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.
But in C34's case, he's "The only humanoid robot in the world that will not listen to reason and continues to blurt out nonsense even when corrected."
Obviously your software needs some improvement, huh? Science to the rescue, Tom! Don't worry!
riflemen, if you call shooting something down based (ONLY) on your own personal opinion. Then maybe you are correct. Yet I have shown you that petrified wood does not require millions of years to form. Spiders can be found above 4000 meters on Mt. Ararat, with webs included. And I have done this, based on evidence presented, and not my personal opinion only. Many of the links I have presented back up such claims, so why do you say I am repeating nonsense. It appears to me, you are ignoring all the information out there that supports the reality of the Ark of Noah. And now you seem to be trying to refute what is understood by many to be common knowledge. And I believe you do this, because you don't want to believe in the Ark of Noah. From petrified wood, to spiders found nesting above 4000 meters, none of this is an exaggeration. Why do you pretend it is?
Yet I have shown you that petrified wood does not require millions of years to form. Spiders can be found above 4000 meters on Mt. Ararat, with webs included. And I have done this, based on evidence presented, and not my personal opinion only.
Campbell, regarding wood petrification in a short period of time, the link you provided, was from a religious college, Regardless, it said that rapid petrification can be occur, even within 100 years, UNDER RARE CERTAIN CONDITIONS, and including certain minerals. Otherwise, it would take an enormously long period of time millions of years for petrification to take place. So you have to ask yourself the question: are such conditions and minerals present near the top of Ararat?
Secondly, you have NOT shown there are any spiders present at high altitudes on Mt. Ararat. What you showed regarding spiders are those that can survive at high elevations (above 4000 meters) in Nepal. And those spiders tend to be Jumping spiders, which are very small spiders. That's not to say small spiders can't survive on Ararat, it's just that you haven't provided any evidence to show there are any up there. So, yes indeed, it is just your personal opinion without anything to support it. Your only evidence is now based on NAMI's photo which is questionable, and NAMI's claims, which are also highly questionable. We've yet to hear anything new from NAMI who already cancelled a conference last month, and so far thius month, they've been so quiet you can hear crickets chirping. What's up with that?
Campbell, regarding wood petrification in a short period of time, the link you provided, was from a religious college, Regardless, it said that rapid petrification can be occur, even within 100 years, UNDER RARE CERTAIN CONDITIONS, and including certain minerals. Otherwise, it would take an enormously long period of time millions of years for petrification to take place. So you have to ask yourself the question: are such conditions and minerals present near the top of Ararat?
Secondly, you have NOT shown there are any spiders present at high altitudes on Mt. Ararat. What you showed regarding spiders are those that can survive at high elevations (above 4000 meters) in Nepal. And those spiders tend to be Jumping spiders, which are very small spiders. That's not to say small spiders can't survive on Ararat, it's just that you haven't provided any evidence to show there are any up there. So, yes indeed, it is just your personal opinion without anything to support it. Your only evidence is now based on NAMI's photo which is questionable, and NAMI's claims, which are also highly questionable. We've yet to hear anything new from NAMI who already cancelled a conference last month, and so far thius month, they've been so quiet you can hear crickets chirping. What's up with that?
The link I presented stated such rapid petrification occurs when samples are located close to a volcano. As it turns out, the Ark of Noah landed near the top of Mt. Ararat. Mt. Ararat, is a volcano. And yes, such conditions are present on Mt. Ararat.
Another link I presented speaking about spiders, state that they can exist above 4000 meters in the Caucasus mountain system, and can be found in ice caves. And that system is where we find Mt. Ararat. Consider the link below. And that same link tells us, that a number of undiscovered spider species would be expected in such remote habitats. (SO NO, IT IS NOT JUST BASED ON MY PERSONAL OPINION). The link clearly tells us that spider species can be found above 4000 meters, in ice caves, and in the Caucasian mountain system. And Mt. Ararat is part of that system.
The fact is, there are those who came here saying no spiders should be found on Mt. Ararat, or even at such an altitude of 13,000 feet. Yet the information presented, clearly shows them to be wrong. If such people are not interested in facts, then you can believe their nonsense.
Last edited by Campbell34; 07-13-2010 at 02:26 AM..
However, if I wrong, could you supply me with the link that would prove me wrong sanspeur? LOL
You are almost always wrong, but will never admit it
If your memory was intact you wouldn't need a link, now would you?...Just about every assertion you have made, and repeated ad infinitum has been refuted by myself or others, but you constantly forget, and bring up the same old garbage again.
