"... take care of it." -Genesis 2:15.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:I would love to see you demonstrate how a 200 gallon solid block of ice could fall on your head and flow around your pea brain like to 200 gallon bucket of liquid water pouring on kids at the water park.

I would love to see you demonstrate a glacier comprised of 200-gallon solid blocks of ice that fell from the sky.

You should learn about ice flowing. I know, I know, you would rather have your teeth extracted without anesthesia than learn something ... but I highly encourage you to keep your teeth in your head and to go the learning route, just once.

Swan wrote: Do you have any kids?

I do. They are the best. There are others who claim that their children are the best but they aren't referencing the official rankings.

Swan wrote:Did your wife name one after you?

Well ... my son is IBDaKidd and my daughter's middle name is "Hardstuff."

Swan wrote: or are you just another dead limb on the tree of existence?

Is somebody projecting again?

So how is it that you insist that much of the planet was buried under miles of ice while insisting that it is impossible for it to have been inundated under water?

Ice can not flow, it slides as a solid mass mowing down or pushing whatever it encounters.

You are physically and emotionally clueless.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Ice can not flow, it slides as a solid mass mowing down or pushing whatever it encounters.

Then again, you never were able to grasp what "flow" means.

You've posted pics before. Would you mind posting a pic of a glacier pushing something along that is not buried in it? Any such pic will do.

Thanks in advance.

The evidence of glaciation is just as clear as is your mental illness as you are demanding photos from a time in the past when cameras did not yet exist. You really should get the lobotomy that was recommended

Quaternary and Holocene Deposits of the Coastal Plain
HOLOCENE DEPOSITS - The modern beach and barrier islands around the New York Bight represent reworked sand material that began accumulating during a slow-down in sea level rise that began about 3-4,000 years ago. These modern coastal deposits overlie older Holocene estuary and fluvial sediments deposited behind barriers during a period ranging from 12,000 to about 7,000 years ago when sea level was lower. (These old barrier deposits are partially eroded and/or buried by younger sediments and exist anywhere from 2 to 20 kilometers seaward of the current shoreline). These ancient barriers are currently supplying sediment to offshore sand ridges on the continental shelf. Sand along the Hudson River and on Staten Island displays an abundance of angular feldspar and lithic fragments indicative of fluvial sedimentation in the harbor region when sea level was lower. Modern anthropogenic sediments and human activity has modified nearly all coastal and nearshore marine sedimentary environments.

WISCONSIN GLACIAL TILL - Wisconsin glacial deposits are apparent everywhere on Long Island, across northern Staten Island and throughout northern New Jersey. Glacial till consists of an unstratified mix of clay, silt and sand within a mix of rock material ranging from pebbles to giant boulders (derived from all rock source areas all the way from Manhattan to Central Quebec). On Long Island the terminal moraine is represented by two ridges that extend the length of the island: the southern, older Ronconcoma moraine and the northern, younger Harbor Hill moraine along the Sound. The terminal moraine extends across central New Jersey along a sinuous line from the vicinity of Perth Amboy to just south of the Delaware Water Gap on the western side of the state. Outwash sand and gravel deposits (altered by soil-forming processes) cover much of southern Long Island, southern Staten Island and areas south of the terminal moraine in New Jersey, particularly along the lower Delaware River Valley. Varved lake clays and swamp peat cover areas flooded by lakes that formed in lowland regions north of the terminal moraines shortly after the glaciers receded.

GARDENERS CLAY - This poorly consolidated clay underlies Wisconsin Age glacial deposits throughout southern Long Island, and it has been interpreted as occurring beneath the modern barrier spit of Sandy Hook. The Gardeners Clay contains a rich estuarine fauna with abundant foraminifera. Many of the fossils found on area beaches are probably derived from the Gardeners Clay or equivalent strata. The unit probably represents high-standing seas between advances of the latest Pleistocene (Wisconsin) glacier.

COLUMBIANA GROUP (early to late Quaternary) consists of three named units: the Pensauken; Bridgetown; and Cape May formations (oldest to youngest, respectively). Each represents different depositional environments throughout the region: the Pensauken and Bridgetown Formations are the result of glacial outwash and interglacial stade fluvial sediments preserved in stream terrace deposits (primarily along the "saddle" west of the Atlantic Highlands between Raritan Bay and the Delaware River Valley). The Cape May represents coastal plain deposits along the southern and eastern shores of New Jersey. The correlation of these terrestrial deposits with offshore areas are poorly resolved..

