Noah's Flood...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:36 pm

this is what he said about water going up hill:

I personally do not subscribe to the Bosphorus Dam hypothesis
neither does anyone else
water doesnt flow uphill without an archimedes screw and he wasn't around until much later

hope it helps

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:48 pm

Ryan and Pitman still lecture on their theory and Pitman was at the University of Colorado about three months ago lecturing. There are indeed some new refuting studies that have been done. For me that puts the theory on a shelf waiting for more study.

They are both PhD geologists out of Columbia University. The geology was correct. I don't think that has been argued with. Some of the sediment studies are claimed to not hold up well.

The issue is over the diatoms that existed in the water and when they were exposed to salt water. There are evidently fresh water diatoms in earlier sediments, but the issue is about when that occurred.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:08 pm

impossible to link the Black Sea flood with a specific legend,

Walter Pitman

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:23 pm

Ryan and Pitman still lecture on their theory and Pitman was at the University of Colorado about three months ago lecturing

it is easy to sit in the audience and refute someone's theory, it is another thing to roll up one's sleeves and workto find the answer.

so far many secular researchers have done a lot of work for me as they seek answers. all i have had to do is read their work, now i do not discount their efforts nor do i think they are unintelligent, my contention comes with their conclusions and their data among other factors.

impossible to link the Black Sea flood with a specific legend,

of course he is going to say that, i would be surprised if he said anything different but i am sure there will be no definitive proof ever found. why would there be? if there was, the accusations would fly along with more refutation hindering any progress for years.

thanks beagle for the update, weller made it sound as if the two had repudiated all their work and i was wondering about that.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:15 am

i am sure there will be no definitive proof ever found. why would there be

thats right because as we all know God hid all the signs of the Global flood after Noah landed as a test for the faithful

thats why theres no evidence of it

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:18 am

all i have had to do is read their work,

Uh...no. You also have to understand it and that is one of your weak spots.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:24 am

minimalist--i ambeginning to wonder about this as well. notice his avoidance of the question:

Quote:
Marduk,you said the mediterranean would have had to flow uphill to get into the Black Sea, and I thought you also said that the Black sea was fed by salt rivers. (Was this because some glaciers are composed of salt water?)

the danube flows into the black sea

You also have to understand it and that is one of your weak spots.

i understand it, i just come to a different conclusion that is all.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:55 am

i ambeginning to wonder about this as well. notice his avoidance of the question

ooh lets pretend its a conspiracy
failing that you could go get yourself a relief map of the area and see for yourself or would you really like me to make you look like an idiot again

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:28 am

Beagle wrote:Ryan and Pitman still lecture on their theory and Pitman was at the University of Colorado about three months ago lecturing. There are indeed some new refuting studies that have been done. For me that puts the theory on a shelf waiting for more study.

They are both PhD geologists out of Columbia University. The geology was correct. I don't think that has been argued with. Some of the sediment studies are claimed to not hold up well.

The issue is over the diatoms that existed in the water and when they were exposed to salt water. There are evidently fresh water diatoms in earlier sediments, but the issue is about when that occurred.

Pitman still thinks he is right, Ryan has I'm pretty sure abandoned the idea.
The proceeds of the 3 flood conferences in 2003 should be published soon by Springer Verlag.

Although some of the issue is shell dating, I think some of it is in fact arguments about the geology. But when the proceedings are published we shall see!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:40 pm

Pitman still thinks he is right, Ryan has I'm pretty sure abandoned the idea.

please, where are your links to back up this claim of repudiation? i am asked to provide proof, so please follow suit and provide some credible source as this is twice now you have mentioned this and both times no links or articles supporting this contention have appeared.

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:58 pm

archaeologist wrote:
Pitman still thinks he is right, Ryan has I'm pretty sure abandoned the idea.
please, where are your links to back up this claim of repudiation? i am asked to provide proof, so please follow suit and provide some credible source as this is twice now you have mentioned this and both times no links or articles supporting this contention have appeared.

Uhuh, start with the person who said Ryan still lectures on it, he posted that before me. First come first served. And after all, I'm only 'pretty sure', Beagle (I'm not getting at you Beagle) made a flat assertion.

Refuations of their hypothesis have been around since the Oct 2002 Marine Geology issue. Why don't you know about them if you are interested in this?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Why don't you know about them if you are interested in this?

i have limited time and access to resources that are english in nature is not only expensive but limited as well. but i will search for their internet site if they have one.

i am always open to hearing about where i can find sources and links, even those secular in nature. i actually save a lot of links posted here as information is always wanted.

Beagle , weller says your up. do you have any links to back up your claim of the non-repudiation?

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:24 pm

Try http://tinyurl.com/p9vxc

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:33 pm

go it and thank you--

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:47 pm

It seems like we go through the same discussions again and again. We did this earlier in this thread. I've posted my thoughts here again. Now Doug comes back after this lenth of time and wants to talk about the other guy.

I think Noahs Flood thread should quietly settle to the bottom of the forum.
If you're truly interested Arch - Daybrown started this topic, and she had some very interesting things to say. Just read around some her feminist views.