a result of collisions.  Newton's third law is empirical in nature and in space. No.1 This VIDEO does not teach that they were pulled gently into each other, they were "violent" collisions.   No2. Either way--gentle or violent--I tend to think Newton's law is going to work.  They are going to bounce off of each other--otherwise why should we ever have to worry about any asteroids from our asteroid belt?  I realize that other asteroids come in from other places--but some of them come from the AB--some of them no doubt resulting from collisions. Question for you, Scienthuse: Do you believe it's possible to learn about events that occured in the past by studying the traces which were left on physical objects when said events occured?

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,05:03    Some persons need explanations with lots of pictures. Maybe scienthuse is one of them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fs0KHlm7aw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gztPlTR-ATM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7y0HmBezM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIjhHmsBkeE -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,05:10    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,21:01) Sixth, can you let me ask a question. This is off the subject of the flood. During the formation of the earth why did the rocks and asteroids in open space defy Newton's third law?     If I take a bat and hit a ball it rebounds from the bat in reaction--I understand we are talking about very large objects. i understand this is based on Einstein's theory--gravitational attraction pulls the objects together. But meteorites come to us from our asteroid belt regularly as a result of collisions.  Newton's third law is empirical in nature and in space. No.1 This VIDEO does not teach that they were pulled gently into each other, they were "violent" collisions.   No2. Either way--gentle or violent--I tend to think Newton's law is going to work.  They are going to bounce off of each other--otherwise why should we ever have to worry about any asteroids from our asteroid belt?  I realize that other asteroids come in from other places--but some of them come from the AB--some of them no doubt resulting from collisions. Er...no. Similarly sized objects that are traveling at orbital velocities (tens of km/sec) when they collide don't "bounce off" one another.  They are pulverized with a good deal of their kinetic energy being converted to heat energy. The resultant debris cloud(s) will continue to follow all the laws of gravity and physics, and will coalesce due to gravity back into one solid mass.  If one object is much larger than the second, the larger will have a crater blasted into it and absorb most of the kinetic to heat released energy. That video is an extremely simple conceptualization and does not accurately model the real collisions and subsequent reformings that took place. Are you surprised that the planes that hit the WTC didn't just "bounce off"?  Both plane and building are much harder than stone.  How did they defy Newton's third law? Asteroids from the asteroid belt don't head our way due to collisions.  They are ejected into highly elliptical Earth crossing orbits due to gravitational slingshotting, usually from Jupiter. -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

FrankH Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,09:46    Scienthuse: Look up the definitions of "Elastic" and "Inelastic" collisions. Please note cars in a traffic accident can be really good examples of inelastic collisions. -------------- Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,10:34    Just out of sheer curiosity and a desire to obey my own concepts of ethical conduct, I have to ask you this, Scienthuse: how old are you, approximately? I'm asking because your posts show little else than an ability to use Google. Your claims seem to indicate (to me) nothing more than that; no checking on the claims yourself, no use of your own knowledge to determine credibility, no insight to basic science that an older student might well have absorbed as they learned how to learn. Your posts give me the impression that you're more likely an adolescent male, perhaps as old as 16 or 17. I don't want to fault you overmuch for your youth, but rather for your intellectual laziness, so if you're OVER 18, that would be best for my purposes. Then I can make fun of you to my heart's content and not feel as though I'm berating a puppy. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2009,12:08    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,19:01) I take it since we are talking about the flood, we can use just a bit of scripture--just this one. Genesis 7:11, 12 -- In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.  12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. <three paragraphs of nonsense snipped> Fourth, there were obviously two major water sources and a third may be considered.  Hard rain by the metaphor "floodgates,"  and the "springs (or fountains) of the great deep" being the second.  This could refer to oceanic and/or subterranean origin of the waters.   Metaphor, Scienthuse?  Metaphor?  I thought every word of the bible was literally true.  Now here you are telling me that some of it is metaphor! So, let's say parts of the bible are not to be taken literally, and your god didn't have really huge water tanks, with honking great sluice-gates, in the sky.  Perhaps, then, other things in the bible might not be literally true?  Things which are just as silly and obviously metaphorical as gigantic orbiting reservoirs?  Maybe, for example, a global flood which left no evidence? -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

Scienthuse Posts: 43 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,12:14    Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 16 2009,12:08)         Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 15 2009,19:01) I take it since we are talking about the flood, we can use just a bit of scripture--just this one. Genesis 7:11, 12 -- In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.  12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. <three paragraphs of nonsense snipped> Fourth, there were obviously two major water sources and a third may be considered.  Hard rain by the metaphor "floodgates,"  and the "springs (or fountains) of the great deep" being the second.  This could refer to oceanic and/or subterranean origin of the waters.   Metaphor, Scienthuse?  Metaphor?  I thought every word of the bible was literally true.  Now here you are telling me that some of it is metaphor! So, let's say parts of the bible are not to be taken literally, and your god didn't have really huge water tanks, with honking great sluice-gates, in the sky.  Perhaps, then, other things in the bible might not be literally true?  Things which are just as silly and obviously metaphorical as gigantic orbiting reservoirs?  Maybe, for example, a global flood which left no evidence? What are you talking about?  Of course the Bible contains metaphorical language.  Because a narrative contains a metaphor does not make the entire narrative a metaphor. You also don't understand the water canopy theory.  It has been shelved as I said.  But there was obviously a mechanism in the past which made the poles warm. Look it up.Warm arctic There is no doubt of water covering the earth--even mountains (e.g. shells on Everest as mentioned earlier)--but you guys choose to interpret it as tectonic uplift or receding oceans. How you betray your arguments by not allowing the same latitude for the flood.  You need to read Baumgardner