CAPE MAY FORMATION - (Late Pleistocene to Holocene) - The Cape May formation consists of surficial silts, sand and quartz-rich gravels along the coastal region of New Jersey; it represents coastal barrier and beach ridge sand and back bay estuarine deposits. The source of the clastic material is mostly from the Delaware River drainage supplemented by shelf sands and longshore drift from the Mid-Atlantic region. The progressive reworking of Cape May deposits is the source of much sand on beaches along the New Jersey coast.

PENSAUKEN FORMATION - (Late Pleistocene) - Wisconsin till unconformably overlies this unit that crops out along a trend from Staten Island to Trenton, NJ and southward along the Delaware River Valley. The unit consist of mixed detritus (eroded from older glacial material and exposed Coastal Plain formations), deposited in fluvial flood plain environments. The existence of the Pensauken Formation suggests that, for a time, the major drainage from the pre-Wisconsin glaciers was southward from the New York area toward Trenton into the lower Delaware River basin. Pedogenic weathering of the sediments suggests that it was deposited, in part, during a warm interglacial period. In the Raritan Bay area, the Pensauken Formation is equivalent to terrace gravel deposits between around 30 to about 60 feet above modern sea level. These terrace deposits contain an abundance of orange-to-brown iron-stained quartz pebbles in heavily weathered sediments that have endured long-term subaerial weathering.

BRIDGETOWN FORMATION - (Early Pleistocene) - This formation is limited to the terrace deposits along the Delaware River Valley. The precise age of the Bridgetown Formation is unclear, however, it consists of a deeply weathered mix of silt, sand, and gravel, representing fluvial environments. The Bridgetown probably signifies sedimentation during an earlier, pre-Wisconsin interglacial stade.

Now take your pills, because their are no 10 to 20 thousand year old photos.

Sheesh

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Again you are demanding 10,000 to 20,000 year old photos that do not exist.

I apologize for forgetting that you don't read very well.

I requested contemporary photos showing a glacier pushing objects along that were not buried within. Although I thought I was clear, I neglected to take you into account.

So, any pic of things being pushed along by a glacier will do.

Cheers.

You are the moron who does not understand that glaciers are in retreat not formation nor are they currently moving mountains as they once did. If you do not exercise some intelligence I am going to conclude that you actually might be working for the FBI as few are as dumb as you.

20,000 years ago there were no cameras silly.



You are the case for legal abortions.

CIAO

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Again you are demanding 10,000 to 20,000 year old photos that do not exist.

I apologize for forgetting that you don't read very well.

I requested contemporary photos showing a glacier pushing objects along that were not buried within. Although I thought I was clear, I neglected to take you into account.

So, any pic of things being pushed along by a glacier will do.

Cheers.

You are the moron who does not understand that glaciers are in retreat not formation nor are they currently moving mountains as they once did. If you do not exercise some intelligence I am going to conclude that you actually might be working for the FBI as few are as dumb as you.

20,000 years ago there were no cameras silly.



You are the case for legal abortions.

CIAO

So you bring up some picture some twit painted in their imagination as proof?????????!?

Actually I do not need to submit proof of anything.

Are you always so confused?

LOL, ass-holes are amusing when they toot like you.

So you admit you are preaching a religion. Gotit.

So in your mind the mountains that I ride my bike over are a religion instead of geological features, because you were not there to see the mountains form.

Again take your medications as the doctor prescribed, all of them, take with grain alcohol

Random statements. No apparent coherency. Try again.

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Actually glaciers covering half of the continent acted like bulldozers flattening some mountains and creating others.

Again, how do you imagine that happening? Flowing ice acts the same as flowing water (which it is) and flows around things. The only things that get moved around are those things that are contained within, i.e. buried.

You clearly haven't thought this through ... because you are simply regurgitating what you have been ordered to believe ... and you are OBEYING.

Your requirement to pretend that you are omniscient should have been your red flag that you are being ordered to say really stupid schytt.

Oh, by the way, you are saying some really stupid schytt.

