Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: tacticalogic
"The only difference in context is who's ox is getting gored."
Actually, it was really a strawman.

what you replied to (and excerpted) said: "So it is quite plausible that" [excerpt].
To which you replied:

What happened to not relying on unproven and untestable hypotheses?

We've seen flooding associated with volcanic activity, but the volcanic eruptions caused the flooding (melting ice and snow on the volcano). Not the other way around.



And what is interesting is what I said and you didn't include in your excerpt: "The flood is generally associated with volcanic activity:" [excerpt]

Very clever strawmen.
Where did I say the flooding caused volcanic activity?

What I did say is that the flood and volcanic activity are associated.

What you did was partially agree with something similar to what I said, that 'We've seen flooding associated with volcanic activity', but then you pulled out your strawman and said 'but the volcanic eruptions caused the flooding', which is totally irrelevant to a discussion about a universal flood.
(except for the fact that, as that article pointed out, volcanic eruptions could have been a driving force of the flood.)

I never said that the flood was the exclusive cause of volcanic activity.

Quit playing games and grow up.
251 posted on 06/16/2008 12:21:50 PM PDT by Fichori (I'm always getting spam advertising drugs and replica watches; Who do they think I am, a gangster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies ]


To: Fichori
Very clever strawmen. Where did I say the flooding caused volcanic activity?

Maybe I misunderstood your post. You said (and I quote):

However, scientists starting from YEC axioms may still be able to determine that the volcano is indeed extinct. (it could have been a result of the Noachin flood, etc)

On review that seems a little ambigous. It's either a claim the flood may have caused the volcano, or that it ws already active, and the flood made it go inactive.

I interpreted it to mean the flood caused it. If you meant instead that the flood may have made the volcano go inactive, then I'll submit the same question to that hypothesis. How can you test and prove that such a flood did in fact occur, and that it would permanently quench an active suupervolcano?

253 posted on 06/16/2008 12:46:04 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson