noetic15:

can u tender the evidences or notes taken after the formation of these polystrate fossils were formed in Nova Scotia? . . .   .u claimed it is a scientific process, as such it must have been observed.
who observed it? when? where and how?

It seems that you are more interested in embarrasing yourself, geologist observed it, John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel have said that the rapid burial and preservation of polystrate fossil trees found at Joggins, Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins.If you have any other scientific evidence to show that the mythical flood did it then you can bring your own scientific findings, you have to fist of all present Just ONE geologist that agrees with your lying position. Please name just ONE geologist.

When will this empty head learn to answer simple questions . . ,   
I am particularly interested in the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia. how come they have no roots? how did they get there? could they not have been transported by a global flood? why not? . . ,   . . .

Why do you keep lying and exposing yourself? . This is what you initially said "tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root?" After I did show you that some were found with roots you are now changing tone and singing another new song. What a dishonest person. There are other polystrate fossils that have roots so that destroys your shameless arguments that they were caused by a mythical global flood that happened only in the pages of the bible. The fact that tree trunks vary greatly in age and strata is enough to show that they were formed at different times and by very different processes. Arguing with people that delibrately choose to mislead themselves is a waste of time. I know that you need to keep deluding yourself that there is some evidence for the mythical flood even though there isn't one. Even christian geologist agree that there is NO evidence for a global flood at all. hydrodynamic sorting which remains the greatest evidence against the global flood was pointed out by a christian geologist. As for the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia scientist have said that it was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin.

wirinet:

The same old Noetic we know, spewing ignorance, insults, one liners and anything his fingers can type, just to defend his untenable dogmatic position.

I could not believe what my eyes were seeing after reading this thread from the beggining to the end. . . . . . .people like neotic only advance the case of the atheist with their lies and shameless deciet, . . . Noetic can you name one geologist that shares your delusion that polystrate fossils came about as a result of a global flood? Toneyb has asked you this question so many times it should not be a difficult thing for you to do no?

A christian geologist have provided more than enough scientific evidence to show that noah's flood myth only happened on the pages of the bible.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/micro.htm

The article contains a lot of data, all which conclusively prove that a global flood did not occur.

Bent rock layers, fossil graveyards and polystrata fossils are best explained by a Flood. -- Kent Hovind.

OLAADEGBU:

Bent rock layers, fossil graveyards and polystrata fossils are best explained by a Flood. -- Kent Hovind.

How so? Kent hovind is not a geologist, what explanations has he given for all these claims?

mazaje:

How so? Kent hovind is not a geologist, what explanations has he given for all these claims?

Why not check it out in his website: http://www.drdino.com/article-categories.php?c=12

OLAADEGBU:

Why not check it out in his website: http://www.drdino.com/article-categories.php?c=12

Why are you giving me a reference to the writting of a person(Kent Hovind) who is a convicted fraud and who is presently serving a 10 year jail term in a federal prison in the USA? If you want to have any credibility then provide links to the works of real geologist not kent hovind who is not a geologist but a convicted criminal who is presently in prison for fraud. . . are these the people you rely on for scientific evidence of a global flood? Ken Ham a person that is not even a geologist and the convicted criminal kent hovind who is presently in jail and also not a geologist? I laugh in Aramiac. . .

Many are the afflictions of the righteous but the Lord delivers him from them all.  Read about the griefs by these sons of belial in the blog below:

http://washparkprophet..com/2006/07/kent-hovind-arrested.html

Give the devil an inch he will be a ruler.  See what these sons of belial would do if given the chance.

God Created heaven and the earth.  Quickly He was faced with a class action suit for failure to file an environmental impact statement.  He was granted a temporary permit for the project, but was stymied with the cease and desist order for the earthly part.

Appearing at the hearing, God was asked why He began His earthly project in the first place.  He replied that He just liked to be creative.

Then God said, "Let there be light", and immediately the officials demanded to know how the light would be made.  Would there be strip mining?  What about thermal pollution?  God explained that the light would come from a huge ball of fire.  God was granted provisional permission to make light, assuming that no smoke would result from the ball of fire: that He would obtain a building permit; and to conserve energy, would turn the light off half the time.  God agreed and said He would call the light "Day" and the darkness "Night". Officials replied that they were not interested in semantics.

God said, "Let the earth bring forth green herb and bear much seed". The EPA agreed so long as native seed was used.  Then God said, "Let waters bring forth creeping creatures begetting life; and the fowl that may fly over the earth".  Officials pointed out this would require approval from the Department of Game coordinated with the Heavenly Wildlife Federation and the Audubongelic Society.