I asked a couple of posts ago...Why is there not sedimentary layer on or near Ararat. I would think if there was a world wide flood there should be evidence consisting of a world wide sedimentary layer, don't you agree?
Have you heard anything from NAMI yet, or are they still AWOL?
You are almost always wrong, but will never admit it
If your memory was intact you wouldn't need a link, now would you?...Just about every assertion you have made, and repeated ad infinitum has been refuted by myself or others, but you constantly forget, and bring up the same old garbage again.
I asked a couple of posts ago...Why is there not sedimentary layer on or near Ararat. I would think if there was a world wide flood there should be evidence consisting of a world wide sedimentary layer, don't you agree?
Have you heard anything from NAMI yet, or are they still AWOL?
Your link speaks of the accesable water, it does not adress the great quanity of water that is not accesable. This non accesable water was spoken of in the New Scientist, December 9, 1995, page 42. And it is believed that there is much more water trapped deep inside the earth, then all the water found in all of earths seas. Consider link below. Your link is based on old school thinking sanspeur.
Your link speaks of the accesable water, it does not adress the great quanity of water that is not accesable. This non accesable water was spoken of in the New Scientist, December 9, 1995, page 42. And it is believed that there is much more water trapped deep inside the earth, then all the water found in all of earths seas. Consider link below. Your link is based on old school thinking sanspeur.
I loved this from your link, oh and the 600 million years part as well, not to mention the quote, " the earth formed 6.5 billion years ago" which I didnt post here. Kinda kills the 6000 year myth.
"Water is the primary greenhouse gas," notes Jeanloz. If there were a massive build-up of greenhouse gases, he says, it could have a devastating effect on every living creature on Earth. But a sudden outpouring of water, Noah-style, is not likely even if the balance does tilt to a greater outflow. Rather it would be a gradual change on geological timescales, which would affect only our most distant descendants. Perhaps by then they will have evolved gills."
Oh sanspeur, you say that all the time. And when I ask you for a link that would make your case. What do you say?
Oh thats right, "I don't have time to search for the link. Look it up yourself."
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifle
Hey Tom [since you've forgotten so easily...]; it was your own link that sanspeur referenced. You pointed it out. But as is predictable now, you just applied your usual GORE™, as in: "Beliefs of Convenience" or "Selective Quote Mining".
Let's all read the last paragraph of your reference together shall we? Nea1 pointed it out, but I just gotta do it again since you probably didn't catch it the first, tenth or 100th time (my highlights in red, and bolded & underlined for extra highlights): link that
[If even some of this tied up water were released], "Obviously the oceans would rise, but the more important effects would be in the atmosphere. "Water is the primary greenhouse gas," notes Jeanloz. If there were a massive build-up of greenhouse gases, he says, it could have a devastating effect on every living creature on Earth. But a sudden outpouring of water, Noah-style, is not likely even if the balance does tilt to a greater outflow. Rather it would be a gradual change on geological timescales, which would affect only our most distant descendants. Perhaps by then they will have evolved gills."
Oh but then you so "errantly" say, sticking you foot into your own mouth....
Of course, such a link does not exist. And you have never proven me wrong on the amount of water found in the depths of the earth.
However, if I wrong, could you supply me with the link that would prove me wrong sanspeur? LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman
And there it is. You're even forgetting you own links, Tom? Off your meds again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
Campbell, regarding wood petrification in a short period of time, the link you provided, was from a religious college, Regardless, it said that rapid petrification can be occur, even within 100 years, UNDER RARE CERTAIN CONDITIONS, and including certain minerals. Otherwise, it would take an enormously long period of time millions of years for petrification to take place. So you have to ask yourself the question: are such conditions and minerals present near the top of Ararat?
Quote:
Originally Posted by riflewood
Yes, as usual, Tom takes an unrelated, unique one-off situation under entirely different conditions, and applies it to the global community. He does this with some church group's findings under an old mud hut somewhere, and suddenly it's "scientists the world over agree...blah blah blah."GORE™ in extremis!
Petrification on one volcanic location therefore, in Tom's world, means that's what happens at or near every volcanic location. The first one might have been downslope from the volcano, immerseed in a constant flow of heavily mineralized water, but here on Ararat, its right there near the summit, with nothing but pure, clear non-mineralized glacial meltwater, just as we see in the Panda videos, which can not petrify anything.
