Author Topic: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir  (Read 22941 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Operator_011

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2646
  • Darwins +17/-1
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #203 on: January 14, 2010, 09:45:07 PM »
^ You beat me to the punch. I was just finishing off a post.

I'll add it to Majesty's ER thread.


Eleven.
Former Moderator Account

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #204 on: January 14, 2010, 09:50:43 PM »
Majesty is long overdue for an ER visit.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3833
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #205 on: January 14, 2010, 09:53:43 PM »
Actually, Admin 1, it might have come from here:

http://tinyurl.com/yf63fkq

« Last Edit: January 14, 2010, 11:09:04 PM by Gnu Ordure »


Offline GetMeThere

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2196
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #207 on: January 14, 2010, 09:57:38 PM »
Nice catch, Gnu.

Offline Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3833
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #208 on: January 14, 2010, 09:58:17 PM »
Also, note that in Majesty's post, he changed all the spellings of too to to, presumably to evade detection:
Quote
2. If  the  distance  of  the  earth  from t he  sun  were  greater,  the  earth  would  be  to  cool  for  a  stable  water  cycle.  If  the  distance  were  less,  the  earth  would  be to   warm  for  a  stable  water  cycle.

3.  If  the  earth's  crust  were  thicker,  to  much  oxygen  would  be  transferred  from  the  atmosphere  to  the  crust.  But  if  the  crust  were  thinner,  there  would  be  to  much  volcanic  and  tectonic  activity.

4.  If  the  gravitational  interaction  with  the  moon  were  greater,  the  tidal  effects  on  the  oceans,  atmosphere,  and  rotational  period  would  be  to  severe.  But  if  it  were  any  less,  the  earths  orbital  obliquity  would  change  to  much  causing  climatic  instabilities.

5.  If  the  gravity  on  the  surface  of  the  earth  were  stronger,  the  atmosphere  would  retain  to  much  ammonia  and  methane,  which  is  poisonous.  But  if  the  gravity  were  less,  the  atmosphere  would  lose  to  much  water.

6.  If  the  length  of  a  day  were  greater,  the  temperature  differences  would  be  to  grate  to  sustain  life.  
« Last Edit: January 14, 2010, 10:04:20 PM by Gnu Ordure »

Offline Grogan

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • I Deny God
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #209 on: January 14, 2010, 09:59:58 PM »
yeah I reported it with the original blogpost as the source, but i was uncertain if the blogpost guy actually wrote it or not until correcting the spelling "mistakes".

As  Majesty  would  say, "LOL  To  Easy."
Quote from: kenn
You want to understand God and the world around you through science and logic alone and, because you cannot come up with a "reasonable" explanation for what they ate when leaving the ark, you dismiss it.

Offline GetMeThere

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2196
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #210 on: January 14, 2010, 10:01:26 PM »
wow. weird.

Now explain why the double spaces. I do know those damn double spaces cause the WWGHA spellcheck a lot of misery.

Offline ReasonIsOutToLunch

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1630
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #211 on: January 14, 2010, 11:20:39 PM »
^ The double spaces makes it harder to run Majesties post through a program to check for plagerism. It also makes it difficult to just run a google check to see if similar sentences have been posted elsewhere. I suspected quite a few posts were plagerized as many of Majesties posts do not follow the same idomatic patterns.

[modbreak= Post edited by Moderator_011] Removed unnecessary quoting. [/modbreak]
« Last Edit: January 14, 2010, 11:28:28 PM by Moderator_011 »
God, doesn't know pi.

Offline GetMeThere

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2196
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #212 on: January 15, 2010, 01:52:31 AM »
^ The double spaces makes it harder to run Majesties post through a program to check for plagerism. It also makes it difficult to just run a google check to see if similar sentences have been posted elsewhere. I suspected quite a few posts were plagerized as many of Majesties posts do not follow the same idomatic patterns.

Well, maybe. There's no doubt it's WEIRD. For me, I just don't get the impression of any PRETENSE from him about the sources of his materials. Wasn't he very clear, very early on, that he was going to present the WLC KCA, for example?

For me, I've WATCHED quite a few WLC debates (too many). So I recognized the heavy sourcing--if not word for word, at least idea for idea, and practically sentence for sentence. I don't think I was the only one. I think he transcribes those debates, and saves them and studies them. When he makes a point or a response, he just whips out his near-memorized WLC clip.

He has said he is now "learning" the "argument from design" points. And there too, he just repeats from the information he's found. To me he's never tried to make a secret of this. In a PM to me about our debate he pretty much described his methodical "learning" of WLC and design arguments.

Offline ReasonIsOutToLunch

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1630
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #213 on: January 15, 2010, 04:23:11 AM »
I guess a case could be made for unintentional plagerism. I can buy that Majesty does not have the capacity to understand the degree to which he copies his ideas. But, it sure looks deliberate and deceptive. In any event, IDC if he goes or stays, he doesn't bother me much. I don't like his arrogance it seems like a crutch one he attempts to use to bash people with and at the same time just makes him seem petty. It's sad, I don't believe he knows how to think on his own.
God, doesn't know pi.

