*The Agony For Atheists; Noah's Ark Found!* - Merged with "Not the Ark"

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Well you low life atheists have to stop and wonder just how did it all happen?
2. You have to ask yourself, is the Bible all true.
3. You fag lovers will need to stop loving fags.
4. This won't be reported by the common media, but that won't change the fact that many of you heathern bastards are screwed royally!
5. Might be time to look ahead, and cling to the Bible, but then again I doubt thats even possible for most of you, your too imbeded.
6. Link and Sample:http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html

"THE remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000ft up a Turkish mountain, it has been claimed.
A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say they have found wooden remains on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.

They claim carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old — around the same time the ark was said to be afloat.



Biblical tale ... Noah filled the ark with two of each animal species
Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team, said: "It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it."



7. May be a good time to fall on yea knee's.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[KarlMarx]

Did you say 4,800 years old? Geez! Read this and tell me that this isn't more proof...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/science/14WAVE.html

[hortysir]

:clap:
I'll have to stay tuned

[hortysir]

Did you say 4,800 years old? Geez! Read this and tell me that this isn't more proof...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/science/14WAVE.html

Do I hear Twilight Zone music??

[hjmick]

Wow, they found it again?

Forgive my scepticism but I've heard this one...

[hortysir]

Wow, they found it again?

Forgive my scepticism but I've heard this one...

I thought the same thing, initially.
But, at least, in this picture they're actually in it or on it.
It seems like last time it was just satellite pics and it was too iced in to get to.

Global Warming??

[Monkeybone]

Wow, they found it again?

Forgive my scepticism but I've heard this one...

that was my thought... or at least I remember hearing something about it years ago, but the Government of the country wouldn't let the people come and look... maybe it was where they thought that it would be.

[Missileman]

Did you say 4,800 years old? Geez! Read this and tell me that this isn't more proof...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/science/14WAVE.html

How does an asteroid-caused tsunami lend any credence to a story about a 40-day rain-caused flood?

[hortysir]

How does an asteroid-caused tsunami lend any credence to a story about a 40-day rain-caused flood?
Take note of the word "and"....


Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

[Missileman]

Take note of the word "and"....


Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Take note of the word "so"...

So what?

[hortysir]

Take note of the word "so"...

So what?

I'm just saying it was a combination of both
:bang3:

[Missileman]

I'm just saying it was a combination of both
:bang3:

I must have missed the part where it says a Ginormous wave AND a flood...got a verse for that?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. The tsunami wasn't apart of the Biblical History.
2. It was a hellasious flood.
3. One never seen before, and or ever again.
4. Flooded to whole planet.
5. In fact.
6. Its the heatherns who suffer for this story, then and now, but they being so imbeded in their own filth can not retrack themselves.
7. They will need a higher power for that.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[hortysir]

I must have missed the part where it says a Ginormous wave AND a flood...got a verse for that?
I did......
all the fountains of the great deep broken up
How else would someone describe a tidal wave that they had never heard of or seen before?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. At the time of the flood, the world itself was like a giant marble, perfectly round.
2. But after the flood, the water covered to whole surface of the globe, and in so doing the shear weight of the water on the land, as it were, crumbled, and thats when volcanoes began to happen, which brought up the land masses, through the deep waters.
3. I love this topic.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Insein]

Sorry bout that,


1. At the time of the flood, the world itself was like a giant marble, perfectly round.
2. But after the flood, the water covered to whole surface of the globe, and in so doing the shear weight of the water on the land, as it were, crumbled, and thats when volcanoes began to happen, which brought up the land masses, through the deep waters.
3. I love this topic.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

...And Kevin Costner came down from on high in his highly modified pontoon boat of Antioch to search for dry land.

Got it.

[Missileman]

I did......
all the fountains of the great deep broken up
How else would someone describe a tidal wave that they had never heard of or seen before?

As I recall, the story ends up with every bit of land submerged and eventually the water slowly recedes. The sediment deposits in the article are the result of a wave rapidly receding. If as you suggest, the oceans bubbled up and formed these giant waves to help cover the surface of the planet, they would have eventually run into...wait for it...other waves and more water from every direction, leaving no place to make such deposits.

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,


1. At the time of the flood, the world itself was like a giant marble, perfectly round.
2. But after the flood, the water covered to whole surface of the globe, and in so doing the shear weight of the water on the land, as it were, crumbled, and thats when volcanoes began to happen, which brought up the land masses, through the deep waters.
3. I love this topic.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Did you never graduate from nursery school?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




...And Kevin Costner came down from on high in his highly modified pontoon boat of Antioch to search for dry land.

Got it.




1. At the time before the Great Flood, there were no oceans.
2. Just lakes and small rivers that fed into these lakes.
3. The rivers were fed by under ground springs, for there wasn't even rain before the flood, there was a dew that settled over the land at night time, at that time.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




Did you never graduate from nursery school?



1. I ain't the heathern here, it is you.
2. You're the one without an education, so sad.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[hortysir]

As I recall, the story ends up with every bit of land submerged and eventually the water slowly recedes. The sediment deposits in the article are the result of a wave rapidly receding. If as you suggest, the oceans bubbled up and formed these giant waves to help cover the surface of the planet, they would have eventually run into...wait for it...other waves and more water from every direction, leaving no place to make such deposits.

Though I do call myself "Christian", I don't subscribe to the belief in a Global Flood.
Just that the world, as those in that time knew of it, flooded.

I actually had to look up those Genesis chapter/verses to see if there was room left for something besides 40 days and nights of rain. That has never seemed, to me, like nearly enough to flood the "world".

I was probably more excited than you to find the verses that I did!! :laugh2:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Though I do call myself "Christian", I don't subscribe to the belief in a Global Flood.
Just that the world, as those in that time knew of it, flooded.

I actually had to look up those Genesis chapter/verses to see if there was room left for something besides 40 days and nights of rain. That has never seemed, to me, like nearly enough to flood the "world".

I was probably more excited than you to find the verses that I did!! :laugh2:



1. Well you would be wrong in assuming that there was never a Great Flood, the world have never seen rain before the Great Flood, made it very easy too flood.
2. Recently in a 24 hour period it rained 8 feet in Taiwan.
3. Just as a sample, lets say that there were no low spots on the globe, if it were to rain 8 feet a day, time 40 days, thats, 320 feet of water covering the entire planet.
4. But I think it was more or less a mile deep at the time, seeing the water from the deep came up too.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,








1. At the time before the Great Flood, there were no oceans.
2. Just lakes and small rivers that fed into these lakes.
3. The rivers were fed by under ground springs, for there wasn't even rain before the flood, there was a dew that settled over the land at night time, at that time.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Let me guess...the thumpers have come out with another new "scientific" theory. What do you call this one...Intelligent Geology? Where DO you come up with this stupid shit?

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,








1. At the time before the Great Flood, there were no oceans.
2. Just lakes and small rivers that fed into these lakes.
3. The rivers were fed by under ground springs, for there wasn't even rain before the flood, there was a dew that settled over the land at night time, at that time.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

And you get this information where? I KNOW it's not in the bible. So what is the source of all this wonderful knowledge you love to impose on everyone? None of what you describe is mentioned in the bible anywhere. So who feeds you this garbage?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Well if you knew the Bible as well as I do, you would know its in the Bible.:dance:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,


1. Well if you knew the Bible as well as I do, you would know its in the Bible.:dance:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I've read the bible, it's not there. What bible are you reading? Because you obviously don't know the bible. either someone is telling you tales and you believe them or your making shit up as you go along.

[pete311]

Many cultures have a flood myth and the one in the bible isn't even the earliest. That story was basically ripped from previous Mesopotamian cultures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth

Noah's ark is one of the least believable stories in the bible. Rounding up millions of animals and throwing them into a small boat? You believe that? Really? wow...

[Gaffer]

Many cultures have a flood myth and the one in the bible isn't even the earliest. That story was basically ripped from previous Mesopotamian cultures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth

Noah's ark is one of the least believable stories in the bible. Rounding up millions of animals and throwing them into a small boat? You believe that? Really? wow...

He also believes all the animals got off the boat on a mountain in Turkey and migrated all over the world.

[pete311]

He also believes all the animals got off the boat on a mountain in Turkey and migrated all over the world.

true, those kangaroos are good swimmers to reach Australia! :D

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. If you would open your eyes then you would be aware that the Bible shows you the way.
2. Genesis 7:19 (King James Version) SAYS:

19And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

3. This was during the flood, so it says that the water covered the high hills, which is all there was, if there were moutains, then the Bible would of said mountains.


4. Here's another nugget:Genesis 2:5 (King James Version)

5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.


5. It never rained on earth till the flood.






Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Gaffer]

true, those kangaroos are good swimmers to reach Australia! :D

I have asked him that before. Not to mention those koala bears having to swim all that way hungry. No one has ever explained how millions of animals were fit into that ark. One guy actually told me once that after the animals left they "evolved". :laugh2:

[PostmodernProphet]

They claim carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old — around the same time the ark was said to be afloat.


/boggle....who says the ark was afloat 4800 years ago?....that would be around 2800 BC.....there's all kinds of things we know happened more than 4800 years ago....like the Egyptians...the Chinese...the Mayans....

[PostmodernProphet]

a flood wouldn't have had to cover every square inch of the planet.....just those places where there were people......

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,


1. If you would open your eyes then you would be aware that the Bible shows you the way.
2. Genesis 7:19 (King James Version) SAYS:

19And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

3. This was during the flood, so it says that the water covered the high hills, which is all there was, if there were moutains, then the Bible would of said mountains.


4. Here's another nugget:Genesis 2:5 (King James Version)

5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.


5. It never rained on earth till the flood.






Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Take note of the bold. There was a time when there were no plants or animals. And no water. About 4 billion years ago. It also says nothing about mountains suddenly appearing. It's all mythology with people trying to explain things they had no clue about. Just like you trying to explain the same things when you have no clue. So you make shit up to cover your ignorance.

[PostmodernProphet]

Did you say 4,800 years old? Geez! Read this and tell me that this isn't more proof...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/science/14WAVE.html

interesting....

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Seeing it never rained, how did things grow before the flood?
2. Answers right here;Genesis 27:28 (King James Version)

28Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine:


3. It covered the land during the night, thats how.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




Take note of the bold.



1. Yes the part where its being said it never rained on the earth because God didn't allow it yet, not till the FLOOD!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,


1. Seeing it never rained, how did things grow before the flood?
2. Answers right here;Genesis 27:28 (King James Version)

28Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine:


3. It covered the land during the night, thats how.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Nothing grew until there was an abundance of water. That took about 2 billion years. Corn was only found in the Americas until they were colonized. Wine comes from grapes which can only be grown in certain temperate zones. 5000 years ago the Chinese had a thriving civilization and they don't mention a flood at all. Logic and common sense tells you there's something wrong with the whole flood story.

[pete311]

This was during the flood, so it says that the water covered the high hills, which is all there was, if there were moutains, then the Bible would of said mountains.


Are you saying the Himalayas rose 30,000ft in just 4800 years?

So the bible was starting to be written ~1800 years ago. Do we really think those people could accurately account for an event that happened 3000 years before they started writing? We can't even figure out who shot Tupac on a busy vegas strip 14 years ago!!

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Are you saying the Himalayas rose 30,000ft in just 4800 years?





1. No not at all, I'm not saying that.
2. I'm saying the mountains rose up in a short period of time, I estimate, four months after the flood,, just after the fourty days and nights of rain.
3. There is a record of it, so my estimate is just that an estimate, but look here:Genesis 8:4 (King James Version)

4And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.



4. The Mount Ararat in Turkey that Noah landed on, rose up from the ocean floor to meet him, just after the flood.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[pete311]

2. I'm saying the mountains rose up in a short period of time, I estimate, four months after the flood,, just after the fourty days and nights of rain.


I don't know why anyone bothers posting in this thread. What a waste of time. Really!

[OldMercsRule]

This is kinda funny. :D:D

Me thinks there is some serious leg pullin' goin on here. ;)

The Indian Ocean hit coulda happened and coulda caused some serious dislocations fer ancient mankind, n' maybe some rain toooooo.

The Black sea flood through the Bosphorus strait was likely kinda serious fer those in the area as well, as the was the big chunk o' Hawaii that fell into the Pacific a few years back. :eek: Bet that caused a wave eh?

I personally think the Noah story is a bit weak, (only one brain cell n' all), as it is hard ta accept the 600 to 800 year life spans in the old book as well.

