Archaeologica.org

the ball is now inyour court--- put up or shut up time.

when you were challenged to produce evidence that the story of Noah predated the flood story in Gilgamesh thats exactly what i told you to do
I'm still waiting for the evidence
and you still haven't shut up

archaeologist wrote:i have a question: what do the previous 10 or so posts have to do with the topic of Noah's flood?

More than any of your cowardly blather has thus far.

"Strive, dear Zilkov, to cultivate a sense of humor!"

--Dr. Ben Lo, The Manchurian Candidate

i make a challenge to the other side to post their evidence and what is put up? a load of crap by people who have no intention of even trying to stay on topic.

You describe yourself well. Another suggestion: capitalize the first word of a sentence.

so far we got two posts on J, E, P, & D which don't even cpme close to an argument against because the proof of such writing has never been proven.

Only 100+ years of research. Should you have a rebuttal, I know some editors who would be happy to review it.

But you do not do you? Because you do not know what you blather about. You merely run around like the child you are crying because you are beginning to realize your Santa Claus does not exist.

Welcome to reality.

Blathers ignorantly

See above.

--J.D.

Dr. Schoch has some interesting things to say about north american flood evidence and about Charles Hapgood. when i get home i will try to post some quotes that refer to this thread.

Dr. Schoch has some interesting things to say about north american flood evidence

But because of the trap set by your own story, you need 'global' flood evidence, to the tops of the mountains...not "north american flood evidence." Flooding is a recurrent problem throughout history but none of the rest of us are locked in to such a stupid story as that of Noah.

But because of the trap set by your own story, you need 'global' flood evidence, to the tops of the mountains...not "north american flood evidence

i am not posting 'evidence' just material for discussion while i await the detractor's presentation.

archaeologist wrote:Dr. Schoch has some interesting things to say about north american flood evidence and about Charles Hapgood. when i get home i will try to post some quotes that refer to this thread.

i just knew that moab, utah was gonna figure into this thread.

1.) the ark is located somewhere in utah.

2.) the coconino sandstone formation is proof of the flood. never mind all the dinosaur footprints (one of which sits on my desk as we speak) - they, and the formation itself are both less than 12k years old.

3.) joseph smith and followers. proof positive there. saved by the seagulls.

4.) how many wives you got, arch?


john

ps

if you only use the feathers, its kinky.

if you use the whole chicken, its perverted.



j

Been to Moab more than once.....was a mormon only once....there is no ark, no boat, hardly any water, bring your own.

But landscape is fantasic.........

Checks furiously through his Score Cards. . . .

Hold on . . . so is archaeologist a Mormon? I thought he read the Latin version--which one has not been determined; however, it is irrelevant because the Latin versions are obsolete.

So is he now arguing the Flood Myth occured in the United States?

Please . . . PLEASE . . . do not send me to the Search Function Newbie!!!!

--J.D.

No Dr. X, archaeologist is not a mormon (as far as I know) nor does he claim the flood happened in the USA.

Silliness, got us off track.....

archaeologist wrote:

But because of the trap set by your own story, you need 'global' flood evidence, to the tops of the mountains...not "north american flood evidence

i am not posting 'evidence' just material for discussion while i await the detractor's presentation.

At least you're consistent.


How many times do you have to be told that the flood story is impossible before it sinks in?

Seventy times seventy. . . .

. . . so you, what, have like only four more times to tell him?

I remain just so exited to know where those huge cisterns of water that exist in space are . . . and . . . no, they are not the Ort Cloud as one creationist tried.

Yes . . . the Flood Myth was caused by comets! Even that guy gave that apology up quickly!

--J.D.

MichelleH wrote:No Dr. X, archaeologist is not a mormon (as far as I know) nor does he claim the flood happened in the USA.

Silliness, got us off track.....

michelle

he just did, or at least insinuated it.

as for silliness,

physics being what it is, one would suppose that water levels rose equally worldwide during the great flood.

unless god decided that water levels would rise only in a limited portion of the mediterranean seaboard, for reasons of his own.

and joseph smith - yet another prophet -

made the argument that n. american indians were the "lost tribes" of israel. then headed for utah.

my point is, given the absolute illogic demonstrated by a certain minority in the previous umpty ump pages,

that one can just as easily predicate utah as the putative site of the landfall of the ark as, say, mt. ararat.


felicitations.


john

that one can just as easily predicate utah as the putative site of the landfall of the ark as, say, mt. ararat.