Everything was O.K. until God said He wanted to complete the project in Six days.  Officials said it would take at least 200 days to review the application and impact statement.  After that there would be a public hearing.  Then there would be a 10-12 month approval period before, . . .   

At this point God created Hell.  

OLAADEGBU:

Many are the afflictions of the righteous but the Lord delivers him from them all. Read about the griefs by these sons of belial in the blog below:

http://washparkprophet..com/2006/07/kent-hovind-arrested.html

What has these got to do wıth the fact that kent hovınd ıs a convıcted felon who is presently serving a 10 year jail tem in a US federal prison for fraud?

toneyb:


It seems that you are more interested in embarrasing yourself, geologist observed it, John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel have said that the rapid burial and preservation of polystrate fossil trees found at Joggins, Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins.If you have any other scientific evidence to show that the mythical flood did it then you can bring your own scientific findings, you have to fist of all present Just ONE geologist that agrees with your lying position. Please name just ONE geologist.

will u stop fooling urself.

Waldron and Michael made "claims" about Nova Scotia . .  . .I asked for scientific OBSERVATION . . . . . .what then is the meaning of the above?

Why do you keep lying and exposing yourself? . This is what you initially said "tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root?" After I did show you that some were found with roots you are now changing tone and singing another new song. What a dishonest person. There are other polystrate fossils that have roots so that destroys your shameless arguments that they were caused by a mythical global flood that happened only in the pages of the bible. The fact that tree trunks vary greatly in age and strata is enough to show that they were formed at different times and by very different processes. Arguing with people that delibrately choose to mislead themselves is a waste of time. I know that you need to keep deluding yourself that there is some evidence for the mythical flood even though there isn't one. Even christian geologist agree that there is NO evidence for a global flood at all. hydrodynamic sorting which remains the greatest evidence against the global flood was pointed out by a christian geologist. As for the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia scientist have said that it was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin.

Actually that was a mistake on my part. . and I do apologise.

My question was and still remains. . .why do the polystrate fossils in Nova Scotia have no root?. . . . . .why could they not have been transported by a flood?

mazaje:

How so? Kent hovind is not a geologist, what explanations has he given for all these claims?

mazaje:

Why are you giving me a reference to the writting of a person(Kent Hovind) who is a convicted fraud and who is presently serving a 10 year jail term in a federal prison in the USA? If you want to have any credibility then provide links to the works of real geologist not kent hovind who is not a geologist but a convicted criminal who is presently in prison for fraud. . . are these the people you rely on for scientific evidence of a global flood? Ken Ham a person that is not even a geologist and the convicted criminal kent hovind who is presently in jail and also not a geologist? I laugh in Aramiac. . . 

HYPOCRITES like u make my belly ache.

I intentionally refused to be drawn into the geologist argument simply for known reasons. . . . and after a geologist was stated, the above was all u could come up with.
u make me feel sick.

noetic15:


HYPOCRITES like u make my belly ache.

I intentionally refused to be drawn into the geologist argument simply for known reasons. . . . and after a geologist was stated, the above was all u could come up with.
u make me feel sick

Do you know what you are saying?  . Kent Hovind is not a geologist at all but a biologist. . . . he is a convicted criminal presently doing time for fraud. He is a very well known lair for jesus. . . . .You really need to feel sick if convicted criminals who are serving time for fraud are the people you refer to as geologist. . . . . .

mazaje:

Do you know what you are saying?  . Kent Hovind is not a geologist at all but a biologist. . . . he is a convicted criminal presently doing time for fraud. He is a very well known lair for jesus. . . . .You really need to feel sick if convicted criminals who are serving time for fraud are the people you refer to as geologist. . . . . .

u make my belly ache . . . . , do u loose ur qualification when convicted?

noetic15:

u make my belly ache . . . . , do u loose your qualification when convicted?

Your delusion knows no bounds. . . . kent hovind has never claimed to be a geologist. . . . so i wonder what you are talking about are you drunk?

noetic15:

will u stop fooling urself.

Waldron and Michael made "claims" about Nova Scotia . .  . .I asked for scientific OBSERVATION . . . . . .what then is the meaning of the above?[

How are their observatıons not scientific? Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins

How is this observation not scientific?. . . . remember that you are yet to provide one geologist that agrees that polyatrate fossils were formed as a result of a global flood. . . . . . .
tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root?"

