Re: Flood Evidence Found Using Google Earth

On Thu, 15 May 2008 18:52:43 GMT, "Pink Freud"
<somewhere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly:


>"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:iv0p24pfjdmdg92d2jk8thp5h3o5fn28g5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> On Thu, 15 May 2008 18:10:20 GMT, "Pink Freud"
>> <somewhere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly:
>>
>>>"adman" <72545@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> What really makes this astounding is that other geological
researchers,
>>>> using Google Earth, found characteristic features of a giant tsunami
in
>>>> the
>>>> Indian Ocean. The features are called chevrons, enormous deposits of
>>>> sediment pointing radially back to a common center. Analysis of 
>>>> satellite
>>>> sea-surface data led to the discovery of a crater ("Burckle Crater") 
>>>> that
>>>> seems to be about the right age, 5000 years or so. The crater would
have
>>>> created a tsunami with "waves 600 feet high" and deposited "25 feet
of
>>>> rain
>>>> globally".
>>>>
>>>>
http://wavespace.info/archives/3-Flood-Evidence-Found-Using-Google-Earth.html
>>>>
>>>> Is there no wonder there are hundres of flood stories from around the
>>>> world?
>>>
>>>Wow. That's incredible.
>>>
>>>Can you see Noah on Google Earth too?
>>
>> And this is the best the evolutionists can do,
>> when presented with the facts!  And yet,
>> they think that somehow, "sarcasm = proof".
>>
>> And what does that prove?  That the following
>> is the proper question:  Not too bright, huh?!
>>
>
>Pffttt. Brighter than thinking that evidence of a tsunami somehow makes a

>ludicrous biblical account true.

Thanks for proving my point!


>I have more respect for Christians who admit the Noah's ark story is some

>sort of fable than those who flail around desperately for evidence to 
>sup****t it.

In other words, you only have respect for "Christians"
who reject the Bible.  Yea, you're really bright, huh?!


>Can you not see how ridiculous this story is?

Can you not see how ridiculous you are for ignoring
the fact that there are too many flood areas to count
and yet, you insist that they're all separate floods?

Let's see...  In addition to the scientific evidence
showing a vast amount of floods, we also have
about 300 flood accounts, which you dismiss all of.

Of course, no archeologist, nor any textual criticist
(both valid sciences) would do this, but hey, as
long as you do to avoid believing, that makes it
all a lie, right?!

Not too bright, huh?!

-- 

Use the force, idiot!