Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just want to say thanks for all the useful posts, including Campbell who has updated us on the current mars -face.
Rifelman, I note that you hinted that the various bits of evidence that Campbell put forward don't fit together. I wondered about that. It would be a remarkable coincidence if all these stories identified the same place (unless there really was something up there, of course ) and I have to say that I feel my heart sink at the thought of trying to wrestle comparitive locations out of various Arkyological sites related to Campbell's preferred candidate for Arkonship.
I suppose you wouldn't care to sum up whether the locations coincide or not?
Just want to say thanks for all the useful posts, including Campbell who has updated us on the current mars -face.
Rifelman, I note that you hinted that the various bits of evidence that Campbell put forward don't fit together. I wondered about that. It would be a remarkable coincidence if all these stories identified the same place (unless there really was something up there, of course ) and I have to say that I feel my heart sink at the thought of trying to wrestle comparitive locations out of various Arkyological sites related to Campbell's preferred candidate for Arkonship.
I suppose you wouldn't care to sum up whether the locations coincide or not?
They don't, and I will happily summarize later, but it is 3:16 am (!!!) here in the Western US of A right now, and I just finished pelting C34 over on the Shroud thread. I'm tired but never defeated. There's always more thruthing to do here, huh?
So I think I'll call it a day, or night, whichever comes first.
Say hello to my ancestors in Kent, would yah? Thx!
They don't, and I will happily summarize later, but it is 3:16 am (!!!) here in the Western US of A right now, and I just finished pelting C34 over on the Shroud thread. I'm tired but never defeated. There's always more thruthing to do here, huh?
Yes. Which is the short answer to the regular complaints of "Why are you atheists trying to destroy people's faith? What harm does it do if they believe a myth? Why should you worry if groups of those myth believers become rich, powerful and influential and interfere with sport, entertainment, health, business, politics, education, law and every aspect of society? Why can't you atheists just keep your opinions to yourselves?"
"So I think I'll call it a day, or night, whichever comes first."
Ok. Btw. I liked your post to Campbell, but I had to put in a word for him.
Quote:
Say hello to my ancestors in Kent, would yah? Thx!
Would those be the Gillingham Riflemens or the Tunbridge Wells Riflemens?
And yet your entire argument is discredited by many others using the same, or better, evidence. You of course will continue to stick your head in the biblical sand, refusing to admit any contrary thought to enter your thoughts.
Once again, pitiful.
Well that is a very nice bland and general statement that has no details to confirm your belief. I have given you proofs that are outside of the Bible, so I am not sticking my head in Biblical sand here. I would suggest you present a detailed contary thought that would refute those proofs.
Well that's probably because it is the original story and it isn't the ark of Noah, but the ark of Upnatishtim. Noah was the character the authors of The Bible wrote into their (much later) version of the myth. Just like they did with all the other myths they plagiarized.
Since there are no legitimate eyewitness accounts of any ark (namely because no such ark ever really existed), your statement is moot and pretty ridiculous.
FYI - there is nothing accurate or original in The Bible - it is all ripped off from earlier works.
Well, there are many eyewitness accounts of the Ark of Noah, and we even have satellite photos of a large man-made object in the same spot where the Bible tells us the Ark of Noah landed. Your denial of those facts, only makes me believe you are led by your personal beliefs, and not by the facts on the ground. And the reason we have such satellite photos and human accounts, is because the Bible is true. You must know about the story written about a newly built 800 foot passenger ship that struck and iceberg and sank in the Atlantic. Of course, that was written 12 years before the Titanic hit an iceburg and sank in the Atlantic. Does that mean the story of the Titanic was really untrue, and plagiarized? LOL
What proofs? All I see is a bunch of testimony from people who's heads are buried to the same depth as yours in biblical nonsense...How about addressing my post #394, or any other post that shows the impossibility of the fairy tale you stubbornly cling to.
Well, there are many eyewitness accounts of the Ark of Noah,
You need to be struck with a clue bat, sharply and firmly about the head. 'Eyewitness' accounts are NOT PROOF. They are undocumented, unverified HEARSAY.
Quote:
and we even have satellite photos of a large man-made object in the same spot where the Bible tells us the Ark of Noah landed.
Gosh, there are photos of Bigfoot too.
Quote:
Your denial of those facts, only makes me believe you are led by your personal beliefs, and not by the facts on the ground.
You REALLY need to be looking into the mirror when you say that. You and YSM are frankly the two posters in the MOST DENIAL about the real world. Do you realize how much of a fool you're making of yourself?
Quote:
And the reason we have such satellite photos and human accounts, is because the Bible is true.
Stop riding the short bus.
Quote:
You must know about the story written about a newly built 800 foot passenger ship that struck and iceberg and sank in the Atlantic. Of course, that was written 12 years before the Titanic hit an iceburg and sank in the Atlantic. Does that mean the story of the Titanic was really untrue, and plagiarized? LOL
If you can't see the difference between the two stories, then you really are mentally impaired.
Well, there are many eyewitness accounts of the Ark of Noah, and we even have satellite photos of a large man-made object in the same spot where the Bible tells us the Ark of Noah landed. Your denial of those facts, only makes me believe you are led by your personal beliefs, and not by the facts on the ground. And the reason we have such satellite photos and human accounts, is because the Bible is true. You must know about the story written about a newly built 800 foot passenger ship that struck and iceberg and sank in the Atlantic. Of course, that was written 12 years before the Titanic hit an iceburg and sank in the Atlantic. Does that mean the story of the Titanic was really untrue, and plagiarized? LOL
What on earth does the story of the Titan have to do with the ark?....How many fiction writers wrote about a journey to the moon long before it happened? What does it mean....Nothing.
Hmmm... no takers yet on this simple question. (I can calculate it up in about 4 minutes.). Well, maybe they're off getting batteries for their calculators.
Or consulting with their ministers/priests/fathers/pastors or AiG on just how to evade this simple, RELALY SIMPLE calculation.
Night all!
They are lost in their river, not sure of they are floating down the river of denial (no it's not a river in Egypt) or the river of ignorance, which has some very very deep and still waters, but they ain't got no paddle and their ark has some serious leaks
I also asked at one point how they managed to have a sun aboard a wooden boat for months and months, but not even a feeble attempt to explain that has been forthcoming.
Would those be the Gillingham Riflemens or the Tunbridge Wells Riflemens?
Hmm.. never been there. I suppose I should visit (my son got to England before I did, this last summer. And he's only 20. And it cost ME a lot of money! And my first car was a real Mini Cooper S, [which meant you had to work on it about every other weekend. Even with Janspeed upgrades...], and my brother & I owned a repair shop for British Sportscars, so I was predisposed to things Brit! Even my last name rings of England!
Some of my long-ago ancestors are the Duke & Duchess of Twyne. [They had some other nomenclature in Spain] Hmmm.. Descended from inbred Spanish royality. That would probably explain the genetic problems I have with arthritis, etc. You know; royal inbreeding, then they moved [fled?] to Britain and took up with some of the local pub girls who, apparently, never migrated more than a few villages away, and often [unknowingly] married their relatives.
Royal mentality, in-bred health. Loverly! But..... all descended directly from Noah's prolific children, by Gawd!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) and I have to say that I feel my heart sink at the thought of trying to wrestle comparitive locations out of various Arkyological sites related to Campbell's preferred candidate for Arkonship. 
