Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "THE EXODUS REVEALED" VIDEO
JimSDA
Inactive Member


Message 614 of 860 (129564)
08-02-2004 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 613 by PaulK
08-02-2004 12:33 PM


Re: Problems with the evidence?
PaulK, then why don't you try telling me what you ARE saying in plain English? If there's a "landbridge/mountain ridge" there, then it is obviously HIGHER than the deeper parts of the gulf! You say there's no landbridge, so that must mean IT'S ALL THE SAME DEPTH!
So what in the world ARE you saying??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 613 by PaulK, posted 08-02-2004 12:33 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 618 by PaulK, posted 08-02-2004 12:50 PM JimSDA has replied

Prince Lucianus
Inactive Member


Message 615 of 860 (129565)
08-02-2004 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 604 by JimSDA
08-02-2004 12:01 PM


Re: C14 dating...
Well, Lysimachus believes in C14 and you don't.
That certainly rules me out of an argument.
If wheels were under the sand, then they would have survived and c14 could be used. Doesn't petrified wood still have year rings? (I genuinly do not know).
Well, like I said in an earlier post, until things have been cleared up by neutral scientists, we can argue all we want.
Lucy

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.
Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering
"Dear God, I understand that if I fail to believe in you, I'll burn in Hell for all eternity. Thanks for being such a good sport about it." -- Dr. Oswald Pratt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 604 by JimSDA, posted 08-02-2004 12:01 PM JimSDA has not replied

Ron Lambert
Inactive Member


Message 616 of 860 (129566)
08-02-2004 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 612 by CK
08-02-2004 12:26 PM


Re: C14 dating...
Charles, Creation Research Society Quarterly is a peer-reviewed journal produced by real, actual, living, breathing scientists who are creationists. They do exist. They provide solid evidence that is documented, testable, and verifiable.
The charter of the Smithsonian Institution says that it is dedicated to promoting the theory of evolution. Should we disregard anything contained in Smithsonian publications, because of the plainly announced bias?
Or should we consider the evidence in a fair-minded and honest manner? If evidence presented by Creation scientists is to be questioned, then there is a scientifically legitimate way to do this. Ridicule and arrogant dismissal are not among those ways.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 612 by CK, posted 08-02-2004 12:26 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 621 by CK, posted 08-02-2004 1:00 PM Ron Lambert has not replied

JimSDA
Inactive Member


Message 617 of 860 (129567)
08-02-2004 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 610 by Yaro
08-02-2004 12:18 PM


I told you the wood is gone
Yaro, we've told everyone (for years now) that the wood in the wooden chariot wheels is GONE -- rotted away -- and the only thing left is coral growth! That is why the shapes are not as clear as they might be! BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD EXPECT TO FIND!
And it sounds like you're ignoring my counsel that you must pay attention to ALL OF THE EVIDENCE, the route, the crossing, the mountain in Saudi Arabia -- because IT ALL FITS TOGETHER!
If we have "doubts" about the coral shaped formations, then we overcome those doubts by realizing 1) That's what we should find there, and 2) Look at all the other evidence that links the sites and the route together!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by Yaro, posted 08-02-2004 12:18 PM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 625 by Yaro, posted 08-02-2004 1:06 PM JimSDA has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 618 of 860 (129568)
08-02-2004 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 614 by JimSDA
08-02-2004 12:39 PM


Re: Problems with the evidence?
Don't be silly. Nothing I have said rules out an area of the Gulf that is significantly deeper than the rest. And there is such an area plainly marked on the charts - the Aragonese Deep.
What I have said - and I guess it needs repeating - is that most of the Gulf of Aqaba is less than 1000m deep. To cross at Nuweiba would require crossing the contour marked as 850m depth. All this is clearly marked on the charts provided by Lysimachus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 614 by JimSDA, posted 08-02-2004 12:39 PM JimSDA has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 626 by JimSDA, posted 08-02-2004 1:07 PM PaulK has not replied

Prince Lucianus
Inactive Member


Message 619 of 860 (129569)
08-02-2004 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 605 by Ron Lambert
08-02-2004 12:02 PM


My sig
I have already told some people elsewhere that my sig is a cynical reply to someone else's signature which claims:
Bible
Search Results
"Love" was found 854 times in 751 verses.
Thats a Whole Lotta loving.
I simply state that you can use the bible to claim everything you want.
I can use the word sin and claim
Thats a whole lotta sinning
Lucy
p.s I know that picture you use from another forum.
I doubt you are the same guy from TBB, which would be fun though.
This message has been edited by Prince Lucianus, 08-02-2004 11:53 AM

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.
Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering
"Dear God, I understand that if I fail to believe in you, I'll burn in Hell for all eternity. Thanks for being such a good sport about it." -- Dr. Oswald Pratt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 605 by Ron Lambert, posted 08-02-2004 12:02 PM Ron Lambert has not replied

JimSDA
Inactive Member


Message 620 of 860 (129571)
08-02-2004 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 607 by PaulK
08-02-2004 12:12 PM


Who are you?
Hey, PaulK -- You've posted over 2100 messages on this forum, but you haven't posted one single bit of bio information on your profile page, so how about putting in some info and letting us know your qualifications for being right about everything? All I can tell is that you live over in the UK and have a "demon" e-mail address carrier -- is part of your stubbornness just because the colonies got free of old Merry England? Is that why you're so contrary to Ron's discoveries?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by PaulK, posted 08-02-2004 12:12 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 624 by PaulK, posted 08-02-2004 1:05 PM JimSDA has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 621 of 860 (129573)
08-02-2004 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 616 by Ron Lambert
08-02-2004 12:46 PM