Secondly, you have NOT shown there are any spiders present at high altitudes on Mt. Ararat. What you showed regarding spiders are those that can survive at high elevations (above 4000 meters) in Nepal. And those spiders tend to be Jumping spiders, which are very small spiders. That's not to say small spiders can't survive on Ararat, it's just that you haven't provided any evidence to show there are any up there. So, yes indeed, it is just your personal opinion without anything to support it. Your only evidence is now based on NAMI's photo which is questionable, and NAMI's claims, which are also highly questionable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman
(BTW, NightBazaar; this would have to be a web spider. There were spider webs. Such webs do not just sit there, unchanged and undisturbed through decades and centuries of various ice encapsulations and shifting ice and meltwater regimes, tom. In my barn, spider webs don't even last a year! As well, they exist as webs to catch flying insects. Yep; lots of those down in an ice cave, huh?
Point is, this wood and that straw and those spider webs were all imported. Obviously. Simple as that. Again, all together now: HOAX.)
We've yet to hear anything new from NAMI who already cancelled a conference last month, and so far this month, they've been so quiet you can hear crickets chirping. What's up with that?
You are almost always wrong, but will never admit it
If your memory was intact you wouldn't need a link, now would you?...Just about every assertion you have made, and repeated ad infinitum has been refuted by myself or others, but you constantly forget, and bring up the same old garbage again.
I asked a couple of posts ago...Why is there not sedimentary layer on or near Ararat. I would think if there was a world wide flood there should be evidence consisting of a world wide sedimentary layer, don't you agree?
Have you heard anything from NAMI yet, or are they still AWOL?
To that last point, I try to keep in touch with Clara Wei, but they are now officially non-responsive. Next week, folks: that's their own deadline, which I'm now going to bet won't happen, since they also would not provide any travel or scheduling information to anyone interested in attending.
Absent that scheduling and BS Press Conference, the whole thing's off. They won't be able to get it together for anything to be done by the end of this season. Even if they did hold their press conference, how on earth are they going to put together a complex scientific expedition in just a couple of weeks? It's obvious they haven't done one before if they believe that.
Or it'll be just a repeat of their last debacle; a charlatan's kiddies hike, with cutesy videos of people hugging and drinking bottled water while the mountaineer Ertugrul counts his moneys in the background. And not one wit of real, credible, scientific support. Even the Turkish government must smell a rat here, since they seem to have backed off as well. Why knowingly get yourself tarred by the same brush as a band of known crooks, liars and thieves after all?
But.... Tom assures us it's all quite professional...
Prediction: when it all fails to materialize, Tom will then say it will be mounted officially and in grand scale NEXT summer!
That Tom is convinced he can wear me or us down with his nonsense repeats, his endless selective quote-mining, his GORE™ exaggerations, his bluffs and his outright prevarications. He no doubt revels in seeing our ire and irritation. A true Christian, you betcha! (to that point: my opinion of their ethics has been completely revised since seeing the obtuse behavior of many of them here on C-D)
Well.... sorry, Tom. I've got all the time in the world, and won't let you get away with it, not even once. Plus, we've got logic, truth and proofs supported by evidence on our side. You rely completely on fakers, charlatans and liars. And an unquestioning belief in the bible as literal and inerrant.
The link I presented stated such rapid petrification occurs when samples are located close to a volcano. As it turns out, the Ark of Noah landed near the top of Mt. Ararat. Mt. Ararat, is a volcano. And yes, such conditions are present on Mt. Ararat.
I'm not saying rapid petrification can't happen. I'm saying that for rapid petrification to occur, it requires certain conditions and kinds of minerals to happen. Here's a quote from the link you provided:
Quote:
...the actual process of petrifaction has very little to do with the amount of time available, but instead the conditions. Factors that determine the time if takes for petrifaction to occur include pH level and temperature. If the water that saturates the tree includes calcite the tree will petrify faster than if the water included less soluble petrifying minerals like silica. Under ideal chemical conditions, petrifaction is possible in a few hundred years.
Earlham College - Geology 211 - petwood (http://www.earlham.edu/~tinkeem/web/petwood.htm - broken link)
It says petrification has to do with the conditions. Factors determining time for something to petrify include pH level and temperature. Petrification can occur in a shorter amount of time if the water contains calcite. It occurs slower if the water contains less soluable (dissolve) minerals like silica. Finally, it states petrification is possible in a few hundred years under IDEAL CHEMICAL CONDITIONS.
