Noahs Ark and the Biblical World Wide Flood Never Happened

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: FlyersFan

'ALL the science, all the anthropology, all the geology, all the archaeology, all the information gathered says that the aboriginal people have a 50,000 year history with tens of thousands of years of it in Australia ... 10s of thousands ... NOT just one or two thousand like you try to claim."

I'm afraid that none of that will change closed minds and dogmatic fundamentalist religious beliefs.

If there was evidence for it I would be open to it. But She just admitted there is no evidence that can be found... Finally... I knew it the whole time (I actually read the article)

A good rule of thumb for investigating scientific matters is that the evidence should be clear and easily accessible. If it's some occultish sort of 'trust the science' deal then it is likely wrong.

a reply to: cooperton

No evidence, just your say so.

You have been provided with evidence.

You choose to reject it.

That's your problem and I'm done with it.

Carry on regardless.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

No evidence, just your say so.

You have been provided with evidence.

No I wasn't. Flyersfan just admitted there's nothing she could find online regarding the data:

originally posted by: FlyersFan
There is no raw data online to be posted.

so many pages of posts and she finally admits there is no raw data to support what they are saying about the Australian aborigines

You choose to reject it.

I am merely not accepting the claim because there's no good evidence to suppose it would be true.

originally posted by: cooperton
But She just admitted there is no evidence that can be found... .

Incorrect. You don't tell the truth. Shame on you.
There is PLENTY of evidence. It's just not online.
It's in the universities and the science based centers.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Incorrect. You don't tell the truth. Shame on you.
There is PLENTY of evidence. It's just not online.
It's in the universities and the science based centers.

So secret they couldn't even publish it online in a journal like real empirical science? How do you know about this secret information that is not online and is hidden in universities and "science based centers"?

Don't you get it yet? There is no evidence. They are guessing. You've been ridiculing me this whole time merely for calling out that your sources are bunk and have no basis in empirical data. It's just made-up. Sorry to ruin santa claus for you

originally posted by: cooperton
Flyersfan just admitted there's nothing she could find online regarding the data.

Not finding something online doesn't mean 'there is no evidence'.
That is extremely disingenuous on your part.

There is mountains of evidence supporting the fact that aborigines have a 50,000 year history with tens of thousands of year in Australia. The experts in the field work with it. They know what they are doing with it. You do not.

I am merely not accepting the claim because there's no good evidence to suppose it would be true.

The 'good evidence' is seen by the experts. They synopsis it for the lay people to understand. You don't have a degree in anthropology or geology or archeology or Australian history or science at all. You wouldn't know what you were looking at.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Not finding something online doesn't mean 'there is no evidence'.
That is extremely disingenuous on your part.

Well you would think that the article that made the claim would have the evidence! They do not. So therefore I can safely assume there is not some hidden library of knowledge that the Australian aborigines have been keeping regarding their vast settlement in Australia.

There is mountains of evidence supporting the fact that aborigines have a 50,000 year history

Mountains are obvious, the evidence for aborigines being there for 50,000 years is not. Otherwise you would be able to find it, like the ease with which you can find a mountain.

originally posted by: cooperton
So secret they couldn't even publish it online in a journal like real empirical science? How do you know about this secret information that is not online and is hidden in universities and "science based centers"?

It's not secret. I just don't see it online. It could be there. It may not be. SO what?

Don't you get it yet? There is no evidence. They are guessing.

You are making that up.

You've been ridiculing me this whole time merely for calling out that your sources are bunk and have no basis in empirical data. It's just made-up. Sorry to ruin santa claus for you

And I'll keep calling you out for rejecting the science and the facts. You claiming it's made up is a falsehood. Shame on you.

ALL the science, all the anthropology, all the geology, all the archaeology, all the information gathered says that the aboriginal people have a 50,000 year history with tens of thousands of years of it in Australia ... 10s of thousands ... NOT just one or two thousand like you try to claim.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
It's not secret. I just don't see it online. It could be there. It may not be. SO what?

What do you mean "SO what?" You've been brow-beating me about how there's so much evidence but you can't find one single example!?

ALL the science, all the anthropology, all the geology, all the archaeology, all the information gathered says that the aboriginal people have a 50,000 year history with tens of thousands of years of it in Australia ... 10s of thousands ... NOT just one or two thousand like you try to claim.

You just admitted you can't find any evidence!

Do you think this is some grand conspiracy to refuse to publish this vast knowledge about Australian aborigines? No, it is simply the fact that there is no concrete evidence for the assertions.

originally posted by: cooperton
Mountains are obvious, the evidence for aborigines being there for 50,000 years is not. Otherwise you would be able to find it, like the ease with which you can find a mountain.

Mountains are obvious .... so where is the mountains of evidence for Noahs flood? DOESN"T EXIST.

The evidence for the aboriginals is there. The experts are dealing with it. You are desperate to claim they made It up. That's pretty pathetic. The synopsis of what they have is out for all to see.

When did aboriginal people first arrive in Australia
Abstract - Stanford University
Genetic Analysis Aboriginal Long History Australia

originally posted by: cooperton
You just admitted you can't find any evidence!

No I didn't. I said the raw data isn't online that I know of. The evidence is online - synopsis from the experts , Your continued attempts to claim there is no evidence is disingenuous at best. Again .. shame on you.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

Mountains are obvious .... so where is the mountains of evidence for Noahs flood?

-Marine fossils on mountains, especially mountains that are not on the edges of tectonic plates.

-Large boulders sitting in the middle of nowhere beyond the reach of theorized glacial zones

-Corroborating accounts from various cultures around the world

-Vast bodies of water beneath the earth's crust

-high elevation water erosion exhibited all around the world

The evidence for the aboriginals is there.

Yet you can't name one example.

originally posted by: cooperton
Yet you can't name one example.

I just posted three links full of scientific information on this subject. It would have taken you 20 minutes to read it. Yet you immediately posted this tripe. You obviously are not reading anything that people post. So why should anyone bother with you?

originally posted by: cooperton
-Marine fossils on mountains, especially mountains that are not on the edges of tectonic plates.

Plate tectonics. Already explained. Mountains were once sea floors. You don't understand plate tectonics.

-Large boulders sitting in the middle of nowhere beyond the reach of theorized glacial zones

Already explained. Glacier melts.

-Corroborating accounts from various cultures around the world

Nope. They contradict each other.

-Vast bodies of water beneath the earth's crust

Your claim on that was completely debunked.

-high elevation water erosion exhibited all around the world

Nope. Already discussed and shown that there is no erosion evidence of a world wide flood.

You fail to provide REAL evidence of a Noahs Flood.
You fail to explain all the evidence against it.

originally posted by: andy06shake

Pssh, the scale is way off on that rendition.

a reply to: cooperton

a reply to: cooperton

Yep. Should have been impossibly massive?

No sense of humour, I see.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Plate tectonics. Already explained. Mountains were once sea floors. You don't understand plate tectonics.

Mountains that are not on the edge of plates also have marine fossils.

gg

"Large boulders sitting in the middle of nowhere beyond the reach of theorized glacial zones"
Already explained. Glacier melts.

They exist in regions beyond glacial maxima:













Sorry I know real data and evidence can be overwhelming for you

"Corroborating accounts from various cultures around the world"
Nope. They contradict each other.

-Vast bodies of water beneath the earth's crust
Your claim on that was completely debunked.

Funny how you so zealously support a pop-sci blog article with no empirical evidence but then deny peer-reviewed research on another topic. It's as though you're totally biased

-high elevation water erosion exhibited all around the world
Nope. Already discussed and shown that there is no erosion evidence of a world wide flood.

Yeah just like all your Australian aborigenes evidence? Let me ask, if these continental plates were at one point under the water before tectonic movement put them upwards, why would there be no evidence of water erosion? You kind of shoot yourself in the foot with these continual baseless claims

You fail to provide REAL evidence of a Noahs Flood.

Given your standard of evidence is oldest.org, I am honored that you don't agree with me.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: cooperton

I think that's just some modern day pro-trans propaganda