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.
He's a bottomless pit of useless & erroneous information guys!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
rifleman, GPS receivers have been around since the 1970s. So you would be incorrect on that. And I do not believe those who went to Ararat in 1989 needed a receiver with them anyway. The numbers that existed only needed to be transposed onto existing maps.
"Yet, beginning around the mid-1980s, a number of companies entered the market and started producing receivers for surveying, navigation, and time transfer." The Evolution of the GPS Receiver
Wrong. But again, why did he even provide GPS coordinates anyhow? Who cares? This is hardly a place lost in the deepest jungle after all: it's right there, where passing delusional and frantically wishful WW-II P-38 pilots can see it from 12,000 feet and make absurd conclusions!
In what way does that prove anytihng? There are, and were, perfectly good topo maps availabe of that mountain. That's like saying: "There is a White House in WA, D.C.! Here's the GPS coordinates to prove it!"
Oh how special. Anyhow, you didn't read my link, of course. You only provided yours. So, as a tangential argument/debate, I'll still challenge you on the widespread commercial/civilian use of handy GPS receivers. But then, why would you say: "He didn't need a receiver."? What? Did he use his tinfoil hat then?
1990's military (and restricted, BTW) GPS units:
Old school GPS on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/complexify/3526951218/ - broken link)
Why, even if he could have snatched one of the cumbersome units away from a super-secret military unit, did he need to? Do you know what GPS is used for? What good is it if you don't have a receiver? Geeez; you are one confused and conflicted boy, Tom... Get out of the basement much?
Anyhow, since you didn't read my link, here's one of the crucial parts, just soz you're not completely up to your neck with your head in the sand. Remember, only the military had pre-1990 GPs, and they weren't portable in any way (as someone noted above).
(From the earler link I thoughtfully provided you to read
TIME AND LOCATION, PRECISELY
"GPS makes it possible to answer the simple question "Where am I?" almost instantaneously and with breathtaking precision. The new technology utilizes atomic clocks that keep time to within a billionth of a second. They were created by scientists who had no idea that the clocks would someday contribute to a global system of navigation.
The system made its public debut to rave reviews in the 1991 Gulf War. U.S. troops used it for navigation on land, sea, and in the air, for targeting of bombs, and for on-board missile guidance. GPS allowed U.S. ground troops to move swiftly and accurately through the vast, featureless desert of the Arabian Peninsula.
It wasn't until 1995, when President Clinton allowed for fully accurate transmissions to be sent, that it gained any real value in accurate personal navigation. This was coupled with the arrival on the market of the small handheld field units now so commonly seen."
Remember now, your hero died in 1990. How long before that was it he was up on this apparently secret and invisible mountain, where he needed to provide GPS numbers in case others suddenly lost their way (sigh...)???
Now once again, aside from showing you what's up in modern Satanic Science, what the heck do GPS coordinates have to do with a proof of the Ark, aside from confirming that this was exactly where the other link I provided did a thorough X-Ray Fluorescence remote sensing analysis and then concluded, quite absolutely, that there was nothing there but a basalt-limestone outcrop.
But then, you wouldn't have read that part either, would you? Of course not.
You DO, consistently, ignore all the other facts that completely disprove your beloved Ark. We keep at it because nothing so massively catastrophic could have possibly happened on this earth, including burying everything under unavailable volumes of water (they are not now, nor ever were, hiding just under the earths' surface, lest they all boil away, Tom...), and yet left no conclusive or even vague evidence.
Plus all the other impossibilities attached to a soggy, pitch-patched gopherwood Ark, casting about on stormy seas, all on board barfing over the rails. Oh yeah, I forgot: they wouldn't have been barfing, because they hadn't eaten anything for months.
And of course you won't tell me the Noah's Number, 'cause you've done that calculation and you now realize that it's staggering. As would the tippy Ark be if we tried to get 600M animals all nicely on board.
So stop showing us touched up kindergarten photos, and impossible GPS dates, and nonsense about water's salinity not being effected at all by a massive fresh-water-fed global flood.
It makes you look real silly, Tom, and I'm concerned for yah man!
Wrong. But again, why did he even provide GPS coordinates anyhow? Who cares? This is hardly a place lost in the deepest jungle after all: it's right there, where passing delusional and frantically wishful WW-II P-38 pilots can see it from 12,000 feet and make absurd conclusions!