Swan wrote:I ride my bike up and down the glacial moraines

... pretending that you are omniscient, that you can verify unobserved events of the distant past, and imagining the occurrences of those events exactly per the narrative you have been ordered to believe.

You go, Swan! You go!

I would love to see you demonstrate how a 200 gallon solid block of ice could fall on your head and flow around your pea brain like to 200 gallon bucket of liquid water pouring on kids at the water park. Can you give us a demonstration?

Do you have any kids? Did your wife name one after you? or are you just another dead limb on the tree of existence? faking your way from Chlorpromazine dose to Chlorpromazine dose, telling people that the past did not happen because they were not there to see it, begging people to argue with you on the internet because no one will socialize with you in the real World which you will claim is not real because you do not accept any definition of real.

So are you enjoying 6 dollar a gallon gas f---tard?



.

Random statements. No apparent coherency. Trolling. No argument presented.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:You are the moron who does not understand that glaciers are in retreat not formation

What religion is this you're spouting?

NEWS | June 18, 2019
Jakobshavn Glacier Grows for Third Straight Year

Swan wrote:nor are they currently moving mountains as they once did.

Who says that glaciers ever moved any mountains? Glaciers flow around mountains and, perhaps, erode them a little.

Oh wait! You claim that glaciers "push things along" because you've watched it happen so much over the many millennia. You can also "read" it from the moraines who "talk to you."

Swan wrote:20,000 years ago there were no cameras silly.

Too funny. I realize that you have no English reading proficiency so I should not have expected you to know what "contemporary" means and what "contemporary photos" are.

My bad, or in other words "It was a bad call, Ripley, it was a bad call."

LOL Jill Xiden is calling Mexicans tacos and you want to waste time on glaciers that have been melting for 20,000 years that everyone knows about?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/13/jill-biden-criticized-latino-americans-remark

Jill Biden has apologized for remarks in a speech to the civil rights and advocacy organization UnidosUS in which she likened the diversity of Latino Americans to breakfast tacos.

Speaking in Texas on Monday, the first lady said: "The diversity of this community – as distinct as the bodegas of the Bronx, as beautiful as the blossoms of Miami and as unique as the breakfast tacos here in San Antonio, is your strength."

Amid condemnation of the statement and her mispronunciation of the word "bodegas", the National Association of Hispanic Journalists said: "We are not tacos. Our heritage as Latinos is shaped by various diasporas, cultures and food traditions. Do not reduce us to stereotypes."

I never knew that Jill Xiden was so smart. Are you a breakfast taco? Do you have any friends that are breakfast taco's?

Gotta love idiots

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:You are the moron who does not understand that glaciers are in retreat not formation

https://strangesounds.org/2019/06/glacier-national-park-glaciers-growing.html

Glacier National Park Glaciers Are Actually Growing – Officials Quietly Remove All 'Glaciers Will Be Gone By 2020' Signs
Jun 8, 2019

Glaciers appear to be growing, not melting in recent years at Glacier National Park.
Officials at Glacier National Park (GNP) have begun quietly removing and altering signs and government literature which told visitors that the Park's glaciers were all expected to disappear by either 2020 or 2030.

Glacier National Park quietly removes its 'Gone by 2020' signs which stated glaciers were disappearing – because they're actually growing. Picture: U.S. National Park Service via Wikipedia

Famous glaciers appear to have been growing

Teams from Lysander Spooner University visiting the Park each September have noted that GNP's most famous glaciers such as the Grinnell Glacier and the Jackson Glacier appear to have been growing – not shrinking-since about 2010.

The centerpiece of the visitor center at St. Mary near the east boundary is a large three-dimensional diorama showing lights going out as the glaciers disappear.

Again idiot 20,000 years ago half the USA was covered in glaciers, as it was for millions of years before that. Proving climate change very real, which you now agree too because your new claim is that glaciation is increasing.

See now you see it my way as I always knew that you would

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Ice can not flow

Traleika Glacier is Surging Again After 60 years. Is the Muldrow Glacier Next?

The Muldrow Glacier cascades down a northern slope of Denali in view of visitors to Wonder Lake. While high in the mountains hides the Traleika Glacier, a tributary of the Muldrow. These iconic glaciers are known for their surging behavior. This behavior is a glacier's capacity to speed up and flow faster during an "active phase" before slowing down to a normal speed during a rest or "quiescent phase". These phases vary from surging glacier to surging glacier. An active phase can last for a few months to a few years while a quiescent phase can last decades.

Surging is not common, but Traleika and Muldrow are among several glaciers in the Alaska Range that do so. The reasons that some glaciers surge and others don't is only partly understood. In this case, it is likely because the Traleika and the Muldrow flow over the shattered, weak rocks of the Denali Fault.

A surging glacier may give the impression that it is expanding, but surging does not involve a significant change in the mass or volume of a glacier. Instead, surging is a change in the shape of the glacier. The change involves the rapid movement of ice from higher elevations of the glacier down towards the lower elevations. While this motion is occurring, several phenomena are evident:

Rapid surface acceleration
Greater than normal generation of crevasses and seracs
A wave of thick ice that progresses downglacier until the completion of the surge

Once the surge finishes, repeat surveys show that the upper glacier has thinned, while the lower glacier has thickened.



repeat photos of the traleika glacier shows a significant difference over the course of a year
Repeat photos of the Traleika Glacier show evidence that the glacier ice has thickened (the surface is higher, relative to the bedrock, than it was a year before) and also become more broken up with crevasses and seracs. For reference, the red box in each picture highlights the same dark rock.
The Muldrow Glacier last surged in 1956-1957. Observers of the event believed it was initiated by an earlier surge on the Muldrow's largest tributary, the Traleika Glacier. Glaciologist, Will Harrison, has speculated, based on an analysis of debris patterns on the glacier surface, that the Traleika/Muldrow system surges every 50 years or so. If he is right, we are due for another surge.

Our eyes and cameras are the traditional tools for detecting change. To the naked eye a surge appears as a zone of broken, crevassed ice sitting higher in the valley than it once did. During a Glaciologists made such an observation during a recent (September 2016) visit to Traleika Glacier. The area when compared with a similar photo from the year before, shows the Traleika Glacier has thickened and grown more crevassed.

Coming from the fool who does not believe that the Earth has a climate,

Swan wrote:
that is very profound, but wait wouldn't increased glaciation mean a cooling climate?

Swan wrote:
Nope not to you because you have already declared that the Earth as said has no climate.

Yawn

Swan wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
I have a high level of confidence that the people who wish AGW/CC to be true will find a way to explain this situation of expanding glaciers.It can not possibly be cyclical it has to be mans fault

They already have explained it as the massive warming is causing more snow. The sad thing is that idiots believe just like the morons commenting on this page believe that hacking a hacker is legal.

Morons are everywhere

https://www.youtube.com/c/ScammerPayback/featured

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Coming from the fool who does not believe that the Earth has a climate,

I did not write the article and I recognize that the earth has millions of climates. You are the one who believes there is a contradictory "global" climate that cannot be unambiguously defined because you know there is no such thing.

Swan wrote: wouldn't increased glaciation mean a cooling climate?

That depends. What is your unambiguous definition of the global Climate? Oh, that's right, you don't really believe there is such a thing, but the moment you do, you'll provide an unambiguous definition. I totally get it.

Yawn. LOL. ROTFYawning.

ICELANDIC GLACIERS ARE EXPANDING FOR THE FIRST TIME IN DECADES — GRAND SOLAR MINIMUM
DECEMBER 6, 2018

According to researchers from the University of Iceland, ALL Icelandic glaciers are projected to expand this year, making it the first time the glaciers wouldn't have shrunk year-on-year in a quarter of a century.

The researchers were shocked by the discovery that all of Iceland's glaciers, including Vatnajökull, Langjökull, Hofsjökull and Mýrdalsjökull, have expanded in the last twelve months, from autumn to autumn. With Mýrdalsjökull showing a really "significant addition of ice this year."

LOL, actually when glaciers expand a few or even a few hundred feet after contracting 900 miles there is no real expansion. Again NY was once 100 percent covered by a single glacier

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:You are the moron who does not understand that glaciers are in retreat not formation

What religion is this you're spouting?

NEWS | June 18, 2019
Jakobshavn Glacier Grows for Third Straight Year

Swan wrote:nor are they currently moving mountains as they once did.