'Ideal chemical conditions' suggests conditions that are not necessarily typical or common. So again, you have to ask yourself, what are the ph levels on Ararat? Does Ararat show any indication that water containing calcite is or has been present? Or is it water soluable silica? One or the other can help determine how fast or slow wood can petrify. What about the termperature factor? If it's too hot, it'd be most likely that wood would be reduced to ash.
Finally, you have to ask whether such conditions for petrification can take place at 13,000 or so feet near the top of a volcano. Or would such conditions be more likely to take place at much lower elevations from a thick covering of volcanic ash, perhaps far from the volcano?
Do you see the point I'm making? Such conditions MIGHT be present on Ararat, but you can't yet say such conditions ARE present on Ararat. You're drawing conclusions based on unknowns, and before having any answers of what the factors and chemical conditions there are. I honestly don't know what the answers are. Do you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
Another link I presented speaking about spiders, state that they can exist above 4000 meters in the Caucasus mountain system, and can be found in ice caves. And that system is where we find Mt. Ararat. Consider the link below. And that same link tells us, that a number of undiscovered spider species would be expected in such remote habitats. (SO NO, IT IS NOT JUST BASED ON MY PERSONAL OPINION). The link clearly tells us that spider species can be found above 4000 meters, in ice caves, and in the Caucasian mountain system. And Mt. Ararat is part of that system.
It's an interesting and worthwhile link, but it doesn't identify what spiders (if any) are present on Mt. Ararat. Again, yes you are basing things on your personal opinion. You're assuming that because there may be certain spiders in the Caucasian mountain range that can be found at elevations above 4000 meters, that it means there are spiders on all the mountains including Ararat. The link only gives a general description, not specific to any particular mountain (or volcano). It's not a matter of could spiders be found at Ararat's high elevations. It's a matter of are there spiders found high up on Ararat? Again, I don't know. Do you?
While it might be possible for spiders to be up there on Ararat, in my opinion, based purely on what has been presented by NAMI, there are some problems with NAMI's claims and your claims. There is nothing in the spider links that indicate ice caves that certain spiders might temporarily inhabit are deep caves. They might be crevasses or just a few feet deep. As deep at the NAMI videos, videos and drawing seem to suggest, I seriously doubt any spider (as referred to), much less small spiders like Jumping spiders, is going to go in that deep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
And according to THE LINK BELOW, the Caucasus mountains not only form a natural border with Europe, (THEY ARE HOME TO THE BIBLICAL MT. ARARAT.)
The Causasus mountain range is home to Mt. Ararat. So what? The
Himalaya mountain range is home to Mt. Everest. That doesn't mean all mountains in the Caucasian range have the same flora and fauna. There can be some plants and creatures that are unique to a specific mountain and live no where else. Because Mt. Ararat happens to be within the Caucasus range, does not mean Ararat has the exact same flora and fauna as other mountains in the range.
They way you're putting it is like saying:
- Penguins live in Antarctica.
- Therefore, penguins can live deep in the interior of Antarctica.
Not so. Penguins live only along the coastal regions of the continent because it's closer to their food source. Why? Because that's how they've adapted and evolved for their survival. If they moved further inland, they'd starve or freeze to death.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
The fact is, there are those who came here saying no spiders should be found on Mt. Ararat, or even at such an altitude of 13,000 feet. Yet the information presented, clearly shows them to be wrong. If such people are not interested in facts, then you can believe their nonsense.
Once again, you're talking about facts, but are only presenting general information about other places and attempting to tie them in with Ararat. That makes what you're calling "facts", in specific relation to Ararat, nothing more than your own personal opinion. Personal opinions are not FACTS about Ararat.
Just because other people may disagree with your opinions, does not mean they are not interested in facts. They are indeed interested in specific facts, but you haven't provided any. You keep wandering off with links, etc., that are unrelated to Ararat and the claim of finding Noah's Ark. And NAMI has yet to reveal any real scientific evidence proving their claim. Time will tell whether they have anything to say that's truly significant or not. Their claims have yet to be authenticated. And until it's been verified as authentic, not because of their say-so, then no one has any idea if their claim is correct, a misunderstanding, or simply a hoax.
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.
The outcome, predictably....
