I'll check with my Really Ancient History Book (The Old Testament) to see if there is a record of such an event.
Well, what do you know! There is!
Woody
America's first climate change refugees are preparing to leave an island that will disappear under t
- Thread starter dennishoddy
- Start Date
I'll check with my Really Ancient History Book (The Old Testament) to see if there is a record of such an event.
Well, what do you know! There is!
Woody
Ah yes... of course....
Anyways.... found it.
https://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/ScienceReligion/noahflud.htm
Guess "he" spared the non-believing Egyptians? among others......
Not true, there was only 197'4" of water over Ponca :<)
That wasn't in his physics studies.
Sadly, many people today don't realize that there are archeological finds that give great credence to, if not actually prove, some of the Biblical stories. And, just for grins, maybe I ought to bring up those nasty little petroglyphs and pictograms that indicate that perhaps mankind and dinosaurs lived together?
bring those up in a serious manner, and youll get more than grins
Oh I've got plenty of natural history too if the physics is too much.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/debunking-the-dinosaurs-of-kachina-bridge-96018102/
Kinda pointless don't you think?
In the end I'm not going to change your mind and you're not going to change mine. Y'all can go on denouncing science (except apparently the science that applies to your daily life) and I'll go on without believing your version of religion.
Yes, I've seen that report, which by the way was produced by two people who examined the Kachina Bridge dinosaur with binoculars. Others have actually stood on a ladder up to the ledge where the petroglyph is located and noted that there are "pecking indentions" in the surface to indicate that it isn't a mud stain.
Here is Senter and Cole's (the "scientists" who "debunked" the image) report:
Dinosaur Petroglyphs at Kachina Bridge Site
Phil Senter. Department of Natural Sciences, Fayetteville State University, 1200 Murchison Road, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301, USA
Sally Cole, archaeological consultant and author, Dolores, Colorado, USA (can be contacted via Phil Senter).
The author's comments as to their methods, stating how they examined the petroglyph.
Methods
"The hypothesis that a given petroglyph depicts a dinosaur makes four predictions: (1) the image is a single image, not a composite of separate images, (2) it depicts an animal, (3) its features cannot be reconciled with an interpretation that it depicts a member of the non-dinosaurian local fauna that was contemporaneous with its maker(s), (4) its features depict a specific, identifiable dinosaur, and (5) it is entirely human-made.
To test these predictions the four alleged dinosaur depictions were examined with the naked eye and with the aid of binoculars and telephoto lenses. Observations were made while the images were illuminated by direct and indirect sunlight and when they were in shadow. Accurate documentation and analysis of petroglyphs requires this level of observation and recording insofar as visibility varies considerably under changing light conditions, and it may be difficult if not impossible to perceive differences between natural and man-made manipulations of sandstone surfaces."
Other statements by Senter and Cole stated that the image was hard to get to with a ladder, thus the use of binoculars and telephoto lenses. However, others that have examined the image have been able to get to the image with the use of lightweight, telescoping ladders.
Here is Senter and Cole's (the "scientists" who "debunked" the image) report:
Dinosaur Petroglyphs at Kachina Bridge Site
Phil Senter. Department of Natural Sciences, Fayetteville State University, 1200 Murchison Road, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301, USA
Sally Cole, archaeological consultant and author, Dolores, Colorado, USA (can be contacted via Phil Senter).
The author's comments as to their methods, stating how they examined the petroglyph.
Methods
"The hypothesis that a given petroglyph depicts a dinosaur makes four predictions: (1) the image is a single image, not a composite of separate images, (2) it depicts an animal, (3) its features cannot be reconciled with an interpretation that it depicts a member of the non-dinosaurian local fauna that was contemporaneous with its maker(s), (4) its features depict a specific, identifiable dinosaur, and (5) it is entirely human-made.
To test these predictions the four alleged dinosaur depictions were examined with the naked eye and with the aid of binoculars and telephoto lenses. Observations were made while the images were illuminated by direct and indirect sunlight and when they were in shadow. Accurate documentation and analysis of petroglyphs requires this level of observation and recording insofar as visibility varies considerably under changing light conditions, and it may be difficult if not impossible to perceive differences between natural and man-made manipulations of sandstone surfaces."
Other statements by Senter and Cole stated that the image was hard to get to with a ladder, thus the use of binoculars and telephoto lenses. However, others that have examined the image have been able to get to the image with the use of lightweight, telescoping ladders.