Actually that was a mistake on my part. . and I do apologise.

That was not a mistake. . .if he had not shown you that you were wrong you would not have admitted you made a mistake. . . . .Its very clear from your previous post that you did not know that some polystrate fossis had roots because your repeated your fallacy twice on this thread. . . . . You repeated this lie twice on this thread alone. . . . ''Do u mind educating me on how else the polystrate fossils got to their present locations since they have no roots?''. . . . . .you twice said that polystrate fossils found had no roots but quickly change your positon when you were shown that some were found with their roots ıntact. . . . keep on deluding yourself is all I have to tell you. . . .

My question was and still remains. . .why do the polystrate fossils in Nova Scotia have no root?. . . . . .why could they not have been transported by a flood?

Its very clear from your debate with toneyb that you will hang on to anything no matter what the evidence against your positions are. You have not presented any scientific peer reviwed paper that says ALL the polystrate papers found in nova scotia have no roots. . . . where is your scientific peer reviwed papers that says all the polystrate papers found there have no roots?  Name one geologıst that agress that they were formed as a result of a global flood. . . . .

Toneyb has asked a question and you refused to answer. . . .If you claim that polystrate fossils are evidence for your global flood then why does their ages vary greatly  . . . they should all be of the same age if they were truly formed by a global flood no?

The Bible's fascinating facts

"And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly" -- 2 Peter 2:5

In Genesis chapter 6, God gave Noah the dimensions of the 1.5 million cubic foot ark he was to build. In 1609 at Hoon in Holland, a ship was built after that same pattern, revolutionizing shipbuilding. By 1900 every large ship on the high seas was inclined towards the proportions of the ark.

OLAADEGBU:


In Genesis chapter 6, God gave Noah the dimensions of the 1.5 million cubic foot ark he was to build. In 1609 at Hoon in Holland, a ship was built after that same pattern, revolutionizing shipbuilding. By 1900 every large ship on the high seas was inclined towards the proportions of the ark.

This is a big lie. . . . .the model of the noah's ark that was built did not float something you refuse to say. . . . . . .

Daily Manna
16.10.2009

Be Prepared

TEXT: LUKE 17:20-37

“And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man” (Luke 17:26).

There was a father who was often away from home for weeks and months for business. One day, as he was leaving, his little boy asked him, “when are you coming back, Daddy?” He replied, “when you see the green leaves on the trees turning yellow and red and brown, you may know that I am coming soon!” The little boy couldn’t understand dates, but he could see the changes in colour of the leaves. When he saw the leaves put on their dresses of yellow, red and brown, he was very happy, for he knew his daddy’s return was near!.

The sign-seeking Pharisees were asking the Lord about when the Kingdom of God should come. In their ignorance, they knew little or nothing about the various stages of the Kingdom that is, the present spiritual aspect of the kingdom in which Christ reigns in the heart of every born again Christian; the future kingdom at the time of His millennial reign when the Lord shall reign physically on earth for a period of one thousand years of uninterrupted joy, peace and prosperity and the eternal kingdom of Christ when the kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; when He shall reign for ever and ever (Revelation 11:15b).

The Lord told these religious leaders what the condition of the world shall be at the time of His coming. Wickedness, worldliness and wantonness shall be prevalent just as it was in the days of Noah and in the days of Lot. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life brought destruction upon the people through the flood and fire in the days of old. Lot’s wife was lost through lust. The angels of mercy held her by the hand and brought her out of Sodom but she looked back, contrary to the divine instruction and she became a pillar of salt. In spite of all the special privileges she enjoyed, she was lost.

The coming of the Lord is imminent. Everything happening in the world today points to the fact that the time is short. The necessity of salvation from sin and holiness of life cannot be over emphasized.



“Remember Lot’s wife”.

Nests in the Ark
October 16, 2009

"Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch." (Genesis 6:14)

Details surrounding the story of Noah and the Flood have long caused laymen and theologians alike to stumble and compromise.

None could argue that the wording was not clear. God had commanded Noah to build a wooden boat of huge dimensions and to take on board representatives of land-dwelling, air-breathing animals. The Flood, Scripture reveals, devastated the entire world. But nineteenth-century theologians, pressed on by Hutton, Lyell, and others proposing the new uniformitarian interpretation of earth history, became convinced that the scriptural account must be understood in a figurative sense. Their twentieth-century counterparts repeat this error, promulgating the non-biblical idea that the Flood was only local.