Who says that glaciers ever moved any mountains? Glaciers flow around mountains and, perhaps, erode them a little.

Oh wait! You claim that glaciers "push things along" because you've watched it happen so much over the many millennia. You can also "read" it from the moraines who "talk to you."

Swan wrote:20,000 years ago there were no cameras silly.

Too funny. I realize that you have no English reading proficiency so I should not have expected you to know what "contemporary" means and what "contemporary photos" are.

My bad, or in other words "It was a bad call, Ripley, it was a bad call."

LOL Jill Xiden is calling Mexicans tacos and you want to waste time on glaciers that have been melting for 20,000 years that everyone knows about?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/13/jill-biden-criticized-latino-americans-remark

Jill Biden has apologized for remarks in a speech to the civil rights and advocacy organization UnidosUS in which she likened the diversity of Latino Americans to breakfast tacos.

Speaking in Texas on Monday, the first lady said: "The diversity of this community – as distinct as the bodegas of the Bronx, as beautiful as the blossoms of Miami and as unique as the breakfast tacos here in San Antonio, is your strength."

Amid condemnation of the statement and her mispronunciation of the word "bodegas", the National Association of Hispanic Journalists said: "We are not tacos. Our heritage as Latinos is shaped by various diasporas, cultures and food traditions. Do not reduce us to stereotypes."

I never knew that Jill Xiden was so smart. Are you a breakfast taco? Do you have any friends that are breakfast taco's?

Gotta love idiots

Random unrelated comments. No apparent coherency. No argument presented. Evasion. Answer the question put to you.

Swan wrote:Says the moron who claims that both covid and cancer have never killed anyone,

Swan wrote:PS In addition to eggplants I also have 15 varieties of tomatoes 10 types of peppers and two types of corn, 3 types of squash and cucumbers in addition to carrots broccoli brussels sprouts and two types of parsley.

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the moron who claims that both covid and cancer have never killed anyone,

Too funny! I love how you threw "and cancer" in there without missing a beat. As it stands, I have become accustomed to tmiddles' level of misrepresenting my position and yours only merits a mild chuckle.

Swan wrote:PS In addition to eggplants I also have 15 varieties of tomatoes 10 types of peppers and two types of corn, 3 types of squash and cucumbers in addition to carrots broccoli brussels sprouts and two types of parsley.

I bet you make some awesome salads. Have you tried preparing garlic brussel spouts?

.

Swan wrote:What question?

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:What question?

He meant "Address the request for a contemporary photo of a glacier pushing something along." I had asked you for this twice and you EVADED by mentioning that cameras did not exist in the distant past.

Please post a contemporary photo of a modern glacier pushing something along that is not buried within as you claim they do.

I found one example on the internet of an Antarctic glacier. You can see how it is pushing the envelope

.

Swan wrote:LOL if you did not watch the sprouts grow, does that mean that you can't prove that they grew?

Swan wrote:NY was once covered by a single glacier in the glacial maximum 20,000 years ago, your opinion is not needed

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:LOL if you did not watch the sprouts grow, does that mean that you can't prove that they grew?

You are mocking a position that I do not have, and you are not mocking because you are instead EVADING the position that I do have.

Regarding your attempted mockery, the philosophy you are discussing is immortalized in the term "Schroedinger's Cat". You should read up on it.

The position that I do have, that you EVADE, is that you are not omniscient and that you do not know what unobserved events occurred in the distant past. You EVADE my position because you know that I am correct and that you are wrong, and that it reveals the petty silliness of your insistence that others ascribe your same reverence and significance to objects that you consider to be sacred relics. You need for others to believe your creation narrative and your account of "history."

i.e. your religion renders you intolerant of differing views and requires you to believe that your faith imparts omniscience and great wisdom.

... but if your faith is your motivation to raise vegetables and other excellent produce, then have at it.

I will eagerly await for Fall to learn how your garlic Brussel sprouts turned out.

Swan wrote:NY was once covered by a single glacier in the glacial maximum 20,000 years ago, your opinion is not needed

I am an atheist. I don't have your theism. I don't have any theism. I therefore have no reason to either accept or reject your faith except for its adherence to logic/math and science, and I do not accept the notion that your faith somehow imparts any sort of knowledge or wisdom but instead causes belief in egregious misconceptions, e.g. ice and water somehow does not flow, that all moraines were somehow under ice at the same time, certainty of unobserved events, etc ..

You EVADE requests to explain why any rational adult should believe any of that, presumably because you don't really believe any of it either.

.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:LOL if you did not watch the sprouts grow, does that mean that you can't prove that they grew?

You are mocking a position that I do not have, and you are not mocking because you are instead EVADING the position that I do have.

Regarding your attempted mockery, the philosophy you are discussing is immortalized in the term "Schroedinger's Cat". You should read up on it.

The position that I do have, that you EVADE, is that you are not omniscient and that you do not know what unobserved events occurred in the distant past. You EVADE my position because you know that I am correct and that you are wrong, and that it reveals the petty silliness of your insistence that others ascribe your same reverence and significance to objects that you consider to be sacred relics. You need for others to believe your creation narrative and your account of "history."

i.e. your religion renders you intolerant of differing views and requires you to believe that your faith imparts omniscience and great wisdom.

... but if your faith is your motivation to raise vegetables and other excellent produce, then have at it.

I will eagerly await for Fall to learn how your garlic Brussel sprouts turned out.

Swan wrote:NY was once covered by a single glacier in the glacial maximum 20,000 years ago, your opinion is not needed

I am an atheist. I don't have your theism. I don't have any theism. I therefore have no reason to either accept or reject your faith except for its adherence to logic/math and science, and I do not accept the notion that your faith somehow imparts any sort of knowledge or wisdom but instead causes belief in egregious misconceptions, e.g. ice and water somehow does not flow, that all moraines were somehow under ice at the same time, certainty of unobserved events, etc ..

You EVADE requests to explain why any rational adult should believe any of that, presumably because you don't really believe any of it either.

.

I accept your defeat, not that it means anything.

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:LOL if you did not watch the sprouts grow, does that mean that you can't prove that they grew?

You are mocking a position that I do not have, and you are not mocking because you are instead EVADING the position that I do have.

Regarding your attempted mockery, the philosophy you are discussing is immortalized in the term "Schroedinger's Cat". You should read up on it.

The position that I do have, that you EVADE, is that you are not omniscient and that you do not know what unobserved events occurred in the distant past. You EVADE my position because you know that I am correct and that you are wrong, and that it reveals the petty silliness of your insistence that others ascribe your same reverence and significance to objects that you consider to be sacred relics. You need for others to believe your creation narrative and your account of "history."

i.e. your religion renders you intolerant of differing views and requires you to believe that your faith imparts omniscience and great wisdom.

... but if your faith is your motivation to raise vegetables and other excellent produce, then have at it.

I will eagerly await for Fall to learn how your garlic Brussel sprouts turned out.

Swan wrote:NY was once covered by a single glacier in the glacial maximum 20,000 years ago, your opinion is not needed

I am an atheist. I don't have your theism. I don't have any theism. I therefore have no reason to either accept or reject your faith except for its adherence to logic/math and science, and I do not accept the notion that your faith somehow imparts any sort of knowledge or wisdom but instead causes belief in egregious misconceptions, e.g. ice and water somehow does not flow, that all moraines were somehow under ice at the same time, certainty of unobserved events, etc ..

You EVADE requests to explain why any rational adult should believe any of that, presumably because you don't really believe any of it either.

.

I accept your defeat, not that it means anything.

It doesn't. YOUR problem. Assumption of victory fallacy. Attempted proof by pivot.

Swan wrote:I accept your humble defeat with grace, just as long as you sign on the dotted line where it says MORON SIGN HERE

LOL the rest of this mountain is a thousand miles away, so did the wind blow this or a glacier pushed it?

Swan wrote:Pushed by a glacier or perhaps this guy carried it there for the photo

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Pushed by a glacier or perhaps this guy carried it there for the photo

That's what you are going to show. You are going to show this by posting an image of a glacier pushing (not pushed) something along ... that is not buried within of course, as you claim glaciers do, so that a rational adult can have a reason for believing this otherwise silly position of yours that glaciers push things along.

Swan wrote:Says the idiot who does not believe that there was an ice age, then post photo's of glaciers to prove such.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:LOL if you did not watch the sprouts grow, does that mean that you can't prove that they grew?

You are mocking a position that I do not have, and you are not mocking because you are instead EVADING the position that I do have.

Regarding your attempted mockery, the philosophy you are discussing is immortalized in the term "Schroedinger's Cat". You should read up on it.

The position that I do have, that you EVADE, is that you are not omniscient and that you do not know what unobserved events occurred in the distant past. You EVADE my position because you know that I am correct and that you are wrong, and that it reveals the petty silliness of your insistence that others ascribe your same reverence and significance to objects that you consider to be sacred relics. You need for others to believe your creation narrative and your account of "history."

i.e. your religion renders you intolerant of differing views and requires you to believe that your faith imparts omniscience and great wisdom.

... but if your faith is your motivation to raise vegetables and other excellent produce, then have at it.

I will eagerly await for Fall to learn how your garlic Brussel sprouts turned out.

Swan wrote:NY was once covered by a single glacier in the glacial maximum 20,000 years ago, your opinion is not needed

I am an atheist. I don't have your theism. I don't have any theism. I therefore have no reason to either accept or reject your faith except for its adherence to logic/math and science, and I do not accept the notion that your faith somehow imparts any sort of knowledge or wisdom but instead causes belief in egregious misconceptions, e.g. ice and water somehow does not flow, that all moraines were somehow under ice at the same time, certainty of unobserved events, etc ..

You EVADE requests to explain why any rational adult should believe any of that, presumably because you don't really believe any of it either.

.

I accept your defeat, not that it means anything.

It doesn't. YOUR problem. Assumption of victory fallacy. Attempted proof by pivot.

I accept your humble defeat with grace, just as long as you sign on the dotted line where it says MORON SIGN HERE

Swan wrote:
LOL the rest of this mountain is a thousand miles away, so did the wind blow this or a glacier pushed it?

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the idiot who does not believe that there was an ice age, then post photo's of glaciers to prove such.

A picture of a glacier proves an ice age?

Well then a picture of rain must prove the great flood.

Touche. ROTMFFYawning.
.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the idiot who does not believe that there was an ice age, then post photo's of glaciers to prove such.

A picture of a glacier proves an ice age?

Well then a picture of rain must prove the great flood.

Touche. ROTMFFYawning.
.

LOL so where did god get the 29,000 feet of water covering the entire Earth from and then where did it drain too?

Swan wrote:
Your idiocy is legendary, at least in the circus geek tent.

However on a serious note, did your Mother teach you that there was no ice age? or did your Dad beat it into you? Freud says that you are welcome to lie back on his couch and tell us about why your Mom did that?

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the idiot who does not believe that there was an ice age, then post photo's of glaciers to prove such.

A picture of a glacier proves an ice age?

Well then a picture of rain must prove the great flood.

Touche. ROTMFFYawning.
.

LOL so where did god get the 29,000 feet of water covering the entire Earth from and then where did it drain too?

Random incoherency. IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

Swan wrote:
Your idiocy is legendary, at least in the circus geek tent.

However on a serious note, did your Mother teach you that there was no ice age? or did your Dad beat it into you? Freud says that you are welcome to lie back on his couch and tell us about why your Mom did that?

Childish insults get you nowhere. Grow up.

Into the Night wrote:IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

Correct. I claimed the one-cubit tinted power windows.

Swan wrote:Actually goofy the story of the ark clearly states that the Earth was covered in water

17: ... and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

19: And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

Swan wrote:and since we know that Mount Everest is 29,031 feet tall then the water had to be at least that deep.

Swan wrote: So where did this water come from and where did it go?

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Actually goofy the story of the ark clearly states that the Earth was covered in water

Nope. It reads that the water prevailed upon the earth, not that the earth was covered. Also, you need to write "earth" in lower case, reflecting the meaning of "the ground" or "the soil" ... in that sense.

Let's look at what it reads:

17: ... and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

There was enough water to lift the ark off the ground.

19: And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

The hills were covered, which would be consistent with the ark being "lift" (lifted) off the ground.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

So 15 cubits did the waters rise from ground level. The subsequent clause is recognized as a poor translation due to a virtually endless chain of human errors generated by many generations of word of mouth recounting over centuries between differing languages, whereby "mountains" should have read "brush and trees" but of course, there will be disagreement to the effect of "there is never any error in either word of mouth recounting or in translations between languages."

Swan wrote:and since we know that Mount Everest is 29,031 feet tall then the water had to be at least that deep.

The waters prevailed 15 cubits (around 30 feet) from somewhere in the region of Mt. Ararat, which is thousands of miles from Mt. Everest.

Swan wrote: So where did this water come from and where did it go?

Wouldn't that be the same place that provided the water for your claimed ice age?

Now, presume that the ice age never happened, just the great flood in that particular region, and now you have a more reasonable account.

Once again, no mention of the whole world being under water.

.

duncan61 wrote:
ITN wrote
Ice cores do not measure temperature.Really

Apparently air bubbles are checked for composition.Its still very much guesswork

ITN wrote
Random statements. No apparent coherency. Trolling. No argument presented.

Why bother posting this on a discussion forum

Swan wrote:Actually the air bubbles in the cores may contain types of pollen that only grow at certain temperatures

Swan wrote: ... allowing for temperature guesses that may or may not be fully accurate

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Actually the air bubbles in the cores may contain types of pollen that only grow at certain temperatures

... and you might be totally confused about the temperature range within which the pollen grew back in the day, which you don't know because you can't travel back in time despite your religious belief that you can.

... and the temperature range of any pollen growth was probably affected/shifted by the amount of rainfall, humidity, and other factors ... which you cannot discern from an air bubble.

... and there is a substantive probability that the non-omniscient people who attempted to classify the pollen in the first place without being able to travel time, totally botched the job.

... and the specific temperature at the site of the captured air bubble, which might have been suffering a heat wave or a cold wave, was not the average global temperature, i.e. it was merely the temperature of that particular spot at that particular moment.

... and you can't tell the temperature of the distant past from an air bubble discovered today, even at that spot.

... and pollen, which really affords no temperature information and doesn't come with time/date tags or lat/long coordinates for point-of-origin, isn't even likely to be present in any given section of a core.

So yeah, it's what we know!

Swan wrote: ... allowing for temperature guesses that may or may not be fully accurate

Wait! Did you become James? How could ice cores somehow prevent guessing and speculation? Of course ice cores "allow for" guesses ... and none will carry any weight.

Have any ice cores been discovered with eggplants trapped in the bubbles?

.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:Says the idiot who does not believe that there was an ice age, then post photo's of glaciers to prove such.

A picture of a glacier proves an ice age?

Well then a picture of rain must prove the great flood.

Touche. ROTMFFYawning.
.

LOL so where did god get the 29,000 feet of water covering the entire Earth from and then where did it drain too?

Random incoherency. IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

Swan wrote:
Your idiocy is legendary, at least in the circus geek tent.

However on a serious note, did your Mother teach you that there was no ice age? or did your Dad beat it into you? Freud says that you are welcome to lie back on his couch and tell us about why your Mom did that?

Childish insults get you nowhere. Grow up.

Actually goofy the story of the ark clearly states that the Earth was covered in water

Swan wrote:
and since we know that Mount Everest is 29,031 feet tall then the water had to be at least that deep.

Swan wrote:
So where did this water come from and where did it go?

Swan wrote:
You also forgot to tell us how Noah fit the hundreds of thousands of antelope and deer in the ark to feed the carnivores

Swan wrote:
nor where he fit the over 6 million species,

Swan wrote:
or how a boat as big as Australia was built.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????

Swan wrote:
PS. CIAO, LOL did you hear that the CIA just indicted itself?

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

Correct. I claimed the one-cubit tinted power windows.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:IBdaMann never claimed any 29,000 feet of water covered the entire Earth.

Correct. I claimed the one-cubit tinted power windows.

Actually you said that all land was covered in water meaning that Mount Everest was covered requiring over 29,000 feet of water over current sea level over the entire globe.

PS. You write back and forth to yourselves very well

duncan61 wrote:
ITN wrote
Ice cores do not measure temperature.Really

Apparently air bubbles are checked for composition.Its still very much guesswork

duncan61 wrote:
ITN wrote
Random statements. No apparent coherency. Trolling. No argument presented.

Why bother posting this on a discussion forum