In what way does that prove anytihng? There are, and were, perfectly good topo maps availabe of that mountain. That's like saying: "There is a White House in WA, D.C.! Here's the GPS coordinates to prove it!"
Oh how special. Anyhow, you didn't read my link, of course. You only provided yours. So, as a tangential argument/debate, I'll still challenge you on the widespread commercial/civilian use of handy GPS receivers. But then, why would you say: "He didn't need a receiver."? What? Did he use his tinfoil hat then?
1990's military (and restricted, BTW) GPS units:
Old school GPS on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/complexify/3526951218/ - broken link)
Why, even if he could have snatched one of the cumbersome units away from a super-secret military unit, did he need to? Do you know what GPS is used for? What good is it if you don't have a receiver? Geeez; you are one confused and conflicted boy, Tom... Get out of the basement much?
Anyhow, since you didn't read my link, here's one of the crucial parts, just soz you're not completely up to your neck with your head in the sand. Remember, only the military had pre-1990 GPs, and they weren't portable in any way (as someone noted above).
(From the earler link I thoughtfully provided you to read
TIME AND LOCATION, PRECISELY
"GPS makes it possible to answer the simple question "Where am I?" almost instantaneously and with breathtaking precision. The new technology utilizes atomic clocks that keep time to within a billionth of a second. They were created by scientists who had no idea that the clocks would someday contribute to a global system of navigation.
The system made its public debut to rave reviews in the 1991 Gulf War. U.S. troops used it for navigation on land, sea, and in the air, for targeting of bombs, and for on-board missile guidance. GPS allowed U.S. ground troops to move swiftly and accurately through the vast, featureless desert of the Arabian Peninsula.
It wasn't until 1995, when President Clinton allowed for fully accurate transmissions to be sent, that it gained any real value in accurate personal navigation. This was coupled with the arrival on the market of the small handheld field units now so commonly seen."
Remember now, your hero died in 1990. How long before that was it he was up on this apparently secret and invisible mountain, where he needed to provide GPS numbers in case others suddenly lost their way (sigh...)???
Now once again, aside from showing you what's up in modern Satanic Science, what the heck do GPS coordinates have to do with a proof of the Ark, aside from confirming that this was exactly where the other link I provided did a thorough X-Ray Fluorescence remote sensing analysis and then concluded, quite absolutely, that there was nothing there but a basalt-limestone outcrop.
But then, you wouldn't have read that part either, would you? Of course not.
You DO, consistently, ignore all the other facts that completely disprove your beloved Ark. We keep at it because nothing so massively catastrophic could have possibly happened on this earth, including burying everything under unavailable volumes of water (they are not now, nor ever were, hiding just under the earths' surface, lest they all boil away, Tom...), and yet left no conclusive or even vague evidence.
Plus all the other impossibilities attached to a soggy, pitch-patched gopherwood Ark, casting about on stormy seas, all on board barfing over the rails. Oh yeah, I forgot: they wouldn't have been barfing, because they hadn't eaten anything for months.
And of course you won't tell me the Noah's Number, 'cause you've done that calculation and you now realize that it's staggering. As would the tippy Ark be if we tried to get 600M animals all nicely on board.
So stop showing us touched up kindergarten photos, and impossible GPS dates, and nonsense about water's salinity not being effected at all by a massive fresh-water-fed global flood.
It makes you look real silly, Tom, and I'm concerned for yah man!
Only the military had 1990 pre GPS? What absolute nonsense.
Do you even know what restricted means? When speaking of GPS receivers, it does not mean that the general public was not allowed to own one. It does mean those on the market, were not able to use the full signal that was available to the military. And as a result, the market GPS receiver was accurate only to about 300 feet of the given cordinance. In the year 2000, President Clinton allowed the full siginal strength to be used by the general population. Yet a number of years before the year 2000, GPS receivers were widely being used by the American public..
Magellan introduced the first marine receiver, and the first integrated differential receiver in the mid 1980s. link below. Magellan Professional GPS
I am not giving impossible GPS dates. I believe you clearly do not have your facts right. And the link above will point this out to you.
And the basalt limestone outcrop again is not the object I am speaking about. Did your basalt limestone outcrop appear broken in two? Was there two sections of it pictured? The photos from space show my objects color as not representing stone, or steel. So both human accounts, and photos from space, do not adress your outcrop. It appears, you are ignoring the object I have been pointing to.
