Global Flood explains Oil Deposits and Geological layers

a reply to: cooperton

Do you actually read and perhaps more importantly understand the papers you cite?

I mean I don't either but I'm not using them to claim the world flooded 4,000 years ago and that the total accumulated human knowledge of geology and biology are naught but lies.

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: cooperton

Do you actually read and perhaps more importantly understand the papers you cite?

I mean I don't either but I'm not using them to claim the world flooded 4,000 years ago and that the total accumulated human knowledge of geology and biology are naught but lies.

Hmmmm, not so much lies but suppressed knowledge and some lies.
It only takes about 10 %lies to manipulate history and science for control type scenarios.

I see this in microbiology and anthropology.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

And I would make a bet in Las Vegas that you have never spent 5 minutes in a chemistry lab. That's why people like you and Cooperton demonstrate your ignorance ad infinitum. You don't have the credentials, you don't have the lab time, you have nothing but some mythological ideology that you attempt to support by deliberate, willful ignorance.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
The irony is that religious folks never entertain the idea that their holy books could be part of that 10% of lies.

They see it everywhere else but not in their "stories".

a reply to: cooperton

You are projecting. You're the one biased about evolutionary theory, disregarding any evidence that shows it's not plausible.

I'm sorry to say but it's you projecting here. I'm just following the actual real science and consensus of real scientists and not some creationst pesudo science.

Science is a ever-progressing field, but you want it to be stuck on the mutant ape theory forever.

Your showing your bias here with your negative 'mutant' ape comment. Science has progrest here in this field too. We now know that Human Evolution is more like a bush than a tree and that our ancestors excisted at the same time as other Homo species.

And I see you're still stuck on the mantle and superfical..I mean supercritcal water!! There isn't enough to flood the world over 5.5 miles above sea level, its stuck in the composition of things like ringwoodite.

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

And I would make a bet in Las Vegas that you have never spent 5 minutes in a chemistry lab. That's why people like you and Cooperton demonstrate your ignorance ad infinitum. You don't have the credentials, you don't have the lab time, you have nothing but some mythological ideology that you attempt to support by deliberate, willful ignorance.

I am willing to bet that less than 1% lab workers understand anything I know about soil microbiology.
The cbd boon proved that.
And add this in considering I started with an understanding with gut microbiome that began 30 years ago in order to understand my own health.
Now consider this.
The gut and soil incorporate the same, almost exact microbiome for either an aerobic or anaerobic state when considering health for either.
Which is why healthy soil equates to plants that can be your true medicine.
And me, being a vermiculturist I know these things uniquely and intimately in recognizing you and I are really nothing much more than dirt eating worms.
I do have the ability to read microscopic works and read a lot of white papers because I own a biotechnology company (one product) and used to sell a nutriceutical product for an International company that had proprieryapplications for glycoprotein support with glycans.
I am way more into the theoretical science aspect than lab work or lab technician.
I can read and think

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
The irony is that religious folks never entertain the idea that their holy books could be part of that 10% of lies.

They see it everywhere else but not in their "stories".

Yes.
We all have presuppositions to seek and validate our individual beliefs and superstitions.
Faith most certainly must be tested to grow..
I try not to be religious in regards to faith.
God hates religion.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
I try not to be religious in regards to faith.

Yet here you are arguing page after page that this story must be true, for what other reason than a religious reason?

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
I try not to be religious in regards to faith.

Yet here you are arguing page after page that this story must be true, for what other reason than a religious reason?

And I believe you and some others are more religious about this topic than most Christians who simply work with faith alone in Christ Yahshua.
Some of you have a religious fervor equal to jihadis

Lol, or Greta Thornberg, "HOW DARE YOU"

I SUBMIT THE OP HAS NO RIGHT TO CONTINUE THIS DEBATE UNTIL HE ANSWERS TO THE PLOT HOLE.

Screw his ineptitude with the 'water' in the mantle, there's more damaging evidence against this.

Why is he using fossils from the Carboniferous period to back up a 4500 year old flood claim?

And saying unequivocally this could ONLY have been made by a VERY VERY VERY recent flood and not about 310 MYA?

Start there. Start with the massive false dilemma. Dispute the dating of the Joggins Formation if you don't believe in isotopes.

a reply to: Degradation33

Good luck. That requires some knowledge of geology .. he obviously has none. He hasn't even answered the 'simple' question of how koalas and Kangaroos got from Australia to the Middle East for Noahs boat ride. Still waiting on that one ....

a reply to: FlyersFan

He hasn't even answered the 'simple' question of how koalas and Kangaroos got from Australia to the Middle East for Noahs boat ride.