Doesn't mean I don't believe in Christ, (I do), I just find the older book has some holes in it, the Ark bein' one of 'em.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. I always wonder why the heaterns rage, but that doesn't change the fact.
2. That they do.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




This is kinda funny. :D:D

Me thinks there is some serious leg pullin' goin on here. ;)

The Indian Ocean hit coulda happened and coulda caused some serious dislocations fer ancient mankind, n' maybe some rain toooooo.

The Black sea flood through the Bosphorus strait was likely kinda serious fer those in the area as well, as the was the big chunk o' Hawaii that fell into the Pacific a few years back. :eek: Bet that caused a wave eh?

I personally think the Noah story is a bit weak, (only one brain cell n' all), as it is hard ta accept the 600 to 800 year life spans in the old book as well.

Doesn't mean I don't believe in Christ, (I do), I just find the older book has some holes in it, the Ark bein' one of 'em.



1. Yah maybe, but then again maybe I believe, but then,....



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,







1. Yah maybe, but then again maybe I believe, but then,....



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


You are kind of a hoot Snowman.......... :D:D

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Just that you know this isn't a joke, here is a link and a sample of proof that the Himalayas were under wtater, during the flood:http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures

"Marine fossils are also found high in the Himalayas, the world’s tallest mountain range, reaching up to 29,029 feet (8,848 m) above sea level.3 For example, fossil ammonites (coiled marine cephalopods) are found in limestone beds in the Himalayas of Nepal. All geologists agree that ocean waters must have buried these marine fossils in these limestone beds. So how did these marine limestone beds get high up in the Himalayas? "


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,


1. Just that you know this isn't a joke, here is a link and a sample of proof that the Himalayas were under wtater, during the flood:http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures

"Marine fossils are also found high in the Himalayas, the world’s tallest mountain range, reaching up to 29,029 feet (8,848 m) above sea level.3 For example, fossil ammonites (coiled marine cephalopods) are found in limestone beds in the Himalayas of Nepal. All geologists agree that ocean waters must have buried these marine fossils in these limestone beds. So how did these marine limestone beds get high up in the Himalayas? "


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I don't know ya well enough ta know whether you are joking or not, Snowman. That said: I find some of yer posts very entertaining and this thread is a real gem. :D:D

As a "cafeteria" Christian I get exposed to the arguments of a 10,000 year old Grand Canyon n' such all the time.

I like everybody's boat to float. Mine floats accepting a 4-4.5 Billion year old earth as very likely.

I am aware that marine fossils have been found in high places in relatively young mountain ranges, The Himalayas were pushed up by the Indian sub contenent's collision with Asia relatively recently, (speaking in geologic terms).

I may not agree with all the 4,000 year old science from the book that Y, E and J and maybe a few other Moses type fellers passed down from four to five millenia ago... that doesn't mean I don't accept the Big Feller's work....... I do.

[pete311]

Sorry bout that,


1.
"Marine fossils are also found high in the Himalayas, the world’s tallest mountain range, reaching up to 29,029 feet (8,848 m) above sea level.3 For example, fossil ammonites (coiled marine cephalopods) are found in limestone beds in the Himalayas of Nepal. All geologists agree that ocean waters must have buried these marine fossils in these limestone beds. So how did these marine limestone beds get high up in the Himalayas? "


Of course, but you are off by about 200 million years.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




I don't know ya well enough ta know whether you are joking or not, Snowman. That said: I find some of yer posts very entertaining and this thread is a real gem. :D:D

As a "cafeteria" Christian I get exposed to the arguments of a 10,000 year old Grand Canyon n' such all the time.

I like everybody's boat to float. Mine floats accepting a 4-4.5 Billion year old earth as very likely.

I am aware that marine fossils have been found in high places in relatively young mountain ranges, The Himalayas were pushed up by the Indian sub contenent's collision with Asia relatively recently, (speaking in geologic terms).

I may not agree with all the 4,000 year old science from the book that Y, E and J and maybe a few other Moses type fellers passed down from four to five millenia ago... that doesn't mean I don't accept the Big Feller's work....... I do.



1. One of us id flat out wrong then.
2. I choose you.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Of course, but you are off by about 200 million years.



1. There is no proof this worlds that old.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[PostmodernProphet]

Are you saying the Himalayas rose 30,000ft in just 4800 years?

So the bible was starting to be written ~1800 years ago. Do we really think those people could accurately account for an event that happened 3000 years before they started writing? We can't even figure out who shot Tupac on a busy vegas strip 14 years ago!!

it wouldn't be necessary to submerge the Himalyas.....even if there had been people in Tibet at the time it isn't likely they would have survived the climb in the first place....

[PostmodernProphet]

This is kinda funny. :D:D

Me thinks there is some serious leg pullin' goin on here. ;)

The Indian Ocean hit coulda happened and coulda caused some serious dislocations fer ancient mankind, n' maybe some rain toooooo.

The Black sea flood through the Bosphorus strait was likely kinda serious fer those in the area as well, as the was the big chunk o' Hawaii that fell into the Pacific a few years back. :eek: Bet that caused a wave eh?

I personally think the Noah story is a bit weak, (only one brain cell n' all), as it is hard ta accept the 600 to 800 year life spans in the old book as well.

Doesn't mean I don't believe in Christ, (I do), I just find the older book has some holes in it, the Ark bein' one of 'em.

and yet nearly every civilization on the planet has a cultural memory of a catastrophic flood.....

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

[pete311]

1. There is no proof this worlds that old.


Do you know what they used to estimate the age of the boat they found? Yes, because you posted it. If you accept carbon dating for the boat's age then you must accept it for everything else in this world that points to the earth being billions of years old. You are so backwards it's pathetic.

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,


1. Well you low life atheists have to stop and wonder just how did it all happen?
2. You have to ask yourself, is the Bible all true.
3. You fag lovers will need to stop loving fags.
4. This won't be reported by the common media, but that won't change the fact that many of you heathern bastards are screwed royally!
5. Might be time to look ahead, and cling to the Bible, but then again I doubt thats even possible for most of you, your too imbeded.
6. Link and Sample:http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html

"THE remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000ft up a Turkish mountain, it has been claimed.
A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say they have found wooden remains on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.

They claim carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old — around the same time the ark was said to be afloat.

Biblical tale ... Noah filled the ark with two of each animal species
Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team, said: "It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it."

7. May be a good time to fall on yea knee's.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team, said: "It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it."


The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000ft in the vicinity, Yeung said.

Since none have ever been found what are the possibilities this is the first one?

[Mr. P]

I'd like to invest in a company that can preserve buried wood for 4,800 years! This will go down as yet another "Oh well, we'll keep looking".

