Trevor Compact

Since Velikovsky was an atheist - your ad hom against him is only because he proved the Bible.

TC

Avatar

What does Velikovsky's philisophical stance have to do with anything? The man made a huge number of outrageous claims--just like Wyatt--and was unable to back them up with any kind of verifiable or testible evidence--just like Wyatt.

What Velikovsky does isn't science because he does not start with what is known and then use ancient myths to illustrate or illuminate what has been discovered. Instead, he is indifferent to the established facts of astronomers and physicists, and seems to assume that someday they will find the evidence to support his ideas. He seems to take it for granted that the claims of ancient myths should be used to support or challenge the claims of modern astronomy and cosmology. In short, like the creationists in their arguments against evolution, he starts with the assumption that the Bible is a foundation and guide for scientific truth.

Boro Nut

In my unbiased opinion, Ron Wyatt is without doubt the foremost sincere scientific Christian fundamentalist archeologist and most honest creationist researcher alive today.

Boro Nut

John A. Broussard

I'd sure like to hear how Velikovsky proved the bible.

Please explain.

Thanks.

John A. Broussard

Which isn't saying much, of course.

andrewcriddle

IIUC (and I may well be wrong) Velikovsky was a Torah-observant Jew.

Andrew Criddle

Amaleq13

Trevor Compact,

If you decide to take John up on his request, please start a new thread to do so. Surely, Velikovsky deserves his own just as much as Wyatt?


Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

Lysimachus

I’ll tell you exactly why Praxeus and myself have basically dropped off the scene. It’s because no matter how well we present our arguments on the drawing board, it isn’t going to change anyone’s minds, especially here at Infidels. There will always be a counter to whatever is presented, even if it means going to desperate (yet futile) lengths by stating that the pillars found on the coasts at Aqaba are “natural rock formations�.

<edit>No one in their right mind would even dare associate the pillars found by Ron Wyatt (primarily, the visible one on Nuwieba Beach) as a natural formation. Not a SINGLE link you provided even REMOTELY resembled the pillars found by Ron on either side of the Gulf of Aqaba. There is no basis to your arguments Sauron. Period. Zilch.

We are talking about a column that was found lying on the shore, with the waves lapping up against the beach and eroding away the edge of the pillar---the pillar whom the Egyptian government set up in a base (platform) that is disconnected from the ground setting on the sand (obviously, if there was of no archaeological importance, it would have been disregarded), where a near-perfectly round pillar extends straight into the sky, with a clearly decorated lip decoration encircling the top of the formation. These characteristics are almost 100% identical to the pillars found in Ashkelon, on the Mediterranean coast. Dr. Moller has CLEAR, UNMISTAKEABLE images of these pillars. Sometimes I have to look at the images twice, just to make sure I’m not looking at the pillar Ron found. You can believe all the lies you want, but facts will remain. Simply said.

Would you like me to scan these images in for you? I guarantee you they don’t look anything like those silly natural formations you provided. In fact, I would give up your silly argument right now, as not only is it going to fly, you’re just going to continue to dig yourself deeper in a hole and come across like a real fool on this board.

The Saudi Government has a clear marker on the Saudi coast of this pillar. There is a round metal plate, and a metal flag extending from it. I have CLEAR distinctive images of this marker. I am appalled that I’ll have to actually scan in any of these images in order for you to concede. This pillar that was removed was in much better condition than the one found on Nuweiba. It was still standing and had not lain in sea-water and eroded.

<edit>It doesn’t even take a rocket scientist to analyze Ron’s pillars and see that they are man-made objects. Take a close look at this, and then this. This isn’t the type of archaeology that one needs to take samples from the rock or date it in order to tell whether it was “man-made� or not. Those procedures are necessary to determine by “whom� or “how� they were erected, but not as to whether they were “man-made� or “natural�.<edit>

Your attacks on fundamentalism have no relevancy regarding facts. I believe fundamentalism has served as pillars in preventing the world from falling into utter mayhem and complete destruction—although fundamentalism in itself has done a great deal in contributing to the many evils that have spread worldwide. But true fundamentalism, though it is little, has helped to hold the four winds of strife back. If there were no fundamentalism, nor any belief in God, there would be murder, crime, brutality, and no mercy all about us—in every corner. Standards of morality would plunge to the ground, as billions would no longer feel the need of responsibility to maintain moral purity. Blood would be running down every street. But this I know you would not agree to. Hopefully one day you will see who the one who erred on this matter was.

So my suggestion to you for now is, stick to the facts and don’t waste your time taking it out on fundamentalism. That is your way of having to avoid facing the data I have presented head on.

Kosh

Dog and Cats, living together in sin!!!!!!

John A. Broussard

This is just too good to leave here in an obscure part of the forum. I'm making a copy for the humor section under "Fundies say the darndest things."

Thanks for the posting.