Noah's Ark

What does all this have to do with:
as far as I can tell, Edge is attempting to prove the flood happened. Yes, it doesn't address the main point, but the flood is a prereq to the story.
I mean, if you believe in a world wide flood with magic water appearing and disappearing, then believing the ark is magically possible isn't that big a deal.
 
as far as I can tell, Edge is attempting to prove the flood happened. Yes, it doesn't address the main point, but the flood is a prereq to the story.
I mean, if you believe in a world wide flood with magic water appearing and disappearing, then believing the ark is magically possible isn't that big a deal.

Oh, ok. Thanks. I really missed this subtlety. Well, near as I can tell, he has been informed precisely and extensively why the flood could not have happened, as well as how various formations occur naturally over eons, and he rejects the evidence in favor of god didit. So what else is new?

Kind of reminds me of telling my neighbor that he was looking at Jupiter one night in a clear southern sky:

"Oh, sure! Ha! You can't see Jupiter, Jupiter is a planet! It takes a telescope to see planets."
"I'll show you on my computer, it is just where my astronomy program says it should be right now. Come on in."
"You think you can see planets? You don't know. Planets are too far away. It's just a star."
"OK. Catch you later.":D
 
joobz
I lived in Gary but we moved to Merrillville a total of about twenty years or so.
 
What does this mean?
Edge, you really need to focus when you write. it is extremely hard to follow you.


meaning what? How lon is always?


What's a sand wave?

based upon what calculation?

why?



Near there. I was closer to gary.
Why should there be more? Based upon what assumptions?


no.
it's clear that the sand in the dunes have been eroding for years.


give him a break. The only light he has comes from his eyes so it's kinda dim there.
 
That insult really discredited the information…NOT!

What can I say? I don't purposely intend to insult folks but it's a self evident fact that you are unrealistic. Just because you are unable to see that doesn't make it any less so.

The point being that the whole thread is pointless (other than perhaps for entertainment purposes). In order to achieve productive discourse, there needs to be a mutually agreed upon "common ground" as a starting point. That doesn't exist in this case.

Theistic argument verses logical argument is an "apples and oranges" situation. The fact that you believe the bible, in god (and dowsing) indicates that you reject reality. Hardly conducive to any useful symposium...
 
As far as reasoning with Edge goes, I agree. But it does offer a fascinating insight into the delusional mind.
And lack of scientific education, and how the scientific method works.

Dowsing is in some ways is not much different from some people’s belief in a lot of nonsense about speaker wire. In both cases the people who believe in them can not believe that they can possibility be fooling themselves.

Paul

:) :) :)

They believe in many cases because they have too.
 
As far as reasoning with Edge goes, I agree. But it does offer a fascinating insight into the delusional mind.

A deluge of biblical proportions happened about 12,000 years ago, I show you proof and then I'm the delusional one?
Explain the process that dumped that amount of sand in a short time? It is in the top layers.

This place was under water about 12,000 years ago and I make the connection with what you dismiss as myth.
Talk about delusional the evidence is in your face.

I talked months ago how a comet may have been the cause and now the scientists are leaning toward that theory, but as Paula says, I no nothing about science; and stop side stepping into other research that I am doing and stick to Noah and the flood, proof there in.
 
edge is back to name calling again.

Bible, 40 days and 40 nights, comet, no 40 days and 40 nights.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Last edited:
A deluge of biblical proportions happened about 12,000 years ago, I show you proof and then I'm the delusional one?
You've shown no proof. You've shown some random rambling about geology.
Explain the process that dumped that amount of sand in a short time? It is in the top layers.
If you will go to http://igs.indiana.edu/Geology/ancient/afterthaw/afterThaw02.cfm you'll see that the Biblical flood has nothing to do with the explanation for the presence of the sand dunes in Indiana.

This place was under water about 12,000 years ago and I make the connection with what you dismiss as myth.
Talk about delusional the evidence is in your face.
No, actually the area was under ice. A glacier was the cause of Northwest Indiana's geology, not a global flood.

I talked months ago how a comet may have been the cause and now the scientists are leaning toward that theory,
Which scientists?

but as Paula says, I no nothing about science;
You have demonstrated that you know little to nothing about scientific methodology.

and stop side stepping into other research that I am doing and stick to Noah and the flood, proof there in.
You mean like showing you how the Indiana Dunes were really formed?
 
Last edited:
How dense can you be, of course the dunes are a deposit from a glacier.
Where is the rest of the material that was gouged out?

Only a skeptic can be so obstinate.

Glacial deposits like the dunes, is loose, and I believe they were bigger than what is there today.
Layered deposits of sand that I filmed are compacted slightly and spread out in thick layers, sedimentation from massive floodwaters.