[KarlMarx]

How does an asteroid-caused tsunami lend any credence to a story about a 40-day rain-caused flood?
1. It didn't cause a tsunami, it caused a mega tsunami. Which is several orders of magnitude worse. Waves could reach as high as 1/2 a mile or more.
2. A large asteroid impact could affect weather and climate to the point where it could rain for 40 days or more

The same thing happened 65 million years ago when a similar type of event occured and wiped out the dinosaurs.

[KarlMarx]

Many cultures have a flood myth and the one in the bible isn't even the earliest. That story was basically ripped from previous Mesopotamian cultures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth

Noah's ark is one of the least believable stories in the bible. Rounding up millions of animals and throwing them into a small boat? You believe that? Really? wow...
The fact that many cultures have a flood myth gives more credence to the hypothesis that a huge flood did occur. If an asteroid collided with the earth, it would have caused flooding on a very large scale.

It isn't the only time that a local event had global consequences. In the 1815, the volcano Tambora in Indonesia erupted. Actually, the word "exploded" is more accurate. The sound of the eruption could be heard over 1200 miles away. The following year, Europe had no summer. It snowed in July and few crops were harvested.

Now, if a volcanic explosion can cause that kind of havoc, then a 2-3 mile wide asteroid slamming into the Indian Ocean at 25,000 miles per hour or more can do a lot more damage. It would have affected both the climate of the Middle East and caused enormous tidal waves.

Remember that Mesopotamia, where Abraham was from, is at the end of the Persian Gulf. The effects of a mega-tsunami would have been magnified. Flooding would have been wide spread and the local climate would have been turned on its head for quite some time. It's not at all far fetched that the account given in the Bible is based on a real event.

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

No need ta be sorry....... :)


1. One of us id flat out wrong then.

I've been wrong before. You ever been wrong? :D


2. I choose you.

Well........ I guess if you were the judge, jury n' jailer... I'd be screwed then........ eh? ;)


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Respectfully, Murky of Seattle ;)

[OldMercsRule]

and yet nearly every civilization on the planet has a cultural memory of a catastrophic flood.....

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

Quite true.


There is a lot of water on this planet......


Floods happen when there is water......


Likely will be an issue in the future as well. ;)

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





I'd like to invest in a company that can preserve buried wood for 4,800 years! This will go down as yet another "Oh well, we'll keep looking".



1. Frozen wood decays much slower, anyway the wood Noah used was coated with pitch~tar, as instructed by God, a wonderful water proofing.
2. Problem is you haven't any faith, thats gotta suck.
3. This find proves without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true, if you hadn't realized it yet.
4. Those doubting are sure to find themselves in a world of hurt, don't let this happen to you.:poke:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Since none have ever been found what are the possibilities this is the first one?



1. Well seeing this is a first, and its been claimed to have been seen over the decades.
2. This find changes everything known to man, up till now.
3. Most people just fail to see this.
4. May be a time to open ones eyes.
5. Or a time to purposefully close ones eyes.
6. Anyways, times they are a changing.
7. Unless you learn from this great find, it will be a cross roads for those whom neglect it.
8. I wonder what secrets will be found that remains in the ARK?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




1. It didn't cause a tsunami, it caused a mega tsunami. Which is several orders of magnitude worse. Waves could reach as high as 1/2 a mile or more.
2. A large asteroid impact could affect weather and climate to the point where it could rain for 40 days or more

The same thing happened 65 million years ago when a similar type of event occured and wiped out the dinosaurs.




1. Just conjecture, there is no need to provide evidence that a asteroid did the Great Flood.
2. It rained, having never rained before, the waters from under ground busted loose.
3. When that happened the places where the waters under ground once was, sunk down creating the oceans.
4. From the weight of the water being over the whole earth.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[pete311]

chess, would you respond to my last reply to you?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,






Do you know what they used to estimate the age of the boat they found? Yes, because you posted it. If you accept carbon dating for the boat's age then you must accept it for everything else in this world that points to the earth being billions of years old. You are so backwards it's pathetic.




1. Sure the age of a object can be tampered with, its not exact, its something the so called experts sell for money.
2. Sure, give me some money, and I will get into the carbon dating business,..LOL!!!
3. Beats working.
4. Snake Oil Sales Men, thats all.:laugh2:
5. But finding the actuall proof, of the Ark, is much more than making claims how old a rock, or peice of wood is.
6. If we focus to hard on whats in plain site we miss seeing it.
7. Thats why I'm here, making the complex easy to see, and understand.:eek:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[pete311]

5. But finding the actuall proof, of the Ark, is much more than making claims how old a rock, or peice of wood is.


How can you prove it without dating it? You were quick to advertise it's carbon dating and now you retreat and cry conspiracy. Seriously, how can you not see how pathetic your attempts are? Your classic defense mechanisms are off the charts.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




How can you prove it without dating it? You were quick to advertise it's carbon dating and now you retreat and cry conspiracy. Seriously, how can you not see how pathetic your attempts are? Your classic defense mechanisms are off the charts.




1. Pete, Pete, I posted a link and sample to the site I found.
2. I didn't rave about what carbon dating they came up with, I just posted a section of said site.
3. How else did this structure get way the hell up there on Mt. Ararat?
4. Is it a plant?
5. Did donkeys drag it up there as a hoax?
6. Maybe a helicopter took it up there then?
7. Is this the conspiracy you are looking for?
8. There is, NO *Conspiracy*, the only thing I see is *Agony* of the heatherns.
9. You a heathern aint cha?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[pete311]

3. How else did this structure get way the hell up there on Mt. Ararat?


So you adhere to a three year old's rationale of "If I don't understand it, it must be god!".

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




So you adhere to a three year old's rationale of "If I don't understand it, it must be god!".



1. No having spoken to God, directly, I believe in God whole heartedly.
2. You on the other hand are just a heathern, so say it, you will at least feel better for it.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[pete311]

1. No having spoken to God, directly, I believe in God whole heartedly.


aaaaaaaand i'm done with this thread, good luck everyone

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bou that,




aaaaaaaand i'm done with this thread, good luck everyone




1. Ah, Pete, don't give up so easy.
2. Don't run!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

No need ta be sorry.


1. Frozen wood decays much slower, anyway the wood Noah used was coated with pitch~tar, as instructed by God, a wonderful water proofing.

Could be.


2. Problem is you haven't any faith, thats gotta suck.

Some may have faith in God/Jesus...... Others have absolute faith in the written words, (every word it would seem... ;) ) in one particular collection of very old work.


3. This find proves without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true, if you hadn't realized it yet.

Some strange words to use for a man who professes faith, eh? Why do ya need to prove "without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true" if yer truely faithful? Hmmmmmmm????? :D:D:D;)


Doesn't such a statement set ya up fer a bit of a heart break if this particular find doesn't werk out? Eh???


4. Those doubting are sure to find themselves in a world of hurt, don't let this happen to you.:poke:

No harm if they believe in Jesus.

"Judge not lest ye be judged"....... eh?



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Respectfully, Murky of Seattle

You really are a hoot Snowman. ;)

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. I really do feel sorry for you heatherns, I know you must be reeling from this find of Noah's Ark.
2. This should crush everything you have ever held close to your hearts.
3. Evolution, Natural Selection, Carbon Dating, Church of Darwin, Worship of Science, Gore's Global Warming.
4. Seems you heatherns have a lot of crap to throw up or hold down?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Mr. P]

aaaaaaaand i'm done with this thread, good luck everyone

Cheesy is just the board idiot..no one really debates with him he's just entertainment.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




Cheesy is just the board idiot..no one really debates with him he's just entertainment.



1. I forgot more than you know old man,..or is it you forgot more than you know?:laugh2:
2. Anyway, you know what I mean,..lol!!!
3. I just like playing with these heatherns, you to Mr. P.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Mr. P]

Sorry bout that,







1. I forgot more than you know old man,..or is it you forgot more than you know?:laugh2:
2. Anyway, you know what I mean,..lol!!!
3. I just like playing with these heatherns, you to Mr. P.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:
Hey, I found a body of a SASQUATCH in the woods behind my house. I'm 99% sure it's the real thing.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




No need ta be sorry.




1. Its my tag line, sig,..you get it right kinda like ure blue text eh?




Could be.



Some may have faith in God/Jesus...... Others have absolute faith in the written words, (every word it would seem... ;) ) in one particular collection of very old work.




2. If its truth, why doubt it?





Some strange words to use for a man who professes faith, eh? Why do ya need to prove "without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true" if yer truely faithful? Hmmmmmmm????? :D:D:D;)





3. Its been kept secret for centuries, now its found for a reason, Gods reasoning.






Doesn't such a statement set ya up fer a bit of a heart break if this particular find doesn't werk out? Eh???




4. Nope.


No harm if they believe in Jesus.

"Judge not lest ye be judged"....... eh?





5. I am not judging anyone into hell, just throwing out statements about heatherns.









Respectfully, Murky of Seattle

You really are a hoot Snowman. ;)





6. I yam what I yam.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

1. Its my tag line, sig,..you get it right kinda like ure blue text eh?

10-4


Originally Posted by OldMercsRule
Could be.

Some may have faith in God/Jesus...... Others have absolute faith in the written words, (every word it would seem... ) in one particular collection of very old work.


2. If its truth, why doubt it?

Jesus Christ is truth.

Written words are written words, some true some.............. hard tellin' not knowin'.......;)


Originally Posted by OldMercsRule
Some strange words to use for a man who professes faith, eh? Why do ya need to prove "without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true" if yer truely faithful? Hmmmmmmm?????


3. Its been kept secret for centuries, now its found for a reason, Gods reasoning.


Originally Posted by OldMercsRule
Doesn't such a statement set ya up fer a bit of a heart break if this particular find doesn't werk out? Eh???


4. Nope.


Originally Posted by OldMercsRule
No harm if they believe in Jesus.

"Judge not lest ye be judged"....... eh?


5. I am not judging anyone into hell, just throwing out statements about heatherns.


Originally Posted by OldMercsRule
Respectfully, Murky of Seattle

You really are a hoot Snowman.


6. I yam what I yam.

That you are. :D


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Respectfully.

[Missileman]

The fact that many cultures have a flood myth gives more credence to the hypothesis that a huge flood did occur. If an asteroid collided with the earth, it would have caused flooding on a very large scale.

It isn't the only time that a local event had global consequences. In the 1815, the volcano Tambora in Indonesia erupted. Actually, the word "exploded" is more accurate. The sound of the eruption could be heard over 1200 miles away. The following year, Europe had no summer. It snowed in July and few crops were harvested.

Now, if a volcanic explosion can cause that kind of havoc, then a 2-3 mile wide asteroid slamming into the Indian Ocean at 25,000 miles per hour or more can do a lot more damage. It would have affected both the climate of the Middle East and caused enormous tidal waves.

Remember that Mesopotamia, where Abraham was from, is at the end of the Persian Gulf. The effects of a mega-tsunami would have been magnified. Flooding would have been wide spread and the local climate would have been turned on its head for quite some time. It's not at all far fetched that the account given in the Bible is based on a real event.

Ahh, but a far-fetched story based on a not-at-all far-fetched story is still far-fetched. :laugh2:

That ancient Jews had witnessed floods is a given...perhaps even a cataclysmic one. That again lends no credence to a myth about the entire planet being submerged through an act of divine retribution. As a matter of fact, coming up with a natural explanation for what was supposed to be a supernatural event should be poo-pooed by the faithful.

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,


8. I wonder what secrets will be found that remains in the ARK?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That Noah and his family had an incestuous relationship if they were the only ones left after your flood.

[Gaffer]

Proud to be a heathen. :salute:

[crin63]

While I absolutely believe the Bible account of the flood and Noah. This just isn't it apparently.


Latest Noah's Ark 'just
wood planted on Ararat'
Archaeologists make astonishing claim
about alleged discovery of Bible boat
Posted: April 28, 2010
9:30 pm Eastern

By Joe Kovacs
WorldNetDaily

Has the real Noah's Ark spoken of in the Bible truly been found?

At least two seasoned archaeologists who have made numerous expeditions to Mount Ararat in search of Noah's Ark are throwing cold water on this week's claim the Old Testament vessel has finally been discovered, saying it's a hoax involving wood hauled in from the Black Sea region.


In this photo from Noah's Ark Ministries International, an explorer is purported to be investigating a wooden structure on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey that it says may be the remnant of Noah's Ark mentioned in the Bible.

"To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake," said Randall Price, director of Judaic Studies at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va.

"This is not Noah's Ark," adds Bob Cornuke of the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration Institute. "This is a fake. It's a fraud and it's of the highest caliber according to what I can assess from the evidence and talking to eyewitnesses and people from Turkey."

WND reported yesterday that Chinese and Turkish explorers with Noah's Ark Ministries International said they were "99.9 percent sure" they found the remnants of the legendary biblical vessel high up on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.

The 15-member team claims it recovered wooden specimens from a structure at an altitude of 13,000 feet and that carbon dating suggested it was 4,800 years old.

Yes, Noah's Ark is completely real! Now find out "what you don't Noah" about the story as well as your spectacular destiny they rarely ever mention in church in this autographed No. 1 best-seller!

Several compartments, some with wooden beams, are said to be inside and could have been used to house animals, the group indicated.

"The search team has made the greatest discovery in history," declared Prof. Oktay Belli, an archaeologist at Istanbul University. "This finding is very important and the greatest up to now."

Some video has been posted on YouTube and can be seen here:

But Dr. Price, who is spearheading efforts to explore two competing locations for Noah's Ark, sent an e-mail dispatch to supporters with his personal take on the alleged find, asserting the structure is a hoax perpetrated by a Kurdish guide and his partners to extort money from Chinese evangelical Christians.

"I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark," he wrote in his message dated April 26.

The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut's men to the site saw the wood, but couldn't get inside because of the severe weather conditions.

During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters – something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubayazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it.

To my knowledge, the Chinese took no professional archaeologist or geologist who could verify or document the wood or the structure ... .

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=146941

[pete311]

heathen reporting for duty! :salute:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Sure, you atheists have to poo poo the finding of the Ark.
2. Otherwise you will go stark raving mad!
3. I know your in such a deep deep agony, over this, but the facts remains, it wasn't a plant, and others will go up there and reveal all its secrets.
4. I'm sure they know the GPS spot now, and can find it with ease now.
5. Just hold on to your deluded hope in Darwin as long as you can, soon that will be wiped out of view for everyone.
6. And you will find you aint some monkeys uncle!:laugh2:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,


1. Sure, you atheists have to poo poo the finding of the Ark.
2. Otherwise you will go stark raving mad!
3. I know your in such a deep deep agony, over this, but the facts remains, it wasn't a plant, and others will go up there and reveal all its secrets.
4. I'm sure they know the GPS spot now, and can find it with ease now.
5. Just hold on to your deluded hope in Darwin as long as you can, soon that will be wiped out of view for everyone.
6. And you will find you aint some monkeys uncle!:laugh2:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

God luv ya Snowman!! Ya have any smoke I can try??? (As long as me single functional brain cell werks when it wears off! :D:D

[Mr. P]

I'd like to invest in a company that can preserve buried wood for 4,800 years! This will go down as yet another "Oh well, we'll keep looking".


Sorry bout that,

1. Frozen wood decays much slower, anyway the wood Noah used was coated with pitch~tar, as instructed by God, a wonderful water proofing.
2. Problem is you haven't any faith, thats gotta suck.
3. This find proves without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true, if you hadn't realized it yet.
4. Those doubting are sure to find themselves in a world of hurt, don't let this happen to you.:poke:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Is this when "I told ya so" comes in?:poke:

[bullypulpit]

Hmmmm..."Evangelical archaeologists" kinda gives one doubts as to their scientific objectivity.

The end of the last Ice Age led to a rise in water levels that would have to large scale catastrophic flooding, but that was 10,000 years ago, not 4,800. This could have been of such a scale, and affecting so many Paleolithic cultures that it becam enshrined in oral histories and legend.

More recently, it has been posited that the Mediterranean Sea overflowed a sill in the Bosporus Straight thus raising the level of the Black Sea catastrophically about 5,600 years ago. This is closer to the claimed age of the "Ark", and may also have been responsible for the legend of Noah's Ark.

[bullypulpit]

Sorry bout that,


1. Well if you knew the Bible as well as I do, you would know its in the Bible.:dance:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Pride goeth before the fall.

[bullypulpit]

Sorry bout that,








1. Frozen wood decays much slower, anyway the wood Noah used was coated with pitch~tar, as instructed by God, a wonderful water proofing.
2. Problem is you haven't any faith, thats gotta suck.
3. This find proves without a shadow of a doubt all the Bible is true, if you hadn't realized it yet.
4. Those doubting are sure to find themselves in a world of hurt, don't let this happen to you.:poke:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Hate to break it to ya but the radioactive decay that is the basis for carbon dating would not be slowed by the temperatures occurring in glacial ice. Absolute zero...maybe, but not anything that would occur terrestrially.

[KarlMarx]

Ahh, but a far-fetched story based on a not-at-all far-fetched story is still far-fetched. :laugh2:

That ancient Jews had witnessed floods is a given...perhaps even a cataclysmic one. That again lends no credence to a myth about the entire planet being submerged through an act of divine retribution. As a matter of fact, coming up with a natural explanation for what was supposed to be a supernatural event should be poo-pooed by the faithful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958_Lituya_Bay_megatsunami

"The highest wave ever recorded occurred on July 9, 1958 in Lituya Bay (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lituya_Bay), Alaska (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Alaska) reaching a height of 524 meters (1,720 feet), 250 feet taller than the Empire State Building (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Empire_State_Building)."

Oddly enough, the text also continues...

"... destroying a fishing boat anchored there and killing two people. Howard Ulrich and his son managed to ride the wave in their boat, and both survived."

further... again from Wikipedia...

"Hawaii
Prehistoric sedimentary deposits on the Kohala Volcano (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Kohala_(mountain)), Lanai (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lanai) and Molokai (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Molokai) controversially indicates that landslides from the flank of the Kilauea (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Kilauea) and Mauna Loa (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Mauna_Loa) volcanoes in Hawaii (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Hawaii) may have triggered past megatsunamis, most recently at 120,000 BP (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Before_Present).<SUP id=cite_ref-17 class=reference>[18] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-17)</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-18 class=reference>[19] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-18)</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-19 class=reference>[20] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-19)</SUP> A future tsunami event is also possible, with the tsunami potentially reaching up to about a kilometer in height
"
However... an asteroid collision has the potential of producing a tsunami that would be much higher than the Lituya Bay event. I didn't say that every mountain in the world was submerged, I said that there was an asteroid collision 4,800 years ago and its effects were both widespread and catclysmic. While the Noah account may still lack evidence to back it up, the account is based on something that happened in pre-recorded history.

[Missileman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958_Lituya_Bay_megatsunami

"The highest wave ever recorded occurred on July 9, 1958 in Lituya Bay (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lituya_Bay), Alaska (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Alaska) reaching a height of 524 meters (1,720 feet), 250 feet taller than the Empire State Building (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Empire_State_Building)."

Oddly enough, the text also continues...

"... destroying a fishing boat anchored there and killing two people. Howard Ulrich and his son managed to ride the wave in their boat, and both survived."

further... again from Wikipedia...

"Hawaii
Prehistoric sedimentary deposits on the Kohala Volcano (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Kohala_(mountain)), Lanai (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Lanai) and Molokai (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Molokai) controversially indicates that landslides from the flank of the Kilauea (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Kilauea) and Mauna Loa (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Mauna_Loa) volcanoes in Hawaii (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Hawaii) may have triggered past megatsunamis, most recently at 120,000 BP (http://www.debatepolicy.com/wiki/Before_Present).<SUP id=cite_ref-17 class=reference>[18] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-17)</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-18 class=reference>[19] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-18)</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-19 class=reference>[20] (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#cite_note-19)</SUP> A future tsunami event is also possible, with the tsunami potentially reaching up to about a kilometer in height
"
However... an asteroid collision has the potential of producing a tsunami that would be much higher than the Lituya Bay event. I didn't say that every mountain in the world was submerged, I said that there was an asteroid collision 4,800 years ago and its effects were both widespread and catclysmic. While the Noah account may still lack evidence to back it up, the account is based on something that happened in pre-recorded history.

What is it exactly you are arguing? Is it that Noah's story of gathering all the world's animals 2-by-2, after constructing a giant floating zoo, and then riding out a supernatural global flood is somehow bolstered by the existence of a mega-tsunami of natural origins because they share approximate age?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





God luv ya Snowman!! Ya have any smoke I can try??? (As long as me single functional brain cell werks when it wears off! :D:D



1. Sorry mon, dopes for losers, you aint one are yea?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Is this when "I told ya so" comes in?:poke:




1. Nope too early yet.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Hmmmm..."Evangelical archaeologists" kinda gives one doubts as to their scientific objectivity.

The end of the last Ice Age led to a rise in water levels that would have to large scale catastrophic flooding, but that was 10,000 years ago, not 4,800. This could have been of such a scale, and affecting so many Paleolithic cultures that it becam enshrined in oral histories and legend.

More recently, it has been posited that the Mediterranean Sea overflowed a sill in the Bosporus Straight thus raising the level of the Black Sea catastrophically about 5,600 years ago. This is closer to the claimed age of the "Ark", and may also have been responsible for the legend of Noah's Ark.




1. They found it, more then the experts ever did.
2. They have special powers, liberal nutter professors dont have.
3. There is no longer a *Legend* of the Ark, there is simply, *THE ARK*.
4. Something you'll have to get used too I suppose lefty.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Pride goeth before the fall.



1. Yes it do, and thats what happens to everyone, before they die, pride dies first.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Hate to break it to ya but the radioactive decay that is the basis for carbon dating would not be slowed by the temperatures occurring in glacial ice. Absolute zero...maybe, but not anything that would occur terrestrially.




1. I dont know man, I am having a hard time believing that.
2. Many times they have unburied Mamoth's from the ise, and they actually look pretty good, preserved, kinda goes against what you're saying eh?
3. The will bring some of this wood down, and artifacts, which will further prove its the *Real Deal*.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Insein]

Chesswarsnow: Makes Bullypulpit look reasonable and sane.

[Missileman]

Chesswarsnow: Makes Bullypulpit look reasonable and sane.

Maybe miracles do happen...:laugh2:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,






Chesswarsnow: Makes Bullypulpit look reasonable and sane.




1. Your ID reminds me of insane, are you?
2. Those who make insane claims may be the ones going nutter,...
3. Just a thought,...:eek:



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Maybe miracles do happen...:laugh2:




1. Huh?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,








1. Sorry mon, dopes for losers, you aint one are yea?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


Well.... with only one remaining functional brain cell I'm surely not Albert Einstein.

I guess smoke isn't what makes ya soooooo special then...... :D:D:D

Is it in yer water???

[KarlMarx]

What is it exactly you are arguing? Is it that Noah's story of gathering all the world's animals 2-by-2, after constructing a giant floating zoo, and then riding out a supernatural global flood is somehow bolstered by the existence of a mega-tsunami of natural origins because they share approximate age?

I'm saying that the flood account in the Bible is based on an actual event. I believe that approximately 4,800 years ago, a cataclysmic event occurred. Whether Noah actually put a bunch on animals on an ark or not is not my point. But calling the flood account total fiction is just as unreasonable. The fact remains that an asteroid did hit the Indian Ocean and caused widespread mega-tsunamis. The Middle East, specifically, the region of the Tigris and Euphrates, would have been affected by such an event.

[Missileman]

I'm saying that the flood account in the Bible is based on an actual event. I believe that approximately 4,800 years ago, a cataclysmic event occurred. Whether Noah actually put a bunch on animals on an ark or not is not my point. But calling the flood account total fiction is just as unreasonable. The fact remains that an asteroid did hit the Indian Ocean and caused widespread mega-tsunamis. The Middle East, specifically, the region of the Tigris and Euphrates, would have been affected by such an event.

Almost all myths and legends are embellished versions of a real event. I'm not convinced a quick-hitting tsunami would give rise to a long, slowly-developing "round-up, boat-build, slow-rising water" myth. The two events are totally dis-similar even though they both involve water. The account of Noah could contain a reference to a "real" high water event and still be total fiction.

[bullypulpit]

The only agony here, Chessie, is reading your inane, mindlessly dogmatic posts.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





The only agony here, Chessie, is reading your inane, mindlessly dogmatic posts.



1. So whats your point of view, do you think this is the Ark or not?
2. I think I already know where you stand on this, but lets get it in writing eh?
3. How else will we know just how much agony you may be in?
4. Bully can I call you Pulpit?
5. Are you a Bible based man Pulpit?
6. You being a healer of men I would be surprised to hear you were not.
7. But stranger things have happened I suppose.
8. As far as we know now, this structure is huge, I have seen one small room inside of it, but when they discover the whole Ark, and map out its whole area, things could change real fast for you doubters.
9. Your Agony will increase.
10. But my total joy will increase too, so its a worthy trade off.:laugh2:




Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[KarlMarx]

Almost all myths and legends are embellished versions of a real event. I'm not convinced a quick-hitting tsunami would give rise to a long, slowly-developing "round-up, boat-build, slow-rising water" myth. The two events are totally dis-similar even though they both involve water. The account of Noah could contain a reference to a "real" high water event and still be total fiction.
Who said anything about a slow-rising water event? The Bible said that God "broke open the fountains of the deep".

