Originally Posted by shirley knott

As others have pointed out Dave, you have never pointed to a single 2+ mile thick sediment layer in any geologic column anywhere.
Never,
Not once.
And so, those of us who are familiar with the geologic column call shenanigans on your claim.
It is your claim, you need to defend it or abandon it.
I assert that examination of the geologic column shows no single layer that meets the criteria of your rather silly notion that somehow a worldwide flood submerged the entire world, and, in your words, left a 2+ mile thick sediment layer everywhere.
You assert otherwise.
Show us.
Or abandon the claim, and the flood.

no hugs for thugs,
Shirley Knott

Originally Posted by afdave

Your real argument here is with Antonio Snider-Pellegrini, who was the originator of Plate Tectonics theory. He said that continent movement was catastrophic ... not slow.

Nature 227, 349 - 350 (25 July 1970); doi:10.1038/227349a0 Continental Drift before 1900 N. A. RUPKE Department of Geological and Geophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 The idea that Francis Bacon and other seventeenth and eighteenth century thinkers first conceived the notion of continental drift does not stand up to close scrutiny. The few authors who expressed the idea viewed the process as a catastrophic event.

Originally Posted by Mike PSS

Dave,
Is your willingness to actually respond to my explanation any more than your willingness to respond to the same explanation I posted at RD.net a month ago?

I think I'll just refer you back to my previous unanswered questions about the pi-issue at RD.net.

It's the same questions you evaded and ignored already.

So how about the accuracy of Smyth's measurements. Another poster a page back brought up the Wiki reference that showed a discrepency in measurement of the GP of 15mm or more. And you have me believe that Smyth can measure a Pyramid Inch to the fourth decimal precision.

Now THAT is a glaring inconsistency if I ever saw one.
Classical measurments: plus/minus 0.015m
Smyth measurements: plus/minus 0.00005m

Was Smyth using lasers?

Originally Posted by afdave

Your real argument here is with Antonio Snider-Pellegrini, who was the originator of Plate Tectonics theory. He said that continent movement was catastrophic ... not slow.

Originally Posted by RED DAVE

Let's continue with the basics.

From afdave:
I am unable to find, online, Rohl's dynastic sequences; however, it is my impression that it refers to later dynasties.

If you have this data, please share it, so we can see when in Egyptian history, according to Rohl's system, the flood occurred.

So far, according to your guesstimate and the standard chronology, it occurred during the Second Dynasty.

RED DAVE

Originally Posted by Pappy Jack

And do you, Dave, accept Rohl’s evidence and chronology uncritically? If yes, why? If not, what parts of it do you reject and why? Your claims are the extraordinary ones and despite what you might think, Rohl is not a ‘get out of jail free’ card for Smyth’s ideas about the Great Pyramid. Even the extreme revision of 350 years proposed by Rohl is not enough to rescue Smyth. Nor does Rohl offer any succour for YEC Biblical literalists, proffering no support that I can see for a <10,000 year-old Earth. Furthermore, Rohl’s conclusions are considered doubtful by several critics, for example Walter Mattfield here (links provided to other critics), and Dennis Forbes and, to a lesser extent, Aidan Dodson here (Dodson is mostly concerned with reviewing Peter James’ Centuries of Darkness, which also argues for a revision of the Dynastic Egyptian chronology). You might want to consider some of these before you hail Rohl’s work as conclusive.

As you are well aware, it was I who categorized Mike’s posts on pi and the GP as ‘overwhelmingly convincing.’ I would point out once again that your (and Smyth’s) argument is the extraordinary one and requires extraordinary evidence independent of the circular ones inherent in your postings about pi. Mike’s links lead you to reasoned explanations of how pi could be incorporated in the GP without resort to anachronistic invokings of ‘advanced scientific knowledge’. You need to explain how Smyth’s unsupported theory is more convincing than these considered arguments.

Finally, the idea I tried to explain to you about the implications of using cylindrical/circular measuring devices is another entirely rational explanation of how pi might appear ‘accidentally’ in the GP’s measurements. I still believe it is a valid idea, although after some further research I agreed with Mike that the evidence for its actual implementation is at the moment lacking.

Originally Posted by afdave

The point remains though. I don't know how anyone can see ~1 mile of sedimentary rock complete with fossils all over the earth and NOT think Global Flood. Beats me!