In Indiana the rest is mixed in clay, gray clay in the earth where the glacier was.

Do you even understand the amount of earth THAT WAS GOUGED OUT OF JUST lake Michigan?

Obviously scientists agree since it is well known that the gray clay there, about three feet down was deposited by the glacier. On top of that is a layer of sand on top of that is the humus. So a wall of water had to do that it, had to be a fast melt and it had to be able to hold back the amount needed to accomplish that, like a giant dam.


In the blue clays here in California there is evidence for, great heat, the fossil trees, or what’s left, the stumps that are left with the roots have been burned to the ground in what is now blue clay.


During the Pleistocene Epoch Ice Age, beginning about 2.5 million years ago, virtually all of southwestern Canada was repeatedly glaciated by ice sheets that also covered much of Alaska, northern Washington, Idaho, Montana, and the rest of northern United States. In North America, the most recent glacial event is the Wisconsin glaciation, which began about 80,000 years ago and ended around 10,000 years ago.


During the Pleistocene Epoch Ice Age, beginning about 2.5 million years ago, virtually all of southwestern Canada was repeatedly glaciated by ice sheets that also covered much of Alaska, northern Washington, Idaho, Montana, and the rest of northern United States. In North America, the most recent glacial event is the Wisconsin glaciation, which began about 80,000 years ago and ended around 10,000 years ago.


http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Glaciers/IceSheets/description_ice_sheets.html

So for 70,000 years or even more the whole northern continent was covered in an ice sheet actually the entire northern hemisphere.

In 12,000 years all of the vegetation is replaced, by who and what mechanism?
Lets see massive weight of the ice is grinding everything up and turning rock into sand, seeds lasted for millions of years.

So they were here for millions of years.

For at least the last two million years, the earth's climate has fluctuated between ice ages. These cycles are largely driven by slight changes in the way the earth orbits around the sun -- just small changes in the various wobbles of the earth's motion are sufficient to fundamentally shift the earth from an "ice-house" to a "hot-house".


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080506-comet-extinct.html
The trigger: No matter how it happened, experts agree that Earth got a shock to its system 12,900 years ago.

This would also explain evidence of fires across swaths of North America, Kennett said.
He and his colleagues have also found widespread and abundant minuscule diamonds and magnetic particles in the layer of Earth that dates to this time.
These features were formed in the extremely hot and high-pressure environment created by the series of explosions, Kennett suggests.

Radiocarbon dating and other data suggest that the mega fauna of South America survived for centuries after their cousins up north were wiped out, Fiedel said.
"You have to ask what kind of blast might peter out by the time it gets to Mexico and not have much effect on South America," Fiedel said.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070523-comet-impact_2.html


Stone Age Hand Axes Found at Bottom of North Sea
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/52855987.html


The first retreat of ice from this link, but the second was the big one, about 12,900 years ago. That’s where the flood stories come into place so the difference is that you think it was a slow melt when in actuality it was quiet rapid.



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071214-mammoths-meteor.html

How all these forests spread out all over the northern hemisphere is still another question and all in only 12,000 years, along with, all of the other vegetation.
I think it was God when he said, “I give you all”.



The Purcell Trench lobe dammed the 2,000-cubic-kilometer glacial Lake Missoula, which successively discharged as huge jökulhlaups that flowed to Spokane along the Rathdrum valley and from upper Pend Oreille River valley. From Spokane the great floods swept across the Channeled Scabland and down the Columbia River valley.
The West Kootenai and East Kootenai glaciers flowed across a high-relief landscape, terminating within a general upland. The Flathead lobe was more extensive than formerly inferred. Both the Flathead lobe and nearby alpine glaciers reached near-maximum positions during high stands of Lake Missoula and thus during the maximum stand of the Purcell Trench lobe.

The apparent absence of the Glacier Peak layer-G tephra within the northern part of its projected fallout area along with the occurrence of several jökulhlaups from glacial Lake Missoula after the Mount St. Helens set-S airfall suggest that much of the glaciated terrain east of the Cascade Range remained glaciated until about 13,000 years ago. In the North Cascade Range, erratics transported by the ice sheet up valleys to cirque floors indicate that, as the ice sheet disappeared, alpine glaciers did not rejuvenate much below the limits of modern glaciers. Although ice lobes both east and west of the Cascade Range generally retreated from terminal positions to the international boundary during the interval 14,000 to 11,000 years B.P., the lobes were not exactly in phase with each other. Particular stillstands and retreats were influenced by local conditions such as topography or seawater that did not affect all lobes equally.

If they all melted at once then they would be in perfect phase with each other and what was described as a worldwide flood could have happened. Since it all comes to an abrupt halt about 12,000 years ago.