Some have wondered how Noah could gather all the animals, but the Bible simply says they "went in two and two unto Noah into the ark" (7:9), evidently migrating to the location on God’s command.

Their care while on the Ark has also been raised as a problem. But, in all likelihood, the animals entered a state of semi-dormancy, as nearly all of their descendants do today when faced with danger over which they have no control and from which they cannot flee.

Scripture supports this idea in our text: The word "rooms," which is more properly translated "nests" everywhere else in Scripture, implies a small place to sleep or nestle, rather than a large cage. The job of caring for the animals may have been difficult, but our gracious God would have seen to it that it was possible. Questions like these are no cause for compromise. JDM

mazaje:

Your delusion knows no bounds. . . . kent hovind has never claimed to be a geologist. . . . so i wonder what you are talking about are you drunk?

what?

mazaje:

How are their observatıons not scientific? Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins

How is this observation not scientific?. . . . remember that you are yet to provide one geologist that agrees that polyatrate fossils were formed as a result of a global flood. . . . . . .
tell me why polystrate fossils found have no root?"

do u know the meaning of the word "observation"? . , what? who observed the above in red? when? where? and how?

That was not a mistake. . .if he had not shown you that you were wrong you would not have admitted you made a mistake. . . . .Its very clear from your previous post that you did not know that some polystrate fossis had roots because your repeated your fallacy twice on this thread. . . . . You repeated this lie twice on this thread alone. . . . ''Do u mind educating me on how else the polystrate fossils got to their present locations since they have no roots?''. . . . . .you twice said that polystrate fossils found had no roots but quickly change your positon when you were shown that some were found with their roots ıntact. . . . keep on deluding yourself is all I have to tell you. . . .

Its very clear from your debate with toneyb that you will hang on to anything no matter what the evidence against your positions are. You have not presented any scientific peer reviwed paper that says ALL the polystrate papers found in nova scotia have no roots. . . . where is your scientific peer reviwed papers that says all the polystrate papers found there have no roots?  Name one geologıst that agress that they were formed as a result of a global flood. . . . .

Toneyb has asked a question and you refused to answer. . . .If you claim that polystrate fossils are evidence for your global flood then why does their ages vary greatly  . . . they should all be of the same age if they were truly formed by a global flood no?

1. must u always degenerate all arguments to ur folly?

2. why are the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia with no root?

3. The mechanism that was used to detect the ages of the polystrate fossils. , .is it porous when the elements in question are in water?

noetic15:

what?

Is this what you have now been reduced to? Where did you get the idea that kent hovind is a geologist? who told you that? The guy has never claimed that he is a geologist so where did you get that LIE from?

do u know the meaning of the word "observation"? . , what? who observed the above in red? when? where? and how?

John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel observed it and made their publications. . . . .do you have any scientific evidence to show that their observations are false? provide it if you can. . . . .

1. must u always degenerate all arguments to your folly?

2. why are the polystrate fossils found in Nova Scotia with no root?

3. The mechanism that was used to detect the ages of the polystrate fossils. , .is it porous when the elements in question are in water?

Where is your evidence to show that all polystrate fossils found in nova scotia have no roots? I need to see the evidence for all your assertions. . . .Why do polystarte fossil vary greatly in age and sedimentary layers. . . . .

noetic,

Here are some resources for answering the critics of Noah's Ark that has been raised on this thread.  I hope they would be useful.

the people against global flooding- do they believe in global warming? The ice age?

arent these global events?

tpia.:

the people against global flooding- do they believe in global warming? The ice age?

arent these global events?

Don't mind them, they only believe it is global when it suits them, that is, when they want to perpetuate their lies.

OLAADEGBU:

noetic,

Here are some resources for answering the critics of Noah's Ark that has been raised on this thread.  I hope they would be useful.

OLAADEGBU:

This is an article by a scientist and theologian on why Christians should believe in a global flood.

thanks. . . .I would surely go through the links.

And here is a link showing that the earth is flat.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=78436c557456d36d969336320115c506&topic=554.0

Dont believe anything that you read. You are not a child. You must know the difference between fact and fiction.
Why have you not learned anything from all the posts showing you the overwhelming amount of scientific reasons why a global flood could not have happened?

Is it because you are desperately denying the possibility that the bible could be wrong, or is rational thinking beyond your capability.

Do you also believe that the earth is flat? and if not, why not?

The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the earth is round:

"It is He that sits upon the circle of the earth" (Isaiah 40:22).

