Forums | MacLife

resedit wrote:

God - whom you loathe.

I don't loathe God.  I loathe willing ignorance.  I suspect that He does too (but, that's up to Him).

ShnickyShnack wrote:

And if millions (billions?) of Christians do believe in evolution, doesn't that mean you're the one who's stuck? Doesn't that pretty much ground your argument into dust?

Actually, I have to call you on that one.  I agree with you basic sentiments there, of course.  But you're bringing up the "consensus=truth" thing again, which is not valid.

Otherwise, great stuff!

Hank Rearden wrote:

Radius of the Earth:
6378.1 km

Height of highest mountain (Mt. Everest):
8.85 km

Radius of Earth including Mt. Everest:
6386.95 km

Volume of Earth:
1086832411937.7006 km3

Volume of sphere consisting of Mt. Everest+Earth radius:
1091362829722.1982 km3

Volume of water required to cover earth to highest mountain:
4530417784.4976 km3

Volume of water in all earth's oceans (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean and elsewhere):
1370000000 km3

Number of "earth oceans" (beyond the real ocean) required to flood entire earth:
3.31

So, not only would all of the water in earth's oceans have to be there to do this.  You'd need 3.3 more of the same volume to cover Mt. Everest. And, all of that water would have to pour out of the sky or ground within a period of days.

Do you have ANY idea how much thermal energy that would transfer? 

And, can you suggest ANY reason that scientists and engineers have not found all of that excess water anywhere?  I am sure that they would love to find that, it would be very useful to humanity, plus being very, very interesting.  If you are SO sure that so much water exists somewhere, then why not give up your day job to find it.  You'd be very, very famous if you found such...that is for sure.

You saying the big sky fairy couldn't do it if he wanted to?

Hank Rearden wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

I wasn't suggesting a consensus=truth connection, I was merely refuting the claim that you can't be Christian and have a positive opinion on evolution.

Meanwhile, I seem to have missed res' comment about you loathing God. I don't know why, but I find myself deeply offended by that.

Oh, gotcha.

He didn't say that I, specifically, loathe God.  He just lumped me in with supposed God-loathers:

Since most of you do not want to accept that a flood is even possible, you take the word of someone opposing the flood as accurately representing what these views are, when the fact is that he is distorting them for the purpose of his rebuttal. But you don't care about that, all you care about is does it ridicule the idea of a flood - if so, it is a great link - never mind checking as to whether or not it accurately portrays what it bashes, strawman is OK if it denies a need for God - whom you loathe.[/b]

I've stopped being offended by stuff like that.  I've heard it nearly all of my adult life.

I'm part Jamaican, as you may know. My Jamaican great-grandmother used to have a particular reaction when one of her people did something dumb or embarrassing that was sure to reflect badly on the whole bunch. She'd shake her head sadly and say, "my people, my people."

So you with certain partisan evangelicals must be a real "my people, my people" situation. You have my sympathy.

Last edited by ShnickyShnack (2005-08-10 12:38 pm)

Hank Rearden wrote:

Radius of the Earth:
6378.1 km

Height of highest mountain (Mt. Everest):
8.85 km

You should know by now that those who do accept a flood do not think the mountains were as high as they now are.

Woo look at the folding of the rock in the mountains - accordion style folding - to note a fairly rapid compression of the rock, had to be compressed when the rock was not hard or else it would break and not fold. Some argue that the folding happened underground under heat but that doesn't make sense because the folding of the rock can be seen giving many mountains their actual shape.

Mountains all seem to parrallel to the mid-oceanic ridge interestingly enough. Where it bends, so do mountain ranges ...

resedit wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

Radius of the Earth:
6378.1 km

Height of highest mountain (Mt. Everest):
8.85 km

You should know by now that those who do accept a flood do not think the mountains were as high as they now are.

Woo look at the folding of the rock in the mountains - accordion style folding - to note a fairly rapid compression of the rock, had to be compressed when the rock was not hard or else it would break and not fold. Some argue that the folding happened underground under heat but that doesn't make sense because the folding of the rock can be seen giving many mountains their actual shape.

Mountains all seem to parrallel to the mid-oceanic ridge interestingly enough. Where it bends, so do mountain ranges ...