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Glaciers/IceSheets/description_ice_sheets.html
 
Well here it is "The Impossibel Voyage...", and I plan to read it in a day or two, I'm working today.

So which five pages defame you, was that from the start?

Paul

:) :) :)

There's nothing defamatory in Moore's article. As I said in my post, Ian Plimer's book _Telling Lies for God_ derives most of its Noah's Ark criticism from Moore's article (without citing it), and it's Plimer's book that spends four pages attacking me (pp. 197-201).
 
How dense can you be, of course the dunes are a deposit from a glacier.
Where is the rest of the material that was gouged out?
Gee Edge, why don't you tell us?

Only a skeptic can be so obstinate.
Coming from a guy who claims to be able to find gold with a stick yet can't do any better than chance when he doesn't already know where the gold is, that strikes me as rather funny. I know, I know. The bronze in the ink. I predict that there will always be some excuse as to why you can't demonstrate your claimed ability.

Obviously scientists agree since it is well known that the gray clay there, about three feet down was deposited by the glacier. On top of that is a layer of sand on top of that is the humus. So a wall of water had to do that it, had to be a fast melt and it had to be able to hold back the amount needed to accomplish that, like a giant dam.
What scientists agree with this? Why did a wall of water have to do it? Sedimentary layers aren't formed by a wall of water, they are formed, in this case, along the shore of an ancient lake. You obviously didn't read the article I linked to or you would know that there are other ancient shorelines under the city of Gary. Ridge Road runs along one of those ancient shores. That feature was not formed by a wall of water as you claim. It was formed by deposition along the shore of the lake. As the glacier melted it allowed water to drain to the sea causing the shoreline to retreat. Sorry Edge, no "wall of water" involved.


In the blue clays here in California there is evidence for, great heat, the fossil trees, or what’s left, the stumps that are left with the roots have been burned to the ground in what is now blue clay.
How old are those trees? How were they burned? Are there any scientists who agree that they were burned by a comet or asteroid impact and that this impact caused all of the glaciers to melt causing a global flood?

Where in the linked article does it say anything to support your theory about all the glaciers melting at once? In fact, the article talks about the gradual retreat of the ice sheets.

So for 70,000 years or even more the whole northern continent was covered in an ice sheet actually the entire northern hemisphere.

In 12,000 years all of the vegetation is replaced, by who and what mechanism?
It's called reproduction. As the ice retreated and exposed fertile land seeds that blew onto that land grew and made more seeds. I can't believe I have to explain this to you, especially after your condescending remarks about being dense and obstinate.

Lets see massive weight of the ice is grinding everything up and turning rock into sand, seeds lasted for millions of years.

So they were here for millions of years.
This makes absolutely no sense at all. The seeds came from plants that continued to grow beyond the glacier's advance. It's just that simple.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080506-comet-extinct.html
The trigger: No matter how it happened, experts agree that Earth got a shock to its system 12,900 years ago.
Where in that article does it state that the theorized comet impact melted the glaciers?

If they all melted at once then they would be in perfect phase with each other and what was described as a worldwide flood could have happened. Since it all comes to an abrupt halt about 12,000 years ago.
If they all melted at once. There is no evidence that they did.
 
Last edited:
If they all melted at once. There is no evidence that they did.


Well the bible says it did and all the other so-called myths tell us the same, to bad what you believe isn't or hasn't been witnessed by today’s scientists.

But it was witnessed, by others.

Layering is science and the sand on top of the clays proves it, the sand here proves it since it is on top and the flood happened after the glaciers.
Since the heavier materials are on the bottom, boulders rock metals….

They did a survey on one of my claims and found a forest underneath it.
I’m not sure what took it out but I will try to find some reference for it.
Could be interesting, but may take time to find the study.


I found something else, that is, the ice sheet didn't extend over this area, but melt would be what made those bottom layers and still my theory is correct. so at first a slow melt and then a sudden melt.
Layers on top were from a massive flood of gigantic proportions.
The layering on top of the bed-rock only goes back in six increments maybe a few more in certain places.
The time spans get shorter the further up in those layers you go.
 
It's a good one now imagine, events happening simultaneously around the world around that time in your link.
What I presented is evidence that correlates to the flood story/myths in my videos’.
More and more will come to light that is promised.
 
It's a good one now imagine, events happening simultaneously around the world around that time in your link.
What I presented is evidence that correlates to the flood story/myths in my videos’.
More and more will come to light that is promised.
Well, your bible says that they all died but one family, so there is no stories around the world about the flood, your bible says that they die. It is your need to link all the stories.

Paul

:) :) :)

Died men tell no tales.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom