FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-18-2002, 03:21 PM   #181
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the 10th planet
Posts: 5,065
Post

"I am having difficulty because it is not coexisting with archaeology as we know it"


That's for sure!!
King Zoesser and Imhotep would have had a rough time building his step Pyramid in all that icky flood debris 4800 years ago. Not to mention the Sumerians building their city states and inventing agriculture and beer making and the people in Anatolia and China etc.
BTW the Egyptians have no Noah type Flood myth, I guess they wern't home at the time. Probably summered on Mars.
Marduk is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 03:34 PM   #182
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 1,840
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by marduck:
<strong>
King Zoesser and Imhotep would have had a rough time building his step Pyramid in all that icky flood debris 4800 years ago. </strong>
Its worse than that! The great pyramids at Giza are constructed from quarried blocks of Eocene limestones rich in the large foraminifer Nummulites.

But then, building a giant pyramid out of soupy, freshly-deposited calcerous flood sediment is hardly a problem when one has access to an unlimited number of completely ad hoc explanatory miracles , which is the duct tape holding together flood geology.
ps418 is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 03:36 PM   #183
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by marduck:
<strong>King Zoesser and Imhotep would have had a rough time building his step Pyramid in all that icky flood debris 4800 years ago. Not to mention the Sumerians building their city states and inventing agriculture and beer making and the people in Anatolia and China etc.</strong>
It also suggests a fairly significant oversight in Mazar's authoritative <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385425902/qid=1032392015/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-7447004-7053724?v=glance&s=books" target="_blank">Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000-586 B.C.E.</a>.
Jayhawker Soule is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 04:18 PM   #184
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orions Belt
Posts: 3,911
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ps418:
<strong>

Its worse than that! The great pyramids at Giza are constructed from quarried blocks of Eocene limestones rich in the large foraminifer Nummulites.

But then, building a giant pyramid out of soupy, freshly-deposited calcerous flood sediment is hardly a problem when one has access to an unlimited number of completely ad hoc explanatory miracles , which is the duct tape holding together flood geology.</strong>

How Wuuuuuuude!
Kosh is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 06:28 PM   #185
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Post

Quote:
This also has a nice picture pointing out that the sea was not calm, rendering pointless disussion on whether a wooden boat will break apart in a calm sea.
Sorry Steve, the skeptic's link provided says they don't break apart because of heavy seas either. That IS NOT THE PROBLEM with wood ships. You would know that if you had read either the link OR my post. Apparently you can't be bothered to read peoples posts before responding.

Radorth
Radorth is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 06:29 PM   #186
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Fargo, ND, USA
Posts: 1,849
Post

Amie,

Quote:

Goliath do you actually have a question? or are you quite comfortable just complaining?
You must not have looked over my post in this thread very carefully, or otherwise you would've surely noticed that I asked the question "What is being debated in this thread?"

Here's another question: Are you going to actually prove that a worldwide flood occurred, as described in the bible, or are you going to continue with your non-arguments that are logically equivalent to "I believe it! So there! Nah-nah-nah-nah-boo-boo!"

Sincerely,

Goliath
Goliath is offline  
Old 09-18-2002, 08:17 PM   #187
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 590
Post

Amie:"My brain is taking in all of the information and telling me one thing and somehow my beliefs are telling me quite another."
I think that logic and reason may yet prevail in this contest between myth and reality.
Three cheers for Amie's brain! Yea Brain! Yea Brain! Yea Brain!
Baidarka is offline  
Old 09-19-2002, 03:43 AM   #188
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Post

I had written 'This also has a nice picture pointing out that the sea was not calm, rendering pointless disussion on whether a wooden boat will break apart in a calm sea.'

And Radorth responded as follows :-

Quote:
Originally posted by Radorth:
<strong>

Sorry Steve, the skeptic's link provided says they don't break apart because of heavy seas either. That IS NOT THE PROBLEM with wood ships. You would know that if you had read either the link OR my post. Apparently you can't be bothered to read peoples posts before responding.

Radorth</strong>
I do have trouble with comprehension.

What do you mean by saying that wooden ships don't break apart in heavy seas and that that is not the problem with wood ships?

However, I will repeat part of your post, and you can explain why there was no discussion of what happens to wooden ships in calm seas.

You were replying to :-
'A wooden vessel this size is exceedingly unseaworthy, and quickly breaks up or capsizes in even the calmest of seas.'

And you wrote 'Ah, no. In calm seas there are no bending loads. Ships are stressed to take the bending load when supported on each end. So at least the "...even in the calmest seas" part is a pagan myth. You guys shouldn't believe everything you read on those skeptics websites.'

I really did think that when you wrote about wooden ships, calm seas etc, in response to something that says wooden ships break up in calm seas, that there was a discussion going on about what happens to wooden ships in calm seas. Sheer stupidity on my part, but there you go.

But as you point out, I must learn to bother to read your posts before responding. Sorry.
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 09-19-2002, 04:11 AM   #189
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edinburgh. Scotland
Posts: 2,532
Post

I would of thought it obvious that heavy seas present a problem to all ships. Steel, timber concrete or whatever. Even in absolutely calm water you're going to have practical limitations on the size. Introduce waves and you've got even more problems.

And in a global flood you have an unlimited fetch.

A huge wooden rectangular boat in those conditions doesn't sound like a good idea.
seanie is offline  
Old 09-19-2002, 03:53 PM   #190
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,872
Post

SC: Read my later post and the link provided by a SKEPTIC, both of which which explain why wood ships fail. Even I was surprised to learn wood ships do not break from moderate seas. A bigger problem is sitting for long periods IN PORT, called "hogging."

Amie has her long boat. The rest of the story is indefensible by science, and there are no eyewitness or even second hand accounts to go by.

Radorth
Radorth is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:53 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.