Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Godless Dave · 05-11-2006, 08:18 PM

Some of the blame here belongs on how science is popularized and reported on. National Geographic will print a few pictures and a short article about an archeological find and not go into detail about how much work, testing, and critical peer review went into the conclusions that were drawn. The general public only sees a few photos and the conclusions and thinks that's all there is to science. Fraudsters like Wyatt can come along and show a few pictures and explain their conclusions and it looks just like what people think science is.

Kosh · 05-11-2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

However, as luck would have it there is a perfect sand bar that is easily passable which stretches between both sides of the Gulf of Aqaba, the only kind in the region. Then, the sand bar is completely free from coral which would also make travel difficult if not impossible for the numbers of people that Exodus describes.

OH, I see...

Quote:

Then come the chariot wheels. The wheels are just the icing on the cake for me.

... so these coral encrusted wheels, were they found on the coral free sandbar? Or were they from off-road chariots? :bulb:

FatherMithras · 05-11-2006, 09:24 PM

I don't mean to be offensive Nuwanda, as you're a pretty laid back creationist, but the amount of ignorance you display here is honestly staggering.

For one, you claim the complexity of life and the universe attest to a design. According to what? The fact that it's "hard" for you to believe it? We've shown that the evolutionary method more than accounts for the life on earth and that ideas about "complexity" are of absolutely no value in determining a designer. They in fact fit the evidence for evolution perfectly.

Another bizarre claim about speciation is kind of ...odd. how would we obeserve million year changes in a lab? It can't be done. In fact, if what we say about evolution is true, we should never be able to do that. HOWEVER, if it's true, we should see long, gradual changes between species. We do. We should also see "half bird half reptiles" and "half fish half tetrapods". WE DO. Tiktaalik and Archaeopetryx ring a bell? So far, we have tons of missing links and transitional fossils. In fact, ALL the fossils fit perfectly in the evolutionary framework, exactly as predicted.

aupmanyav · 05-11-2006, 09:38 PM

Do the people get paid to make such claims on the internet?

MrWhy · 05-11-2006, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

If secular atheists claim to be moved by the lack of evidence for Biblical claims, then what do they do with this discovery? If there could be evidence of the Red Sea crossing, what would be acceptable evidence if this is not?

Two or more of the the following would be acceptable evidence that a god exists. These would be supernatural events like: Multiple acts, appearances, or events that are clearly beyond human ability, natural forces, or coincidence. They would have to be current events witnessed by a large number of credible witnesses, and well documented by objective witnesses. Some investigators would insist that a miracle be repeated under controlled or measurable conditions.

Examples of supernatural events:
1. A presentation of detail physics that would complete our understanding of universe creation.
2. Interrupting a large natural disaster in mid event.
3. Resurrection of a cadaver that had been declared and observed as dead for three days. Perform the resurrection while the cadaver was under continous observation by medical doctors.
4. A demonstration of heaven.
5. A medical miracle where a missing arm or leg was restored.

Nothing reported in text old as the Bible is credible evidence of a miracle. Too many authors, translations, years, etc.

Wads4 · 05-12-2006, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

It's easier than that. You'll notice that the "chariot" wheel in the photo is made of cast metal. You can see the fillets where the spokes meet the rim and the hub that ease mould removal. Also notice that the axel hole and the rim have been machined. This means that the easiest and most accurate way to date this wheel is to flip it over. The manufacture’s specs will be embossed on one of the spokes.

Splendid-I had not seen it that close.

Wads4 · 05-12-2006, 12:18 AM

"Originally Posted by Nuwanda
One of my good friends is a geologist by trade and has been for over 30 years. He, and many like him, believe that the sedimentary layers in the earth were not the result of millions of years of layering, but layering that happened in a very quick time frame. Similar to the results you find when rounding up various kinds of dirt in a jar, mixing it with water, then stirring it up. In a few hours and/or days you have layers of the different dirt, not mixed up dirt. "

I only have a smattering of geological knowledge, but it seems to me that even if dozens, scores, or hundreds of fresh, soft different sediments were deposited rapidly in a neat fasion,-which in itself is highly improbable, would they not be vulnerable to the tubulence in the on-going moving flood-waters, as well as gale and storm provoked movements of the waters,--and would therefore be immediately re-mixed into an unidentifiable soup of muds and shales? The only way in which the sediments could be stabilised was if they had had many years or more in which to harden and compact into sedimentary rocky layers instead of just soft, loose temporary deposits. Think about it. Even better, try pouring some thin layers of different coloured talcum powders into a glass then give it a good shake, or blow onto it, --and see what happens,--they will all be mixed up won't they? Whereas, if you leave them for a 1000 years they might harden into separate coloured plates of compacted powder. There is no substitute for empirical science.
What sort of a geologist is your friend?

05-12-2006, 12:18 AM	#127
Wads4 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Jersey, U.K. Posts: 2,864	Nuwanda "Originally Posted by Nuwanda One of my good friends is a geologist by trade and has been for over 30 years. He, and many like him, believe that the sedimentary layers in the earth were not the result of millions of years of layering, but layering that happened in a very quick time frame. Similar to the results you find when rounding up various kinds of dirt in a jar, mixing it with water, then stirring it up. In a few hours and/or days you have layers of the different dirt, not mixed up dirt. " I only have a smattering of geological knowledge, but it seems to me that even if dozens, scores, or hundreds of fresh, soft different sediments were deposited rapidly in a neat fasion,-which in itself is highly improbable, would they not be vulnerable to the tubulence in the on-going moving flood-waters, as well as gale and storm provoked movements of the waters,--and would therefore be immediately re-mixed into an unidentifiable soup of muds and shales? The only way in which the sediments could be stabilised was if they had had many years or more in which to harden and compact into sedimentary rocky layers instead of just soft, loose temporary deposits. Think about it. Even better, try pouring some thin layers of different coloured talcum powders into a glass then give it a good shake, or blow onto it, --and see what happens,--they will all be mixed up won't they? Whereas, if you leave them for a 1000 years they might harden into separate coloured plates of compacted powder. There is no substitute for empirical science. What sort of a geologist is your friend?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-11-2006, 08:18 PM	#121
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	Some of the blame here belongs on how science is popularized and reported on. National Geographic will print a few pictures and a short article about an archeological find and not go into detail about how much work, testing, and critical peer review went into the conclusions that were drawn. The general public only sees a few photos and the conclusions and thinks that's all there is to science. Fraudsters like Wyatt can come along and show a few pictures and explain their conclusions and it looks just like what people think science is.

05-11-2006, 09:24 PM	#123
FatherMithras Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 3,890	I don't mean to be offensive Nuwanda, as you're a pretty laid back creationist, but the amount of ignorance you display here is honestly staggering. For one, you claim the complexity of life and the universe attest to a design. According to what? The fact that it's "hard" for you to believe it? We've shown that the evolutionary method more than accounts for the life on earth and that ideas about "complexity" are of absolutely no value in determining a designer. They in fact fit the evidence for evolution perfectly. Another bizarre claim about speciation is kind of ...odd. how would we obeserve million year changes in a lab? It can't be done. In fact, if what we say about evolution is true, we should never be able to do that. HOWEVER, if it's true, we should see long, gradual changes between species. We do. We should also see "half bird half reptiles" and "half fish half tetrapods". WE DO. Tiktaalik and Archaeopetryx ring a bell? So far, we have tons of missing links and transitional fossils. In fact, ALL the fossils fit perfectly in the evolutionary framework, exactly as predicted.

05-11-2006, 09:38 PM	#124
aupmanyav Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New Delhi, India Posts: 18,926	Do the people get paid to make such claims on the internet?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.