Re: C14 dating...
What a lot of old jism!
ron writes:
Charles, Creation Research Society Quarterly is a peer-reviewed journal produced by real, actual, living, breathing scientists who are creationists. They do exist. They provide solid evidence that is documented, testable, and verifiable.
How many journal ask you to agree with statements like:
The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.
All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.
How can you do science when you have already decided on the answer! What a load of old rubbish!
Can you name me ONE real journal that requires you to agree to a statement of belief?
The charter of the Smithsonian Institution says that it is dedicated to promoting the theory of evolution. Should we disregard anything contained in Smithsonian publications, because of the plainly announced bias?
So what? it's not a peer-reviewed journal, last time I checked it's an insititution - you are trying to compare apples to oranges.
Why is this earth-shattering material not submitted to other journals? GOSH let me guess there is a secret plan to hide all the evidence!
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 08-02-2004 12:01 PM
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 08-02-2004 12:13 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 616 by Ron Lambert, posted 08-02-2004 12:46 PM Ron Lambert has not replied

Ron Lambert
Inactive Member


Message 622 of 860 (129574)
08-02-2004 1:00 PM


Ron Wyatt was not the first person to suggest that the wilderness wandering of the children of Israel might have been in the Arabian penninsula, rather than in the Sinai desert. Immanuel Velikovsky published this idea in some of his books in the 1960s. Others also have noticed the striking similarity in place names along the coast of Saudi Arabia to place names in the Bible associated with the Exodus. But Wyatt seems to have found a lot of confirming evidence, and tied everything together better than anyone else.
Look, did the Exodus occur as the Bible says? Were pharoahs' chariots buried in the Red Sea? If you believe the answer is yes, then where are the chariot wheels and associated metallic implements? If not where Wyatt says he found evidence of them, then where else do you find such relics?
This message has been edited by Ron Lambert, 08-02-2004 12:01 PM

Prince Lucianus
Inactive Member


Message 623 of 860 (129575)
08-02-2004 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 610 by Yaro
08-02-2004 12:18 PM


Re: My own Hypothesis
The metal is a hot iron
The Egyptians in that period didn't pocess the skills to work iron, so these iron finds in the gulf of Aqaba are quite amazing, something else or belonged to another civilisation.
Furthermore, I have found no argument to support/falsify it yet, but I believe that coaral which grows on wood would perish before hard coral has a chance to get a good solid grip. I'm willing to listen to any well founded argument in favour/against it.
But normally, wood simply floats upward.
Lucy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by Yaro, posted 08-02-2004 12:18 PM Yaro has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 624 of 860 (129576)
08-02-2004 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 620 by JimSDA
08-02-2004 12:57 PM


Re: Who are you?
Does it matter that I haven't bothered to put anything on my profile page ?
I don't claim to be infallible or an expert on everything. But then again how much expertise does it take to read contours on a chart ? Is it too difficult for you ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 620 by JimSDA, posted 08-02-2004 12:57 PM JimSDA has not replied

Yaro
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 625 of 860 (129577)
08-02-2004 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 617 by JimSDA
08-02-2004 12:47 PM


Re: I told you the wood is gone
Yaro, we've told everyone (for years now) that the wood in the wooden chariot wheels is GONE -- rotted away -- and the only thing left is coral growth! That is why the shapes are not as clear as they might be! BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD EXPECT TO FIND!
ok. But then why do they neciseraly have to be chariot wheels? They could be cart wheels. Among other things,
furthermore, back to those phonecian ship wrecks, you find the wood all roted away, but tons and tons of cargo. Swords, amphora, statuary, etc.
A whole freakin army woulda left more than some bones and some wheeles. Im sure the egiptians were carying swords, spears, and arrows, as well as jewlry armomor, among other things.
Sertainly an army of thousands would have left more than what we find there.
Case in point,
Ancient Roman battlefields are chock full of ancient roman goodies. Skelteons horse remains, armor, weapons, bones etc. And I mean tons!
we are talking armies here remember.
Why don't we see the same here?
This message has been edited by Yaro, 08-02-2004 12:10 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 617 by JimSDA, posted 08-02-2004 12:47 PM JimSDA has not replied

JimSDA
Inactive Member


Message 626 of 860 (129578)
08-02-2004 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 618 by PaulK
08-02-2004 12:50 PM


"Deep" thinking required...
PaulK wrote: "To cross at Nuweiba would require crossing the contour marked as 850m depth. All this is clearly marked on the charts provided by Lysimachus."
And I told you that it might not have been that deep 3,500 years ago!
I realize that this might take some "deep thinking" to figure this out, but SO WHAT about the current 850m depth??
It could have been gouged that deep by the earthquakes/seaquakes in that area, rough seas could have eroded the ridge deeper, or when the 2 walls of the separated seas crashed back together the middle portion of the 8 mile crossing ridge could have been washed away (which would leave the chariot remains nearer the shores)!
Can't you understand that "things change" over 3,500 years??
Accordingly, there is NOTHING wrong with the depth readings at the crossing site, no matter what the numbers are!
This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-02-2004 12:08 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by PaulK, posted 08-02-2004 12:50 PM PaulK has not replied

JimSDA
Inactive Member


Message 627 of 860 (129581)
08-02-2004 1:14 PM


Yaro wrote: "A whole freakin army woulda left more than some bones and some wheels. Im sure the egiptians were carying swords, spears, and arrows, as well as jewlry armomor, among other things."
Absolutely!
And that's why we want to do a full investigation of the

Lysimachus
Member (Idle past 5191 days)
Posts: 380
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 857 of 860 (130303)
08-04-2004 1:20 PM


Re: JimSDA....
This is getting absolutely retarted...
...here we come from debating with sensible arguments to outright attacks on a religious organization...
What a shame.

~Lysimachus

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024