A topo map was all they needed, yet that map would be of little use, unless they had an accurate point of reference on the map revealing the Arks location. And that was only accomplished by GPS numbers. Such numbers could reveal the distances from existing rock formations to the Ark.
Oh please, the airplane removed from the depth of 268 feet of ice had numerous layers of defined ice over it. Just like your ice cores. And if it were not for those planes being there. Science would be telling us the ice was thousands of years old. Bob Cardin, who was involoved in the planes removal, was asked how many layers of ice was over the plane. Bob stated, there were (MANY HUNDREDS OF LAYERS OF ICE).
Many hundreds of layers of ice, yet the plane was only under the ice for 46 years. Your belief that each layer of ice equals one annual year, does not square with the facts.
Comparing Greenland weather conditions and effects to Antarctic ones is just one more screamingly idiotic assumption that you vomit up on a continual basis.
Your belief that many layers of ice show us yearly accumulation, is also false. The plane recovered from the 268 feet of ice had many hundreds of well defined layers of ice over it.
Nope it had had much snow over it. Did your ever do the penny experiment I asked you to do? Place a penny on an ice cube and see what happens after a year
Quote:
Yet the plane was only under the ice for 46 years. Clearly, layers of ice occur, and do not represent only yearly accumulations.
Yes they do represent yearly accumulations,. Layers on a Gereenland glacier <> ice cores in the antarctic. Only if plane had landed there, you might have a case.
Quote:
Here again, such a belief is based on unfound assumptions.
Your belief that yearly layers of ice can be identified, would require us to believe the plane recovered, was really many hundreds of years old. And based on the accounts of that recovered airplane, the only thing you have put in my face, is nonsense.
Nope. Layers in greenland are obviously thicker than those in teh antarctic where precipitation is ± 2 inches per year.
Nice try but AiG does not have a verifiable claim - your aeryplanes just don't cut it.
Again, Tom, the major point I make still remains: just explain why he provided GPS coordinates with the massive early-model packpack unit he lugged up there. We all saw them back then; roadside surveyers did, yes, use those massive old tripod units back then. But: For what again? He knew where he was going, everyone does; its obviously a "boat" to all of them, so why again? You evade, m'boy...
Fact is, you're just trying, as usual, to lend some sort of scientific credibility to this "find" by saying "We even have GPS coordinates! That PROVES it's the Ark!"
Ugada-boo-gah-dah!
Next: Kent Hovind is a moron. He conflates ice varve thickness near the surface with long-term rates of accumulation. Yes, there are intra-varve differences, visible and identifiable by an experienced (ahem...) varve analyist. But for example, pollen artifacts within the individual varve, identifiable under extreme microscopy and other means, clearly identify the annual nature of varves
As one would logically anticipate, as the layers are buried under subsequent layers, they are "squished" (I'm using non -technical terms soz you can understand it all easily...) into thinner and thinner layers. In the mud samples from Lake Baikal, where they have conclusively and conservatively measured uncontestable annual depositions down to millions of years, they can still ID individual spore particles despite varve thicknesses of a few ten-thoudsandths of a millimeter. Varves so very old that they contain pollen types have even gone extinct!
If Kent Hovind, The Great Truth Manipulator (huzzah, huzzah, bow down and send money, quickly!) had anywhere near this level of actual expertise and knowledge:
1) He'd hide it under his mattress soz no-on could see it, 'cause then he'd be out of a lucrative job, and/or..
2) If he were intellectually honest (which he ain't) he'd fess up that varve analysis, all on it's own, completely cleans the clock on a YEC timeline.
BTW, Montana Guy's simple little experiment about laying a heat-absorbing penny on the ice will quick-like, prove another bit of fact for you. Hot objects migrate down into the ice!
Wow!
But I do understand your desperate need, Tom... you constantly search for unusual situations and try, desperately, to apply them to the overall general case. All neatly provided by Kent or AiG or other scientifically incompetent sites.
Just like YSM's dreadfully inappropriate "examples" of someone petrifying wood in their lab, under ideal situations, in just a week or so, thus "proving" that complete Ark petrification musthave happened in only the last 2000 or so years. (Of course, I looked it all up, and this guy had mineralization occur to depths of less than 0.01mm, but who's going into the details. They'd only confuse the issue of mis-informing folks on purpose...)
