RE: More Questions for Christians
November 13, 2014 at 12:35 pm
(This post was last modified: November 13, 2014 at 12:38 pm by Drich.)
(November 13, 2014 at 11:35 am)Esquilax Wrote: Hey Drich? Whale bones don't float. They're heavy. These things weigh in tonnes, not pounds. You have no idea of the scale of what you're describing.http://www.sbnature.org/exhibitions/234.html
7700 lbs for a baleen whale sport. That the whole thing combined.. Granted there are peices and part that weigh hundreds of lbs, but there are also bits and peices that you could put in your pocket..
Again, if they were on the beach I have no doubt some of the larger portions would remain, but we are not talking about just the large bones. Whole Skeletons have been found this includes the small bits and peices.. Not to mention the thing you seem all to anxious to over look is the baleen whale is not the only marine mamal found. Much smaller animals (Sea sloth) was also found intact. So again no errosion from tidal forces are possiable, if these fossils are indeed intact..
Quote:But that's not the case. There are several dozen piles of fossilized bones that are completely undisturbed. Infact they are is such good order they can tell the whales decomposed upside down. This can only happen one way. That's if the area was completely covered in water, they bones sank to the bottom and were quickly covered in silt.
Quote:What is your education in paleontology, that you can say the only way it could happen is yours?You sound like a desperate Christian trying to hang on to what they believe in faith despite the facts..

Quote:The problem with that is, according to 'science' that region was out of the water before the triassic period, which means the animals found would not have been in thier 'evolved state' 300 million years ago.
Which leaves a great flood
Quote:Some of the area was out of the ocean. Do try to keep up.Yes the bit that is not covered in salt/mineral deposits. Which can be found several hundred miles inland. The portion we are discussing resides 1400 to 6000 ft above sea level. Which means the salt deposits can be traced back to when that region was underwater... Before the triassic period.![]()
Quote:Also? That's a false dichotomy. Perhaps a giant hurricane blew them all onto the shore.1400 to 6000 ft above sea level? 4 dozen different times over a '10,000 year' span??

Who says your not a man of GREAT Faith???
Quote:It's no more physically impossible than a worldwide flood.what makes a world wide flood impossiable?
Quote:Besides, we know a great flood never occurred because the geological column does not support the idea;That's not true at all. In the case of a world wide flood the evidence is here, we just don't want to acknoweledge it (Whales found on a desert mesa for instance)
Quote: evidently the whales got there some other way, but you're not going to be able to point to this single thing, even if we don't know exactly how they got there, and say therefore Noah's flood.One thing's for sure science has no answers for us if what we 'know' to be true is indeed true.
Quote: Far stronger evidence contradicts that claim, and no matter how strongly you appeal to ignorance, an unknown is not going to trump real, verifiable facts.

Your statement reeks of desperation in how youre down playing facts, Now I know how you guys 'feel' When you have some poor faith driven believer on his heels. The roles have reversed. I am the one speaking from fact and you and minnie are the one who are dealing in faith.
Quote:Why is it that you think an assertion from you, a man with no education in a relevant field, carries more weight than the evidence based reportage of the actual paleontologists who were there? Who are you to gainsay them?
Again Common sense sport. a Life time living near the beach has proven one thing. If multi ton boulders from a Jetty/Sea wall can be moved miles down a beach during a cat 1 hurricane with just a 10ft storm surge, bones weighing ounces or lbs or even hundreds of lbs don't stand a chance, even in the course of normal tidal flow.
Oh, and not to mention at the very least the area we are speaking about is at minimum 1/4 MILE ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE SEA!!!
Look up the term Mesa, in that defination it should say a mesa is larger than a butte but smaller than a plateau..
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&...9006,d.eXY
The Atacama Is a Desert Plateau
The coastal chain hovers around 5,000 feet (1,500 metres) or so in elevation with individual peaks reaching to 6,560 feet (2,000 metres). There is no coastal plain; through much of their extent the mountains terminate abruptly at the sea in cliffs, some of them higher than 1,600 feet (500 metres), making communication difficult between the coastal ports and the interior. In the interior a raised depression extends north and south and forms the high Tamarugal Plain at an elevation of more than 3,000 feet (900 metres). Farther to the east in the western outliers of the Andes, preceded by the Cordillera Domeyko, there are numerous volcanic cones, some exceeding 16,000 feet (4,900 metres) in elevation. Along Chile’s northeastern frontier with Argentina and Bolivia extends the Atacama Plateau, which reaches elevations of 13,000 feet (4,000 metres).
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topi...ama-Desert
Again the last time this region was at or below sea level was before the triassic period which means the animals found there could not have existed.
I know you are speaking from faith here but do try and open your mind to the facts one in a while.

(November 13, 2014 at 11:40 am)Piscinin Wrote:Quote:2. Do you believe jonah really was able to live in a fish and survive?yes
Ohhh ffs, because a fairytale book told you so?
Do you believe in the tooth fairy? If not, why not?
Since your new here i will give you a chance to back out. maybe look at the beating e-lax is taking trying to defend what he thought was a sure thing, and ask yourself are you really ready to do this? Can you really put up an arguement as well as he can?
If your starting with a taunt, then the answer your looking for is no.