Offline Grogan

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • I Deny God
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #214 on: January 15, 2010, 06:47:37 AM »
This discussion belongs in the ER, IMO.

I called him out on the plagiarism earlier in this (and other) thread, and he knew that the implication was that he was being disingenuous.
Quote from: kenn
You want to understand God and the world around you through science and logic alone and, because you cannot come up with a "reasonable" explanation for what they ate when leaving the ark, you dismiss it.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 17213
  • Darwins +346/-19
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #215 on: January 15, 2010, 10:54:28 AM »
it's a bit late but I decided to review all of the supposed proofs of the flood "from science".  It's an ugly word wall showing my utter disgust at the whole thing, and not really meant to be read but I had a grand time doing it, especially when finding things that utterly contradict each other. 

14. Depends very much on how one defines “civilization”.  And Ararat/Babylon region? What exactly does that mean?  Turkey?  Iraq? Iran?  No one knows for sure what the “mountains of ararat” were supposed to be. 16.  A bald faced lie.  17. Another bald faced lie 18. another one, with the usual avoidance of giving a firm date for this “flood”. 19. Baseless claim by Morris: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris  What’s really sad that a supposed hydraulic expert avoids the fact that if there was a flood, fossils of similar size and shape would have been sorted together, not by complexity.  He also wrote this “Morris wrote in The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972) that the craters of the moon were caused by a cosmic battle between the forces of Satan and the armies of the archangel Michael.”  Hilarious! 20. Again, no evidence of any “old atmosphere” that humans could actually breathe before any “flood”.  21. Please explain on how floods cause a glacial period.  22. Oh my.  No, they can’t since we have faults overunning older faults.  What a sad sad little liar.  23, 24 and 27.Wow.  Total lies about how rocks fold. I have a lovely example of compression fractures in folds just up the road from me, on US RT 322, if you want, I’ll go take a picture.  And yes, rocks can fold plastically when solid. If they were “soft and wet” they would have squished together showing evidence of *that*.   And if one flood event was responsible for all of the sediment, why isn’t it all in one big layer as would happen?  Nope, we have layers that are coarse to fine, layer after layer, which would need magic to happen to avoid physical laws. No kidding we have similar layers during various ages. Last Thursdayism anyone? 25. Whuaaaa? Time changes? No, they all don’t appear to have been laid down very quickly. 26. What “tiny layers of sediment”?  We have some layers meters thick. And there is plenty of plant and animal activity, boreholes, roots, etc. and dehydration cracks, layers of things that dissolve in water. Just how do those appear *during* this “flood”?  28 and 29. How does one find this “geological date” if one ignores every method in getting such dates.  Yep, if you ignore those methods, you can pull any damn thing out of your ass. And why yes, we see volcanoes all over the world spewing, this proves your “flood” how?  30.  Wow, big lie here. No the uplift of mountain ranges is not “relatively young” notice weasel words here and why base geology on evolution?  What a moron!  Again we have things being pulled from orifices. 31. “Assumed paleontological ages”? Praytell what are these?  And how can a flood create an “illusion” of “ages”? 32 and 33. Again more claims of absolutes which are again, lies. Why can’t animals have died in various times?  And why a small flood cause burial?  A landslide?  34. Wow, this old one. If one knows geology, one knows the answer and doesn’t’ have to lie about it. 35.  Outright lie and avoidance of continental drift as a mechanism. 36 and 37.Outright lies. Just that simple.  38. “Supposedly”?  oh good. No evidence of this at all. 39.  And so could another type of catastrophe, like ones we have evidence for, unlike the “flood”.  40 and 41. No, they don’t. They indicate erosion and deposition of various rates.  And wow, total ignorance on how it long it takes for a log to sink and avoiding the problem that all wood debris should be in the verymost top layers and it isn’t.  42. Why didn’t the “flood” wash these things away if the deposition was so “rapid”? Amazing the stupidity that went into this list. 43. I love “basically absent” used to mean “we’re ignoring any thing that doesn’t agree with us”.  And there is no “large number of meteorites hitting the earth each year”. What a lie. 44. “no hail imprints?”  I’m going to pee myself laughing at this one.  Oh my.  And we can have raindrop imprints that were not somehow washed away by the “flood” and this idiot is complaining about “hail imprints”?  45. Yep, lakes evaporate if their source dries up too.  No need for a “flood” here. And it does again bring up, hey, where did the evaporites and dehydration cracks come from in these supposedly “flood” deposited layers? 46. Not they way your bible describes the flood.  47, 48 and 49. So you’re admitting that the flood wasn’t what the bible says yet again? A beach benches a couple of meters high and river benches are enough evidence for a massive flood, fountatins from the earth, complete upheaval?  You may want to look how you are massively contradicting yourself now. And what “mountain high water marks”?  Evidence please. 50. Ah, more willful ignorance about geology, and having just mentioned river terraces. Shame on you!  51. Amazing lie. We see old drainage systems, most easily seen in coal fields and their vicinities since most formed in deltas.  52, 53, 54. No hydrologic evidence doesn’t even remotely support the “flood”.  Which is why I find it a shame that Morris is such a bad liar.  55 and 56. There is no such ‘deep alluvial deposits and sedimentary rocks” consistent with a huge global flood and to show your internal contradiction, if this was true, then your claim of “near-random” deposition of formational sequences” couldn’t be true.  57.  Another outright lie: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/  58. And sad when just a bit of googling can show this wrong.  First, is the confusion that Christians sew on just when they want to claim the “flood” happened?  Even if we take the author’s claim of the oldest living things are 3,000 – 4,000 years old, they are wrong. No surprise there and it’s hilarious that they whine about dating methods earlier but oooh, when it seems to “confirm” their claims, they’re all over them.  There’s a bristlecone pine of 4,838 years.  There are bacteria in ice cores far far older than that. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Positiveaob