You didn't read those proceedings of the 6th Intl. Conf on the Ark, now did you, Tom? Where the conservative and honest Christians correctly concluded, in 2008, that they will likely NEVER find some intact Ark, esp. at the 13,000 ft level on Ararat.
Right on, bruddah! Right on!
(Rifleman's Rule of Denialism: [RRD]: "As soon as any potent new investigative technology emerges, or an older one is improved or is applied to the point of conclusively finding some Christian "evidence" to be faked or impossible, it will automatically be reviewed, attacked, and mis-quoted by the acolyte websites for the general consumption of the non-critically thinking but endlessly braying sheeple-masses of IDTrs.)
Translation: New, good information MUST BE denied, actively. Lying for Jesus is OK.
Intransigent... (unwilling to learn anything new, ever, except rote memorization of mis-represented information), Dogmo-Theists (dogmatically and literally dedicated to their god myths, no matter what).
There's simply no idea in modern science that's too well supported to be mindlessly mis-interpreted, or denied or modified or, simply, lied about.
Now THAT'S a perspective worth "repping", huh?
Say... I'm even going to rep Tom [C34] soz he'll know that at least one of his rep points is a ringer, a dud, a contaminant mixed in with the others to get the word out! How's about it, guys! Let's all rep him one to, you know, show him how a little bit of nonsense statistical info can modify the validity of his "number"?
Yeah!
Last edited by rifleman; 10-13-2009 at 12:14 PM..
Reason: de-obfuscation
numbers, and Ronald Reagan's intentions, do not lie. Even for Jesus.
From your link, which I read:
"Since it became fully operational on April 27, 1995, GPS has become a widely used aid to navigation worldwide,"
As noted by all other links, including the one I provided you and you didn't likely read at all:
It was in 1996 (not, as you incorrectly noted, 2000) when Clinton allowed the accurization of signals, since it was then that the transportable units were made readily available to the non-military general public. The surveyor's field tripod units, (Block Two technology) plus the militaty units such as I provided pictures of, were simply NOT available not in general expedition use in the mid-'80s. The costs were prohibitive.
for commercial use, and I quote:
"After Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was shot down in 1983 after straying into the USSR's prohibited airspace,[2] President Ronald Reagan issued a directive making GPS freely available for civilian use, once it was sufficiently developed, as a common good.[3] The first satellite was launched in 1989 and the 24th and last satellite was launched in 1994."
Read it again, Tom: the first satellite for the commercially available signals approved by Ron Reagan was not even launched until 1989, "once it was sufficiently developed", but when your hero was, no doubt, no longer feeling quite up to an Ararat trek, he having died the next year. And only one satellite was not enough. It takes at least three or five to do the job; no accomplished until about 1995 The pre-1995 system used older satellites than do the new system's units. Sorry to be so detail-oriented: the truth's a bee-atch, huh?
The outcropping you so ardently refer to was exactly the focus of one of the paragraphs in the link I provided. You REALLY ought to go read it, Tom, though it will upset you I understand....
The entire exposed outcrops do NOT fluoresce back mineralized, and definitely NOT organicmaterials (as in "gopherwood"... Hmmm... maybe god was actually saying "You'll have to go-fur-wood on this one, Noah; nothing useful around here to build a rugged Ark big enough to hold 600M animals!").
Had there been some abnormality, some out-of-place artifact, then the analysists would have duly noted it, and realistic and unbiased expeditions would have followed. But there's no need to waste millions of $$$ on a pointless pursuit. They did not, on all of Ararat or surrounds, find "Arky" artifacts.
Sorry. You're the one who brought up remote sensing, and I looked into it, thoroughly. As per Rifleman's Rule of Denialism[RRD], it's been dutifully mis-quoted or mis-represented ever since, but the ignorance and lying's been caught too many times!
But please... make my point for me: say it all again, and again, and again, and again, and again.... thus proving RRD.
(PS: Still waiting for the Noah's Number calc. Any time soon?)
Last edited by rifleman; 10-13-2009 at 12:17 PM..
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.
He's a bottomless pit of useless & erroneous information guys!
numbers, and Ronald Reagan's intentions, do not lie. Even for Jesus.
The pre-1995 system used older satellites than do the new system's units. Sorry to be so detail-oriented: the truth's a bee-atch, huh?