[Missileman]

Who said anything about a slow-rising water event? The Bible said that God "broke open the fountains of the deep".

It also says:

"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."

I'd call 40 days a slow-rising water event.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. The great flood came with great speed, and as it came, the soon to be ocean floor sank down.
2. The shear pressure of this land folding down on itself, caused the water of the deep to shoot forth with hypersonic speeds.
3. Perhaps reaching the hieghts of one mile, in a curtain like wall.
4. That follows the tectonic plates we see now, that looks like a baseball seam and runs around the bottom of the oceans.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,


1. The great flood came with great speed, and as it came, the soon to be ocean floor sank down.
2. The shear pressure of this land folding down on itself, caused the water of the deep to shoot forth with hypersonic speeds.
3. Perhaps reaching the hieghts of one mile, in a curtain like wall.
4. That follows the tectonic plates we see now, that looks like a baseball seam and runs around the bottom of the oceans.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

So let's see if we can straighten out what you're arguing. First, you claim there were no oceans, so when you say water of the deep, you can only be referring to underground water. Now in this post, you're arguing that water displaced water. With every post you establish a new pinnacle of stupidity...it's amazing.

[Mr. P]

So let's see if we can straighten out what you're arguing. First, you claim there were no oceans, so when you say water of the deep, you can only be referring to underground water. Now in this post, you're arguing that water displaced water. With every post you establish a new pinnacle of stupidity...it's amazing.

It's as easy as...

1.
2.
3.

:laugh2:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. You two are just too much of a bone head atheist to understand.
2. And you don't even want to understand.
3. Your ignorance is your bliss.
4. Keep telling yourselves that!:laugh2:



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[PostmodernProphet]

Chess?....will you acknowledge from what I have posted here that I am not an atheist?.......

will you recognize that it is impossible for the flood to have occurred 4800 years ago?......that would date it around 2800 BC......the Chinese have written records of government that go back before that date by at least a thousand years.....if the Flood had occured in the middle of one of their dynasties, don't you think they would have written it down somewhere?.....or at least noticed that everyone was dead?.......

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




Chess?....will you acknowledge from what I have posted here that I am not an atheist?.......

will you recognize that it is impossible for the flood to have occurred 4800 years ago?......that would date it around 2800 BC......the Chinese have written records of government that go back before that date by at least a thousand years.....if the Flood had occured in the middle of one of their dynasties, don't you think they would have written it down somewhere?.....or at least noticed that everyone was dead?.......



1. I have not made any claim your an atheist PMP, when I rant its not always directed at you.
2. First look at who's doing the carbon dating, then you will know thats why its only 4800 years ago, I think they looked the other way on the other 5210years.
3. This world isn't nearly as old as you may think it is.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[PostmodernProphet]

Sorry bout that,







1. I have not made any claim your an atheist PMP, when I rant its not always directed at you.
2. First look at who's doing the carbon dating, then you will know thats why its only 4800 years ago, I think they looked the other way on the other 5210years.
3. This world isn't nearly as old as you may think it is.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

it's at least as old as the Chinese have recorded it is.....

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




So let's see if we can straighten out what you're arguing. First, you claim there were no oceans, so when you say water of the deep, you can only be referring to underground water. Now in this post, you're arguing that water displaced water. With every post you establish a new pinnacle of stupidity...it's amazing.




1. To an atheist I have to be stupid.
2. Because otherwise you people would totally flip out.
3. What it was is this, there was a thin layer of earth over some huge cavernous underground bodies of water, where all forms of sea life lived.
4. This was where the most of the water came from, though the rains from the fermament was quite large too.
5. Equal to a half a mile of water to cover the whole planet.
6. Ofcourse God broke up the land in oder to allow the water out from underground, and punctured the fermament in order for the rain to begin.
7. We can never have another Great Flood, because there isn't enough water to over flow the land after the land rose up with the rising of volcanoes, which is why the land is even here as we see it now.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

1. To an atheist I have to be stupid.


I have a sneaky suspicion that you're stupid to more than atheists. :laugh2:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Being stupid beats to hell, going there.
2. Anyways MM good luck with that!:laugh2:
3. Maybe invest in some asbestos underwear???:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:
4. You don't have to go there, but when you do, if you do, remember I told you so get the underwear.......

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

1.
2.
3. What it was is this, there was a thin layer of earth over some huge cavernous underground bodies of water, where all forms of sea life lived.
4. This was where the most of the water came from, though the rains from the fermament was quite large too.
5.
6. Ofcourse God broke up the land in oder to allow the water out from underground, and punctured the fermament in order for the rain to begin.7.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


Where do you get this stuff in red Snowman??? Did I miss some sections of the old book or do you tune in ta somebody directly, fer some sorta inside scoop??? :D:D

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,






Where do you get this stuff in red Snowman??? Did I miss some sections of the old book or do you tune in ta somebody directly, fer some sorta inside scoop??? :D:D



1. Its how it happened, its where mankind came from.
2. And at some point God will make everything back the way it was.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

1. Its how it happened, its where mankind came from.
2. And at some point God will make everything back the way it was.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


Do you have any particular source you rely upon? Or is this a revelation by God or........ soley to you? ;)

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,



Do you have any particular source you rely upon? Or is this a revelation by God or........ soley to you? ;)




1. My source is the source of us all, God.
2. Whatever the sceintest think, God gave them the idea.
3. Its just my thoughts are higher then theirs.
4. And founded on better truths, truth itself.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OldMercsRule]

Sorry bout that,

1. My source is the source of us all, God.
2. Whatever the sceintest think, God gave them the idea.
3. Its just my thoughts are higher then theirs.
4. And founded on better truths, truth itself.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

That's purdy kool Snowman. :D

Guess I didn't miss somethin' in the old book after all.... I was gettin' kinda skeeeered........ (fer a wee bit), anyhooooo. ;)

Not often I come across a feller who can tune into God on his own private channel n' get the real inside scoop. :D

Thanks fer sharin'.

You carry on now, my friend.

Respectfully; Murky of Seattle. ;)