I'm nearby. I'll take a run up and see if there are any arks laying around.

I was very "forgiving" in my calculations, because I did not try to account for seepage and the like. While I implied the damage of something greater than the Hiroshima bomb blasting every square inch, I did not calculate it, because I figured it would be truly "over-kill," and I ran out of Cheetos [Tm.--Ed.]

So ed in His Infinite Wisdom has punted it to a physics board to figure out such things as the energy conveyed by that much water. Now, terminal velocity would come into play except that would invalidate the Flood Myths right there--you have to get a certain volume of water on the Earth within the described time period.

In a way, I feel sorry for the archaeologists of the world, because it is sad to close one's mind off to knowledge. On ANOTHER BOARD [Boo! Hiss!--Ed.] I challenged one who did not like the Documentary Hypothesis to simply read Who Wrote the Bible? There is nothing "special" about the scholar--respected though he is--it is not his "pet theory." He merely provides a very excessible summary of it. I also give him credit for separating out what is his theory--the dating of certain authors.

He, himself, is no "EvilAtheistOhMy"--he wants to believe in David and even Solomon despite evidence to the contrary. I make that point because skepticism, scientific thinking, all of that is a process--one either applies the process or not. One really is not "a scientist" or "a scholar" ipso facto.

Woos and Fundis will try to do this--make themselve something by just calling themselves "biblical scholars" or whathaveyou.

It does not work. You either practice scholarship or you do not.

archaeologist does not, obviously.

I would extend to him the same challenge--simply read the book--very cheap on Amazon.

He does not have to "believe" it; he merely need to demonstrate why the author--and the rest of scholarship--is wrong. Simply saying "they're wrong" or "they're biased" does not cut it.

I hate Einstein.

Einstein means I will never be able to pilot my starship to visit the highly accomodating Nymphomaniacs of Nimbus 9.

Tragedy!

However, my "hate" or "dislike" of Einstein is worthless unless I can provide an alternative theory that better explains observations and makes better predictions that prove true.

Einstein, in a way, realized this with quantum--he did not like probability. There just "had to be" "hidden variable" that would remove the uncertainty/indeterminancy." As a demonstration he and colleagues showed that quantum predicts the curious phenomenon "entanglement."

Hogwash! Particles cannot be "entangled" across vast reaches! Therefore, quantum must be incomplete.

At the time of his paper--in the 1930s or 40s . . . to lazy to get up and check . . . might spill the Cheetos--there was no way to experimentally verify or deny his demonstration.

Then came an Irishman named Bell. Bell came up with "Bell's Theorem" which was basically a way to test Einstein's theory--if you ran an experiment and got "this" result, Einstein was right. If you got "that" result, Einstein was wrong--and therefore "right" in that quantum was incomplete and there is no entanglement, et cetera.

Of course, no one could run the experiment at that time.

Years pass . . . bad television produced . . . someone gave Shatner another series . . . then, finally, someone could run the experiment.

Result?

Einstein was "right" and therefore "wrong!" Entanglement does happen as he felt quantum would predict!

THAT, My Children, is how science and scholarship is done.

[ZzzzZZZzzzZZZzz--Ed.]

Scholarship recognizes both positive and negative evidence. So, when I propose that I am currently engaged as Nicole Kidman's sex-slave, I may try to sit back and [CENSORED--Ed.] then claim "prove me wrong!" "Prove that I am NOT Nicole Kidman's main Snuggle Bunny!"

Well, I just proposed something. That proposal generates testable claims. So the fact that I am on the otherside of the planet in my underwear consuming Cheetos . . . actually a nice cold mocha and a fine Romeo Y Julieta--cigar, you sickos! Not menage a tois! . . . and you can show proof of Nicole beating small animals in Australia rather invalidates my proposal.

So, the proposal that a Global Flood or Exodus happened generates testable claims. Thus far, as detailed repeatedly, archaeology has shown these claims invalid.

--J.D.

someone once said that no one was looking for flood evidence in north america, probably another board, or that there was any present in that continent.

well aside from the annual local floods, i guess there may be some evidence after all but the question is how deep do we dig to find it?

in Ur we have a civilization layer in which to judge success or not but what would the guide line be for north america?

How many times do you have to be told that the flood story is impossible before it sinks in?

maybe a google. seriously, it won't happen. how amny times do i have to say there was a flood before you believe it?