This is not a reference to a flat disk, as some skeptics maintain, but to a sphere. Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world.

"It was the Lord who put it into my mind . . . I could feel His hand upon me . . . There is no question the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures. . . No one should fear to undertake any task in the name of our Saviour if it is just and if the intention is purely for His holy service. The gospel must still be preached to so many lands in such a short time. This is what convinces me." -- Christopher Columbus (from his diary, in reference to his discovery of "the New World".

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart; and lean not unto your own understanding." -- Proverbs 3:6

The Bible's fascinating facts

"And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly" -- 2 Peter 2:5

In Genesis chapter 6, God gave Noah the dimensions of the 1.5 million cubic foot ark he was to build.  In 1609 at Hoon in Holland, a ship was built after that same pattern, revolutionizing shipbuilding.  By 1900 every large ship on the high seas was inclined towards the proportions of the ark.

(as verified by "Lloyd's Register of Shipping" in the World Almanac).

tpia.:

the people against global flooding- do they believe in global warming? The ice age?

arent these global events?

Scientist have provided lots of evidence in peer reviwed papers to show that the world is warming up. . . .I do not believe in the ice age. . . . .do you have ANY scientific evidence from peer reviwed papers to show that the earth was once flooded? Even some christian now believe that the event recored in the bible was a local flood because of the lack of evidence to support the claim of a global flood. . . . . .there İs ZERO scientific evidence for it. . . .

OLAADEGBU:

noetic,

Here are some resources for answering the critics of Noah's Ark that has been raised on this thread.  I hope they would be useful.

OLAADEGBU:

This is an article by a scientist and theologian on why Christians should believe in a global flood.

Here is an a link showing that the Sun revolves around the earth(geocentric earth)

http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/geocentric.shtml

Link showing that the earth is flat

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

Link showing Alien Abduction and UFO experience.

http://www.abduct.com/

People cook up all kind of stories so that they can validate their delusions. . . .they provided ''scientific evidence'' for their postulations etc. . .

The FACT remains that there is no historical and scientific evidence to show that the noahis flood occured outside the pages of the bible. . . .

mazaje:

The FACT remains that there is no historical and scientific evidence to show that the noahis flood occured outside the pages of the bible. . . .

So, if you see evidence that the flood occured outside the Bible you will believe? It sounds absurd. If I claim that president Obama is in the White House and you insist that I can't prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House. This is how you skeptics accuse us of using circular reasoning by trying to prove the Bible by quoting from the Bible.

It is by looking into the White House that will provide the necessary proof or evidence. The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God. They also provide evidence that it is supernatural in origin.

OLAADEGBU:

So, if you see evidence that the flood occured outside the Bible you will believe?  It sounds absurd.  If I claim that president Obama is in the White House and you insist that I can't prove that the President lives in the White House by looking into the White House.  This is how you skeptics accuse us of using circular reasoning by trying to prove the Bible by quoting from the Bible.

If you tell me that a flood once covered the whole earth and your only evidence for it is some document that was written thousands of years ago by unknown writers then I will personally accept that you do not know what you are talking about. . . . The FACT still remains that the Noah's flood happened ONLY in the pages of the bible. . . . .the earth was NEVER flooded at once because there is NO evidence for it at all. . . .Why is it that majority of Christians and Jewish scientist refuse to accept that the flood was global? Is it because they know that there is absolutely no evidence for it?. . . .In fact many Christian now believe due to the absence of evidence for a global flood that the flood recorded in the bible was a local flood. . . .Any way we still have people like the convicted felon Kent Hovind and the discredited Ken Ham decieving people with very BOGUS claims which they call ''scientific evidence'' for the flood but the problem is that their bogus claims have been completely debunked by their fellow christian geologist. . . . .

It is by looking into the White House that will provide the necessary proof or evidence.  The fulfilled prophecies, the amazing consistency and the many scientific statements of the Bible prove it to be the Word of God.  They also provide evidence that it is supernatural in origin.

There is very little science in the bible and the science we know is completely different from what is recorded in the bible. . . .the bible very clearly says that the sun orbits the earth in 2 different places. . . . ıt clearly says that evil spirits cause diseases. . . .so the science of the bible is false when put side by side with normal science we know. . . . .The so called fulfilled prophecies are some of your favorite evidence that the bible is true, but why would a god inspire prophecies that invite more dissent when he could easily inspire prophecies that are difficult to dispute? Christian are yet to even agree on what these so called prophecies mean or represent. . . . so much confusion and maddness . . . .