The Exodus

"Prove it didn't exist."

That's not how it works... It is up to the person making the claim to provide proof of the occurrence. Show proof there was a global flood... Show proof that hasn't already been refuted over and over and over. Ron Wyatt was unable to do it.... I'm not holding my breath that anyone else ever will either.

"Disprove the Bible."
This planet was NEVER covered by water.... This planet is WAY more than 5+ thousand years old.... (acknowledging the fact that I haven't seen the docu. this thread is originally about) There is NO evidence to support the assertion that there were ever Jewish 'slaves' in Egypt.... It is biologically IMPOSSIBLE for 2 or 4 members of a species to populate (or even repopulate) the planet.... NO boat could carry 2 of every creature on this ball of rock....

"Anytime anything that could possibly be construed as Biblical evidence is produced, be sure character assassination is right behind it."
I think you're over-reacting, inferring slights were none exist, just because you WANT it to be 'true' and the sceptics/scientists/experts demonstrate over and over again that it isn't....
 

indyt

Active member
ClintonHammond said:
"Professionals built the Titanic, amateurs built the Ark."

Ya... but the Titanic is real.... "The Ark" isn't.... So, I'll stick to so-called "experts" thanks....

To quote the Israel Antiquities Authority, "Ron Wyatt is neither an archaeologist nor has he ever carried out a legally licensed excavation in Israel or Jerusalem... [His claims] fall into the category of trash which one finds in tabloids such as the National Enquirer, Sun etc."

Sorry CH, the ark is real. More and more evidence surfaces every decade.In fact there was yet another expedition in June 2006 by Bob Cornuke. They hiked above the tree line of one of the mountains of Ararat and found a black object jetting out of the side of the mountain. Come to find out it was wood. No trees can grow at this altitude and it would be impossible for any human to carry wood up the side of this mountain. This, satelite images and past expeditions give plenty of evidence that something man made is on that mountain.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Even "Creationist Geologists" criticize that 'find'... It's not petrified wood in the least... it's rock...
Again, an over-generalized statement...SOME question whether or not it's petrified wood.

And as for whether or not Jabal al-Lawzin Arabia is Sinai, Wyatt and Cornuke aren't the first to recognize it as such.

As for a "young earth" being incongruent with the evidence:

Geological strata could just as well, and more probably, sediment layers from a global flood than "epochs" of evolution. The circular reasoning of strata-fossil-strata dating is easily the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. And carbon dating is a pseudo-scientific crapshoot.

No extant proof of civilization prior to Biblical accounts.

Extant evidence that man saw dinosaurs. Cave painting and Ica stones alone are compelling enough, and the Bible backs up this hypothesis.

We can, and no doubt will, go on and on comparing and debating. Bottom line: critical thinking, real honest-to-goodness thinking for one's self, is a lost art. Most evolutionists spout textbooks rather than considered, self-generated thought. Most are still using long-disproven "facts" ('womb evolution' and the whale's pelvic bones) to further their propoganda.

Rare is the man who sees with his own eyes and thinks with his own mind.
 
"an over-generalized statement...SOME question whether or not it's petrified wood"
Most do.... at least it sure seems that the ones who aren't foaming at the mouth do....

"Geological strata could just as well, and more probably, sediment layers from a global flood than "epochs" of evolution."
Only to someone who doesn't know much about geology... Problems With Geological Strata As Flood Sediment

More probably??? Ya... that's why Young Earth is regarded as a fringe theory.... Because it's more probable.... *rollseyes*

Where are these cave paintings of man and dinosaurs together?!?!?!

Cause your "Ica stones" are nothing more than kitch aimed at duping money out of gullible tourists...

Ica Stones:Most Are Fake. The Rest Might Be Examples Of Pre-Columbian Art
 
Objective?!?!
Fine... I'll play kettle to your pot if you need me to..... Just so long as we BOTH know that is what's happening....
Or is Ad hominem all you care to bring to the table now?

I was hoping you'd have some more 'evidence' that could be easily brushed aside....

"Young Earth" is poppycock.... (One may as well advocate Hollow or Flat Earth) and the sources I've referenced so far are just SOME of the reasons why. It's a symptom of people thinking they already have the answers and then going out and look for the questions.... Then, when they don't FIND them, they try to tailor what they do find to fit the answers they think they already have. It doesn't work like that anywhere outside of Douglas Adams novels....

"Bigotry and bias, however..."
From the end of the article refuting Ica Stones.... "Creationists, mythohistorians, and extraterrestrialists are in a jihad against belief in evolution where apparently it is one's duty to make the preposterous seem plausible."
 
Double post to get back On Topic....

The more I look around about the original Docu in question.... I donno.....

The Jerusalem Post says "None of the relics - or arguments - cited in the made-for-TV, state-of-the-art film, which is the result of six years of research, has been accepted by archeologists or any prominent archeological institution as proof for Jacobovici's theory."

When the all experts in a given field tell you you're wrong, 99 times outa 100, you probably are.... I guess it's POSSIBLE that Simcha Jacobovici has found some evidence that others have missed (That is when science is at it's most exciting) but from what I can glean from articles on his docu, that doesn't much seem to be the case....
 

indyt

Active member
Doc Savage said:
Again, an over-generalized statement...SOME question whether or not it's petrified wood.

And as for whether or not Jabal al-Lawzin Arabia is Sinai, Wyatt and Cornuke aren't the first to recognize it as such.

As for a "young earth" being incongruent with the evidence:

Geological strata could just as well, and more probably, sediment layers from a global flood than "epochs" of evolution. The circular reasoning of strata-fossil-strata dating is easily the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. And carbon dating is a pseudo-scientific crapshoot.

No extant proof of civilization prior to Biblical accounts.

Extant evidence that man saw dinosaurs. Cave painting and Ica stones alone are compelling enough, and the Bible backs up this hypothesis.

We can, and no doubt will, go on and on comparing and debating. Bottom line: critical thinking, real honest-to-goodness thinking for one's self, is a lost art. Most evolutionists spout textbooks rather than considered, self-generated thought. Most are still using long-disproven "facts" ('womb evolution' and the whale's pelvic bones) to further their propoganda.

Rare is the man who sees with his own eyes and thinks with his own mind.

Preach it brother. I hope you are enjoying this conversation with CH. CH and I have battled many times in the past. It is always fun!!:dead:
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
mutters under his breath

a civil arguement, here at the Raven. It can't be.

Sorry about that, back to the thread, it is a pleasure to read the two sides of this, I am being enlightened.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
The more I look around about the original Docu in question.... I donno.....
Shows you how far OT I got, which documentary is this?

ClintonHammond said:
I guess it's POSSIBLE that Simcha Jacobovici has found some evidence that others have missed ....
Who is this Jacobovici, and what is the evidence/theory?
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Read the thread Doc..... *sigh*
:eek:

That still doesn't give me the details on the theory. I've read some suppositions of volcanic activity resulting in the Nile becoming 'blood' ; is this more of the same?
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
I don't care one way or the other if you like or don't like me....
You're so charming...

My problem with this theory is the aforementioned "heaping up" of the waters on either side of the path through the Red Sea (Exodus 14:22, 15:8). The Bible states that they went through on dry land because a wind blew across the path, and that the waters were a wall on the left- and right-hand side. Chariot wheels would get stuck in a recently-exposed sea bed.

I'm not afraid to suppose the supernatural has a plausible and provable bearing on the human events.
 
"You're so charming..."
Also irrelevant... unless Ad hominem is the only ball you brought to this game

"The Bible states that they"
What was it Indy said? We cannot afford to take mythology at face value....

Or as the "Treasury of American Folklore" says....
"You can't always have things like they are in poetry. Poetry ain't what you'd call truth. There ain't room enough in the verses."


"supernatural"

Ha... James Randi has a million bucks with your name on it, if you can show an iota of proof.... I don't suspect that money is gonna change hands any time soon
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
... unless Ad hominem is the only ball you brought to this game...
You seem to be overly sensitive. I have nothing to gain by attacks on your character. Or are you just intent on provocation?
ClintonHammond said:
We cannot afford to take mythology at face value....
Again with the provocation. You believe your religion (namely, evolution) and it dictates your paradigm of interpretive evidence. I believe mine. No matter how vocal or venomous you get, that truth won't change.
ClintonHammond said:
... James Randi has a million bucks with your name on it.
From what I've seen of Mr. Randi, he seems like a very intelligent man. But his mention has no bearing on the conversation.

To stay on topic, most viewpoints operate under the premise that the Exodus crossing occurred at the Gulf of Suez. I think the account and what evidence is available lends more credence to an Aqaba crossing. Logically, the Sinai peninsula has been gone over with a couple thousand fine-toothed combs. If any evidence of a nomadic nation of that magnitude existed there, it would have been found.

Operating under the premise that I believe the Bible to be true, searching elsewhere for evidence is the next logical step. Unfortunately, access to Jabal al-Lawz is restricted by the Saudi government.

Relating that back to the conversation, most people espousing volcanic activity (and this documentary isn't the first) operate on the first above-mentioned premise.

Now, if we can continue without vitriol...
 
Top