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,12:33    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 17 2009,10:14) You also don't understand the water canopy theory.  It has been shelved as I said.  But there was obviously a mechanism in the past which made the poles warm. Look it up.Warm arctic Yeah, that's called the greenhouse effect, Sci.   Here, I looked it up the relevant article for you: Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum And yes, water vapor's involved.  Unfortunately for you, the Earth would still have to be in the midst of the Flood in order for that to save your idea.   *Looks around* Nope: you're wrong.  Unless all that water just magically disappeared. Quote [snip]but you guys choose to interpret it as tectonic uplift or receding oceans[snip] Well, yeah, but only because we like to be not dead-ass wrong and ignore mountains of evidence (you're goddamn right that pun was intended). (edited: more power) -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,14:01    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 17 2009,12:14) What are you talking about?  Of course the Bible contains metaphorical language.  Because a narrative contains a metaphor does not make the entire narrative a metaphor. Now, here's the critical question: How do you tell the difference? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,15:07    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 17 2009,12:14) There is no doubt of water covering the earth--even mountains (e.g. shells on Everest as mentioned earlier)--but you guys choose to interpret it as tectonic uplift or receding oceans. How you betray your arguments by not allowing the same latitude for the flood.  You need to read Baumgardner Most of us have read Baumgardner.  To put it mildly, the guy's so full of shit his eyes are brown.  He cherry picks isolated pieces of data he can hand-wave away, while completely ignoring the 99.9% that he can't.  He then wraps that bit in meaningless sciency sounding gobbledygook just wow to his target uneducated YEC audience.  Profession geologists just point and laugh. As has already been pointed out, the heat generated by his "catastrophic plate tectonics," model would melt the planet and vaporize Noah et al.  Here's another big one he ignores - the ages of the formations around the mid-ocean ridges. larger image here Source: Marine Geology and Geophysics Division, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA. If all this spreading happened in just one year, why is there such a huge discrepancy in the dates of the seafloor as you get farther away from the MORs?  Why doesn't the whole seafloor show the same age?  The bullshit Accelerated Nuclear Decay hand-wave can't explain the gradients, can you? -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

JLT Posts: 740 Joined: Jan. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,15:50    Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 17 2009,18:14) There is no doubt of water covering the earth--even mountains (e.g. shells on Everest as mentioned earlier)--but you guys choose to interpret it as tectonic uplift or receding oceans. How you betray your arguments by not allowing the same latitude for the flood.  You need to read Baumgardner I figured it all out! First the earth contracted*, so that the existing water covered it. No need for extra water. It probably also rained a lot, but maybe it was just bad weather season. Then, Noah, boat, etc. Finally, the earth expanded** again! Makes as much sense as Baumgardner's stories. * Could be, that a big gas bubble inside the earth burst*** ** and gas built up again. *** We all know that the earth is hollow on the inside, don't we. -------------- "Random mutations, if they are truly random, will affect, and potentially damage, any aspect of the organism, [...] Thus, a realistic [computer] simulation [of evolution] would allow the program, OS, and hardware to be affected in a random fashion." GilDodgen, Frilly shirt owner

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,15:59    Quote (JLT @ Oct. 17 2009,15:50) *** We all know that the earth is hollow on the inside, don't we. Oh, yeah!  I saw this movie last night that had a geologist in it, so it must right.  Anyway, the world was hollow and there was this big ocean.  And a lot of the water went up through the volcano.  Oh and there were dinosaurs and people walking side-by-side. It must be true, I heard that the book the movie was based on is almost 150 years old.  That's the same age as Darwin's book. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

khan Posts: 1554 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2009,15:59    Quote (JLT @ Oct. 17 2009,16:50) Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 17 2009,18:14) There is no doubt of water covering the earth--even mountains (e.g. shells on Everest as mentioned earlier)--but you guys choose to interpret it as tectonic uplift or receding oceans. How you betray your arguments by not allowing the same latitude for the flood.  You need to read Baumgardner I figured it all out! First the earth contracted*, so that the existing water covered it. No need for extra water. It probably also rained a lot, but maybe it was just bad weather season. Then, Noah, boat, etc. Finally, the earth expanded** again! Makes as much sense as Baumgardner's stories. * Could be, that a big gas bubble inside the earth burst*** ** and gas built up again. *** We all know that the earth is hollow on the inside, don't we. Sounds reasonable. -------------- "It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad Frequency is just the plural of wavelength... -JoeG

Pages: (46) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard