Re: Rational thought process vs creationist 'thought' processes

On May 8, 3:38 pm, "s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <swa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
[snip]
> > Either way, the continents under your (ludicrious) hypothesis are
> > travelling away from each other at a (preposterous) rate that could
> > be observed by the ****d eye.  And absolutely no evidence exists for
> > such a claim either in the records of ancient peoples, geography, or
any
> > other form of physical history.
>
> How could there have been as the people were on the land/ Ark-boat and
> didn't have mapping skills. Apart from that they would have had to be
> above the land in some sort of a space-****p to see the shore line
> moving away from them.

Or wizzing along on the horizon!

Seriously, can you conceptualise the amount of energy required to
****ft an entire conteninet along the surface of the earth at a speed
it could be watched happening (because that is a concequnec of what
you propose)

How much energy would be required to split the sea floor and open it
at one end, and collapse it at the other, to allow this to happen.

Living in Australia you dont see many earthquakes, and no serious
ones.  Monstrous earthquakes of the likes unimgainable would have to
have occured for your hypothesis to hold: the entire surface of the
earth would be thrown into turmoil.