I bet that makes him hopping mad.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
And I believe you and some others...

That is also a result of your religiousness. You think we feel as strongly as you about the topic. I'm sure many of the people you have in mind would be willing to accept that a global flood had happened if you could just provide the evidence.

They/I don't accept your evidence because it is lacking, not because they/I pray at the altar of science.

Also, personally, I could see how people could have just made up this story, along with all of the bible. So, no, it isn't religious faith in science, it is distrust of humans, especially when they claim to have a message from god.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

If you knew about soil microbiology, you would know some chemistry and obviously you don't. Your comments give you away.
The organic byproducts of decomposition should be a no-brainer for you. You should understand the role of oxygen in decomposition reactions. You may grow worms, but you're no vermiculturist by profession otherwise you would put the lid on Cooperton's ridiculous hypothesis.

You're into theoretical science? What the hell does that mean? Can you write a set of equations for Cooperton's flood hypothesis? A lab technician is a SPECIALIST. They know what role they play inside and out. If they're in a molecular biology lab, they know molecular biology techniques. If they're in an organic chemistry lab, they know organic chemistry inside and out.

There's a lot of people around here, including myself, who have spent most of their adult life in laboratories. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue what goes on in a lab or you wouldn't make such a stupid statement:

I am way more into the theoretical science aspect than lab work or lab technician.
I can read and think

I think you're just another phony baloney like Cooperton.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
And I believe you and some others...

That is also a result of your religiousness. You think we feel as strongly as you about the topic. I'm sure many of the people you have in mind would be willing to accept that a global flood had happened if you could just provide the evidence.

They/I don't accept your evidence because it is lacking, not because they/I pray at the altar of science.

Also, personally, I could see how people could have just made up this story, along with all of the bible. So, no, it isn't religious faith in science, it is distrust of humans, especially when they claim to have a message from god.

The biggest scientific problem you have for your side is in tracing rh- through the dna haplogroups.
It all began in the caucusus. Ot is incontrovertable. Right to where the oldest winery in the world is.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
The biggest scientific problem you have for your side is in tracing rh- through the dna haplogroups.
It all began in the caucusus. Ot is incontrovertable. Right to where the oldest winery in the world is.

Nope, I honestly don't care about rh-, that is you bag, man.

Not sure how a winery from over a thousand years before Noah proves the flood story. If anything it shows people were doing their thing and some never stopped, due to a world flood or anything else.

Noah and his family re-built the winery after the flood. Amongst the first things they did in fact.

They had to produce the appropriate intoxicant required for what would no doubt be the harrowing prospect of repopulating mankind through multi-generational incest.

a reply to: Ohanka

I suppose if his magic boat was full of Psilocybin instead of millions of pairs of animals that might explain a lot.

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

If you knew about soil microbiology, you would know some chemistry and obviously you don't. Your comments give you away.
The organic byproducts of decomposition should be a no-brainer for you. You should understand the role of oxygen in decomposition reactions. You may grow worms, but you're no vermiculturist by profession otherwise you would put the lid on Cooperton's ridiculous hypothesis.

You're into theoretical science? What the hell does that mean? Can you write a set of equations for Cooperton's flood hypothesis? A lab technician is a SPECIALIST. They know what role they play inside and out. If they're in a molecular biology lab, they know molecular biology techniques. If they're in an organic chemistry lab, they know organic chemistry inside and out.

There's a lot of people around here, including myself, who have spent most of their adult life in laboratories. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue what goes on in a lab or you wouldn't make such a stupid statement:

I am way more into the theoretical science aspect than lab work or lab technician.
I can read and think

I think you're just another phony baloney like Cooperton.

Yawn.
If you say so

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

If you knew about soil microbiology, you would know some chemistry and obviously you don't. Your comments give you away.
The organic byproducts of decomposition should be a no-brainer for you. You should understand the role of oxygen in decomposition reactions. You may grow worms, but you're no vermiculturist by profession otherwise you would put the lid on Cooperton's ridiculous hypothesis.

You're into theoretical science? What the hell does that mean? Can you write a set of equations for Cooperton's flood hypothesis? A lab technician is a SPECIALIST. They know what role they play inside and out. If they're in a molecular biology lab, they know molecular biology techniques. If they're in an organic chemistry lab, they know organic chemistry inside and out.

There's a lot of people around here, including myself, who have spent most of their adult life in laboratories. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue what goes on in a lab or you wouldn't make such a stupid statement:

I am way more into the theoretical science aspect than lab work or lab technician.
I can read and think

I think you're just another phony baloney like Cooperton.

Yawn.
If you say so

Thank you for proving my point. Next...................