Well, he subscribes to the theory of evolution, so he must not be Christian. We can therefore forgive his errors, I think.

resedit wrote:

Woo look at the folding of the rock in the mountains - accordion style folding - to note a fairly rapid compression of the rock, had to be compressed when the rock was not hard or else it would break and not fold. Some argue that the folding happened underground under heat but that doesn't make sense because the folding of the rock can be seen giving many mountains their actual shape.

Or it happened very slowly over millions of years. Look ma, no heat required!

I wonder if you're aware that many 'brittle' substances actually flex pretty well. Glass bends a good bit before it breaks. Thats why you cannot put a broken glass together. Also, glass happens to be made out of the same stuff as mountains. Interesting......

Mountain ranges all seem parallel to the mid-oceanic ridge? Do you just make this up? What about the Himalayas? Or the Alps?

Notice how the mideoceanic ridge curves near those ranges.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo … nfloor.jpg

-=-

While I'm there - here is the model of pangea that distorts continent sizes to work:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo … ardmap.jpg

requires massive distortion.

Now, compare that to this:

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo … nglobe.jpg

Notice how they fit around the ridge without distortion of size.

The BSF made the Mid Atlanic Ridge to test people's faith.

resedit wrote:

Boy Scouts of France?

You'll go to heck for that.

resedit wrote:

You should know by now that those who do accept a flood do not think the mountains were as high as they now are.

That's a convenient postulate...

Hank Rearden wrote:

resedit wrote:

You should know by now that those who do accept a flood do not think the mountains were as high as they now are.

That's a convenient postulate...

"If you're not with us, you're with the atheists."

Hank Rearden wrote:

resedit wrote:

You should know by now that those who do accept a flood do not think the mountains were as high as they now are.

That's a convenient postulate...

Well sure.
But since it is what the flood supporting scientists put forth, arguements about how much water it would take to cover mount everest are really kind of pointless - since they aren't arguing water was at what is now an elevation above 20K feet.

It is fact that marine fossils are found in every mountain range.
It also is fact that fossilized trees often have fossilized marine worms in them.
It is also fact that layers of rocks in the mountains are folded.

I don't know how the trees are explained, but I know they say that the mountains have fossils because they were once sea floor, and have since pushed up. I agree - they were once sea floor, during the flood, and have since pushed up - though from the manner of the rock folding, it is clearly sideways compression that resulted in them rising. That sideways compression happened as they moved away from the mid-oceanic ridge that tore the land into what we now call continents.

After the flood, the water level was actually lower than it currently is - that provided the land bridges by which man and animals redistributed themselves. As the continents settled, the water level rose - much like when you sit on a water bed, closing off the land bridges.

-=-
I'm taking a history course this semester, history of Shasta County. Class starts in a week, but since I bought the materials and I'm taking the class because it interests me - I've been reading the materials. There is now a penninsula into the Sacramento river that use to be an island before we "tamed" the river. It was called "Blood Island". No one knows why - but several reasons have been given in tales told be the families of settlers. Every single one of them includes a massacre of Indians that happened on that Island. Most of them can be discounted because details about the people involved (who was murdered resulting in the retaliation, who led the retaliation, etc.) would place the naming of the Island after known date maps that call the Island "Blood Island". Most of them refer to a legendary military leader, Fremont - but either place the time at a time when Fremont was not in the area, or the details are very close to other confrontations he had in his memoirs that did not happen at Blood Island. No one knows for sure why it is called Blood Island, but since every account of the naming includes an Indian massacre with many Indians trying to escape by jumping in the river and drowning, an Indian massacre at some point is probably responsible for the naming of the Island, and the local lore just added or changed details either to spice it up, or because of faulty memory. But it is fairly certain it was named because of a massacre (which were not too uncommon unfortunately - we made promises we never kept, didn't let them near the rivers they needed for fish because we were after Gold, we hunted the deer and elk, etc. Really dark history)

Anyway - virtually every single culture on the planet has a global flood story. Sometimes the details are very similar, even on different continents - sometimes they are not as similar, but often it includes saving the animals, often it includes one family surviving, often it includes displeasure of God and/or gods at the people as the cause. But just about every single culture, if not every culture, has a global flood story.