| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"MarkA" |
| Date: |
27 Aug 2006 04:50:13 PM |
| Object: |
Noah's Ark |
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
--
MarkA
(this space accidentally filled in)
.
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
28 Aug 2006 08:43:02 AM |
|
|
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built - but
it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it cannot,
sucessfully, float!
.
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
28 Aug 2006 09:11:50 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools
that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains
in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make
more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would
even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built -
but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it cannot,
sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build one
first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
--
MarkA
(this space accidentally filled in)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 05:03:51 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools
that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains
in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make
more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would
even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built -
but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it cannot,
sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build one
first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
.
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 11:36:14 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools
that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains
in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make
more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would
even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built -
but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it cannot,
sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build one
first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are in the final process of building one.
It's in Texas - near the site where they (fraudulently) claim man walked
along dinosaurs.
Of course, it is hundreds of miles from any ocean.
No doubt they will use the ark as evidence that the ark COULD be built, but
when challenged to make it float, they will say it's just a display museum.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 07:46:35 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:36:14 -0400, "ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@MYOB.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <12f8r82sru4f9b8@corp.supernews.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools
that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains
in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make
more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would
even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built -
but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it cannot,
sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build one
first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are in the final process of building one.
It's in Texas - near the site where they (fraudulently) claim man walked
along dinosaurs.
Of course, it is hundreds of miles from any ocean.
The melting Ice Caps will take care of that.
No doubt they will use the ark as evidence that the ark COULD be built, but
when challenged to make it float, they will say it's just a display museum.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 06:38:12 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids.
To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the
tools that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb
mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't
it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the
Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built
- but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it
cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 11:37:31 AM |
|
|
"MarkA" <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.29.11.38.10.349776@stopspam.net...
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids.
To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the
tools that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb
mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't
it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the
Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built
- but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it
cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
Good thing ......... 'else there'd be one hell of a lot of totally pissed
gophers out there!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 07:45:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:37:31 -0400, "ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@MYOB.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <12f8ragao5ji60b@corp.supernews.com>
"MarkA" <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.29.11.38.10.349776@stopspam.net...
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids.
To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the
tools that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb
mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't
it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the
Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built
- but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it
cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
Good thing ......... 'else there'd be one hell of a lot of totally pissed
gophers out there!
How would they get drunk?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
31 Aug 2006 10:44:14 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:38:12 GMT, MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in
alt.atheism
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids.
To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the
tools that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb
mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't
it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the
Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built
- but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it
cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
So they used lots of splinters.....
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 07:17:10 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:38:12 GMT, MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.11.38.10.349776@stopspam.net>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids.
To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the
tools that would have been available to the civilization in question*,
demonstrates that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved,
etc. IOW, he actually builds something similar, using only primitive
technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb
mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't
it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the
Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be built
- but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and it
cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold the
animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
Oops, sorry!
A natural enough mistake to make when considering usual Christian
Hieratic "moral" behaviour.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 10:37:09 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:47:10 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:38:12 GMT, MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.11.38.10.349776@stopspam.net>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the
Pyramids. To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and,
*using only the tools that would have been available to the
civilization in question*, demonstrates that a monolith can be
erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he actually builds
something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe,
among other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually
correct. Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to
climb mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark,
wouldn't it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that
construction of the Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be
built - but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and
it cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold
the animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
Oops, sorry!
A natural enough mistake to make when considering usual Christian Hieratic
"moral" behaviour.
I wouldn't even want to THINK about all the pissed-off female gophers
you'd have to deal with....
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
29 Aug 2006 07:45:06 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 15:37:09 GMT, MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.15.37.08.350105@stopspam.net>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:47:10 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:38:12 GMT, MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.11.38.10.349776@stopspam.net>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:33:51 +0930, Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:11:50 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
- Refer: <pan.2006.08.29.02.11.47.587615@nowhere.com>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:43:02 -0400, ZenIsWhen wrote:
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com...
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive
people can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the
Pyramids. To test his theory, he takes a group of students, and,
*using only the tools that would have been available to the
civilization in question*, demonstrates that a monolith can be
erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he actually builds
something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe,
among other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually
correct. Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to
climb mountains in the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark,
wouldn't it make more sense to begin by demonstrating that
construction of the Ark would even be possible?
The ark isn't the same as an immobile structure. Sure, it can be
built - but it CANNOT hold the creatures claimed in the bible - and
it cannot, sucessfully, float!
I'm not convinced it could even be built. Let's see the fundies build
one first, THEN we'll worry about whether it is seaworthy, could hold
the animals, etc...
They are going to have to 'tease' a lot of gophers...
It was made from "gopher wood", NOT "gopher woodies"!
Oops, sorry!
A natural enough mistake to make when considering usual Christian Hieratic
"moral" behaviour.
I wouldn't even want to THINK about all the pissed-off female gophers
you'd have to deal with....
If they are anything as dangerous as pissed-off female humans, then I
will respect your cautionary advice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
28 Aug 2006 12:47:25 AM |
|
|
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
31 Aug 2006 10:42:57 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
31 Aug 2006 10:24:38 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:42:57 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <rp0ef29hhsbjc07a891svqsdkjt0qp7m5g@4ax.com>
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 05:01:36 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:54:38 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:42:57 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <rp0ef29hhsbjc07a891svqsdkjt0qp7m5g@4ax.com>
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 05:42:24 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mdbhf2tprn1h9sh504bicn8v4ocf5m1hnb@4ax.com>
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:54:38 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:42:57 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <rp0ef29hhsbjc07a891svqsdkjt0qp7m5g@4ax.com>
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
03 Sep 2006 11:28:28 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 08:12:24 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mdbhf2tprn1h9sh504bicn8v4ocf5m1hnb@4ax.com>
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:54:38 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:42:57 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <rp0ef29hhsbjc07a891svqsdkjt0qp7m5g@4ax.com>
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
who missed the fluff
and said; "Dat's enuff!"
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
03 Sep 2006 03:30:54 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 09:28:28 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ak0mf2pauvfsnchg03di7uhtbmbvvtaksi@4ax.com>
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 08:12:24 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:36 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mdbhf2tprn1h9sh504bicn8v4ocf5m1hnb@4ax.com>
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:54:38 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:42:57 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <rp0ef29hhsbjc07a891svqsdkjt0qp7m5g@4ax.com>
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
who missed the fluff
and said; "Dat's enuff!"
An poltergeist poof.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
12 Sep 2006 10:31:39 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:00:54 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 09:28:28 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ak0mf2pauvfsnchg03di7uhtbmbvvtaksi@4ax.com>
[]
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
who missed the fluff
and said; "Dat's enuff!"
An poltergeist poof.
IOW not a 'breath of fresh air'
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
12 Sep 2006 04:06:13 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:31:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <3mkdg2hv0lhc7iutn60bq0mlmak7lupkm8@4ax.com>
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:00:54 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 09:28:28 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ak0mf2pauvfsnchg03di7uhtbmbvvtaksi@4ax.com>
[]
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
who missed the fluff
and said; "Dat's enuff!"
An poltergeist poof.
IOW not a 'breath of fresh air'
Gaspair, the very friendly ghost!
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
13 Sep 2006 08:52:33 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 06:36:13 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:31:39 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <3mkdg2hv0lhc7iutn60bq0mlmak7lupkm8@4ax.com>
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:00:54 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 09:28:28 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ak0mf2pauvfsnchg03di7uhtbmbvvtaksi@4ax.com>
[]
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
Typhoid Mary!
was a faerie.
Got up the duff,
by a ghost with puff,
????
who missed the fluff
and said; "Dat's enuff!"
An poltergeist poof.
IOW not a 'breath of fresh air'
Gaspair, the very friendly ghost!
Constant outgassing....
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim McGaughy" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 12:57:11 AM |
|
|
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
Sorry.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 05:02:14 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:57:11 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
<no carrier>
Sorry.
Shurrrrrreeeee NOW you say that......
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 06:35:52 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:57:11 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <ed8i3j097f@enews2.newsguy.com>
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
Sorry.
Right.
Get to the back of the line young man.
(There's always *one*, isn't there?)
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 05:02:50 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 21:05:52 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:57:11 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <ed8i3j097f@enews2.newsguy.com>
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
Sorry.
Right.
Get to the back of the line young man.
(There's always *one*, isn't there?)
One's the lonliest number especially when it's a three dog night.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
01 Sep 2006 05:46:00 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:02:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ifbhf25edko6mlgpdmqa6cr07nm7ft2he1@4ax.com>
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 21:05:52 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:57:11 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <ed8i3j097f@enews2.newsguy.com>
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
Sorry.
Right.
Get to the back of the line young man.
(There's always *one*, isn't there?)
One's the lonliest number especially when it's a three dog night.
Still getting 'flashbacks', I see!
I said before that that song about living on pianos was the most
nuseating libretto ever devised by "man", (and I use that term
advisedly), but little Johnny Farnham's "One (is the loneliest
number)" is easily the second most puke producing.
Even more so than Charlene's "I've been to paradise, but I've never
been to me" pile of steaming tripe!
That lot should give you recurring nightmares.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Noah's Ark |
03 Sep 2006 11:30:46 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 08:16:00 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:02:50 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <ifbhf25edko6mlgpdmqa6cr07nm7ft2he1@4ax.com>
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 21:05:52 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:57:11 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <ed8i3j097f@enews2.newsguy.com>
stoney wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:47:25 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In article <pan.2006.08.27.21.50.08.374038@nowhere.com>,
MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
I have seen a few documentaries that go something like this: an
anthropology professor comes up with a theory about how primitive people
can build something amazing, like Stonehenge, or the Pyramids. To test
his theory, he takes a group of students, and, *using only the tools that
would have been available to the civilization in question*, demonstrates
that a monolith can be erected, the stones can be moved, etc. IOW, he
actually builds something similar, using only primitive technology.
There are a depressing number of theists out there who believe, among
other things, that the biblical story of Noah is factually correct.
Rather than spending their time mounting expeditions to climb mountains in
the Middle East, looking for remains of the Ark, wouldn't it make more
sense to begin by demonstrating that construction of the Ark would even
be possible?
The theists should collect a small group of people, and, using only the
hand tools that Noah had, actually build an ark the size described in the
bible. Once built, they should put it in the water, and demonstrate that
it can stay afloat for a few months. Then, they should put a pair of
every "kind" of animal aboard, close it up, and have no contact with the
outside world for about two months or so.
One problem is that some of the more rabid fundies claim that Noah had
ALL 'kinds' on board, existing and extinct including dinosaurs. I think
that they would have problems finding a T. Rex or a Diplodicus these
days.
Once that is done, they will have demonstrated that the story of the ark
is *possible*, no matter how improbable. Right now, they don't even have
a demonstration of the possibility. I believe that some church in the
midwest is building a replica of the ark, but using modern construction
techniques (concrete, steel beams, etc). That doesn't count. Build one
the way Noah would have, then, we'll talk.
And build it in the middle of a Middle East desert using only materials
available in that region that were also available to Noah including
'gopher wood' whatever that was supposed to be.
Who carried the; malaria, ebola, polio, syphillis, mumps, typhoid, etc.,
etc., etc.?
<sheepishly raises hand>
I did it. It was me.
Sorry.
Right.
Get to the back of the line young man.
(There's always *one*, isn't there?)
One's the lonliest number especially when it's a three dog night.
Still getting 'flashbacks', I see!
Nah. They quit many years ago. HEY!!!!!!!!!!...............
I said before that that song about living on pianos was the most
nuseating libretto ever devised by "man", (and I use that term
advisedly), but little Johnny Farnham's "One (is the loneliest
number)" is easily the second most puke producing.
Even more so than Charlene's "I've been to paradise, but I've never
been to me" pile of steaming tripe!
That lot should give you recurring nightmares.
Nope. I don't remember those songs.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
| | | | | | | |
