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.
I'm amazed that this thread is still alive...The flood myth has been disproven six ways from Sunday already, but I suppose the thread still has some entertainment value.
That Kool-Aid they chug is some might powerful stuff
I'm amazed that this thread is still alive...The flood myth has been disproven six ways from Sunday already, but I suppose the thread still has some entertainment value.
coupled with this evidence of purposeful lying and deception...
I found the Ark in the southwest part of the USA, when I picked up a piece of petrified wood. So the Ark DOES exist, and there must have been a world-wide cataclysm!
Well of course, the problem here is you have the wrong location. The Bible clearly tells us the Ark is very near the top of Mt. Ararat. And this is the same location that everyone for hundreds of years have reported most of the Ark encounters.
Last edited by Campbell34; 10-25-2009 at 10:55 AM..
Given that other nonsense but obligatory concept that the Earth's major continents all moved happily about, pre-flood, as if they were on big, well oiled ball bearings, and therefore allowed Noah to quickly and easily gather up incongruous creatures together one afternoon, who says the designated mountain hasn't now ended up back in Zion National Park in Utah?
One of those nice flat mesas out there? You know, when the continents immediately got with the program but then instantly cruised back to their current and s l o w l y moving tectonic movement rates?
HEY! Utah! Let's ask the Mormons what they think. Surely they've got some keen and nifty ideas of their own.
So, IMHO, Mercury Cougar's findings of petrified wood, plus what I have in my back yard (musta fallen off the Ark-barge as it cruised in for a Utah landing, when it grazed off Mt. Rainier's icy sides) are equally valid. The Ark was here! Long Live The Ark!
C'mon, Tom. The whole story keeps falling on it's face. Technically ecologically, engineering-wise, common-sense wise, historically, scientifically. You really should take pity on it and let it crawl off to die peacefully. Instead, you keep propping it up for one more go, like a fake WalMart Halloween scarecrow, and again, "thud", it falls on it's face.
Well of course, the problem here is you have the wrong location. The Bible clearly tells us the Ark is very near the top of Mt. Ararat. And this is the same location that everyone for hundreds of years (or at least since 1947..) have reported most of the Ark encounters.
Wrong ,and you know it. Ron Wyatt. The Turks's Theme Park site. Ertugrul's NEW tourist-destination cave site with wood litter in it. Your favorite on Ararat's Upper East side. There's even some talk about an Egyptian site, and one out near the Black Sea.
A lot of options, Tom. You've just picked and insisted on one (the limestone/basalt one), but then, recently, you shifted your own allegances to Ertugrul's tourista site, the latest in a long line of money-grubbing come-ons for thoughtless buffoons. Just because he planted some fake wood up there, and a University said "This is petrified wood".
Yep; that's THE Ark for sure....
BTW, "Ark encounters"?????? Huh? Close, and of The Third Kind?
ARE, this has been covered in an earlier discussion with YSM, who also contended that petrification can and does take place in very short periods of time. She cited telphone pole bases in the Canadian north, plus wood that had fallen into pools in Yellowstone. Yes: these results prove that wood placed in a quiescent and mineral-laden body of water can indeed be inundated with minerals (i.e.: petrified).
But as I've asked Tom (C34), where exactly did the heavily mineralized water come from up on Ararat? Where, as we all know, the water would come from melted ice, which is essentially precipitation in the form of snow or rain. That's about as pure as water can be, certainly not carrying ANY minerals. I posted two pics above, one of Yellowstone, and the other of a nice meltwater stream.
The answer is, quite obviously, that any wood up there would not have undergone any petrification. no matter how long it was up there. If Hong Kong got a petrified sample, Ertugrul planted it before his "expedition", not understanding the physics and chemistry of petrification before he planted it up there.
Tom's answer? 1) well, he didn't, and then 2) he just repeated, again and again, his 'statement" of assumptive "proof", that indeed the wood was petrified, and that it's ...
THEREFORE....
...from the Ark. Simple as that!
Petrified wood where none could have formed, plus GPs coordinates for some other site than this latest one, plus old photo interpretation of visible form, not composition, and very assumptive statements by an analyst, plus some sort of assumptive scientific credibility by using REALLY BIG SCIENCE WORDS (out of context of course) "proves", to Tom anyways, that this is The Ark.
Quite the leap of faith, wouldn't you say.
As I mentioned, we have all spent more than enough time rebutting each and every possibility and point made by Tom and any other dedicated fund Arkinst here.
________________________________________________
There simply is no convincing evidence, not even slightly suggestive at this point, of a 2500 year old biblical boat up there. Not to mention all the other requirements for a successful voyage and subsequent successful re-introduction of all the species we now know to inhabit this Earth.
________________________________________________
It's all just nonsense, and Tom knows it, so he just goes into rote-repeat mode.
Quite convincing, eh?
Mt. Ararat, is really a volcano, and would be an excellent location for wood to petrify. Especially based on the Russian report from 1914, that stated the Ark was half submerged in a lake on the mountain. I did not use assumption, when I reported the wood found was petrified. That statement came from Hong Kong university. Really rifleman, I must adress you on this. Would you please stop suggesting I am only assuming things. Especially, when I have given you the very name of the institution that did the testing.
If the wooden Ark of Noah is on Mt. Ararat, the mineral water easily could come from the existing ash sediments from the Volcano itself. And if the Ark was half submerged in the lake as reported by the Russian pilots from 1914. Then, this lake easily could be made up of highly enriched minerals, and would explain how the Ark today is petrified. Highly mineralized lakes can be found on or around volcanoes. Your belief that the Ark was in a location where no petrified wood could be found, does not agree with the facts, or with the stated results from Hong Kong University. And now for you to suggest it was Ertugral who played with the samples. Well, this is just so much more nonsense coming from you again. And did Ertugral also play with the samples submitted by the Turkish, and Japanese teams as well?
Last edited by Campbell34; 10-25-2009 at 01:21 PM..
Wrong ,and you know it. Ron Wyatt. The Turks's Theme Park site. Ertugrul's NEW tourist-destination cave site with wood litter in it. Your favorite on Ararat's Upper East side. There's even some talk about an Egyptian site, and one out near the Black Sea.
A lot of options, Tom. You've just picked and insisted on one (the limestone/basalt one), but then, recently, you shifted your own allegances to Ertugrul's tourista site, the latest in a long line of money-grubbing come-ons for thoughtless buffoons. Just because he planted some fake wood up there, and a University said "This is petrified wood".
Yep; that's THE Ark for sure....
BTW, "Ark encounters"?????? Huh? Close, and of The Third Kind?
Let me make this clear to you. At no time did I ever believe Ron Wyatts location for the Ark of Noah was valid. It is in the wrong place, and the wrong altitude. And has nothing to do with the Biblical location.
I believe the sample found in the cave by the Turkish authorities, and the Japanese team was about 37 feet long, and at least 8 feet wide, and petrified. Who could of planted a petrified section of wood deep in a cave three miles up on Ararat, and weighing no doubt thousands of pounds? Do you really think Ertugrul brought it there when no one was looking? LOL
Please get real.
The Ark is a scam? Which location are you talking about?
The entire fairy tale, the whole enchilada, the hook, line, sinker, pole, angler, and the boat.
Location? That my friend is solely in the mind of the delusional that see this fairy tale as anything different than a fairy tale. A bedtime fable about a gawd that kills 99.99999999% of all life on the planet because he is 'displeased'. Really dude how do you all rationalize that as the work of a loving and caring 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.
Prophesy
"There's One Born EVERY Minute!" P. T. Barnum.
for hundreds of years (or at least since 1947..