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1059
  • Darwins +5/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #216 on: January 15, 2010, 02:40:09 PM »
Quote yesterday from majesty:
Quote
1. If  the  axial tilt  of  the  earth  were  greater  or  lesser,  the  surface  temperatures  would  be  too  harsh  to  support  life.



6.  If  the  length  of  a  day  were  greater,  the  temperature  differences  would  be  to  grate  to  sustain  life.  But  if  the  day  were  shorter,  the  atmospheric  wind  velocities  would  be  to  great  to  surive.

These  are  just  6!!!  There  are  many  more.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  i  challenge  anyone  to  a  debate  on  the  argument  from  design.  I  am  about  to  leave  right  now,  headed  to  Phoenix.  I  dont  know  if  i  will  have  access  to  a  computer  while  i  am  gone.  I  will  be  back  on  Tuesday.  Hopefully,  you  people  are  man/woman  enough  to  accept  the  challenge.  Stop  dodging  me!!!

I’d be happy to debate you on the intelligent design topic.  Although I don’t really log on that frequently so my responses might be delayed occasionally.  But I imagine your argument is going to go something like this:
Do you believe that something can come from nothing?  No?  Well then something must have created and designed it.  And since everything fits together perfectly, then it must have been an intelligent designer.

Ignoring the obvious gaping hole in that logic, namely that something would have had to create the creator, there are 2 fundamental flaws in this line of reasoning:
First of all, no one in the fields of evolutionary science, abiogenesis or big bang theory (3 separate disciplines) has made the statement that “something came from nothing” or that “everything just came together by chance”.  You create this strawman argument that if you don’t believe in the bible as a divinely inspired true account of history then you must just believe that everything just poofed into existence spontaneously and randomly assembled into what it is today.  The fact is that no one has any idea what happened prior to the big bang or why all the mass in the universe was so compressed at one point in history.  But when you don’t an answer you can either just give up and fill in the gaps with “god did it” (whichever god you were brought up to believe) or you can keep looking for answers.  And evolution is not random chance.  You need to spend more time reading about evolution if this is truly your understanding of the topic.

Secondly, you seem to fall into the same trap one falls into after winning a lottery.  That one person is bound to believe that divine intervention has played a role in his winning, because after all the chances were one in ten million he would pick the right numbers.  But he fails to realize that there were millions of others who did not pick the right ticket.  The universe is a very very large place that has been around a very very long time.  It stand to reason that somewhere along the way the perfect set of circumstances will occur to bring about life (as we know it).  And of course those of us on that planet circling that star at just the right distance with just the right set of circumstances will feel pretty lucky about it.  There are many many many planets that didn’t quite make it. 

And by the way, the earth we live in is far from perfect.  Just as pianodwarf pointed out.  More than likely there is a luckier planet out there.  But I guess that's a topic for another day.
If you desire peace of soul and happiness, then believe; if you would be a disciple of truth, then inquire. - Neitzsche

Support the Military Religious Freedom Foundation!

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #217 on: January 15, 2010, 02:46:53 PM »
And by the way, the earth we live in is far from perfect.  Just as pianodwarf pointed out.  More than likely there is a luckier planet out there.  But I guess that's a topic for another day.

Positiveaob,

Majesty is in the ER for a bit... So he might not respond for a while.

So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1962
  • Darwins +75/-11
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #218 on: January 15, 2010, 08:43:50 PM »
Quote
1. If  the  axial tilt  of  the  earth  were  greater  or  lesser,  the  surface  temperatures  would  be  too  harsh  to  support  life.

2. If  the  distance  of  the  earth  from t he  sun  were  greater,  the  earth  would  be  to  cool  for  a  stable  water  cycle.  If  the  distance  were  less,  the  earth  would  be  to  warm  for  a  stable  water  cycle.

3.  If  the  earth's  crust  were  thicker,  to  much  oxygen  would  be  transferred  from  the  atmosphere  to  the  crust.  But  if  the  crust  were  thinner,  there  would  be  to  much  volcanic  and  tectonic  activity.

4.  If  the  gravitational  interaction  with  the  moon  were  greater,  the  tidal  effects  on  the  oceans,  atmosphere,  and  rotational  period  would  be  to  severe.  But  if  it  were  any  less,  the  earths  orbital  obliquity  would  change  to  much  causing  climatic  instabilities.

5.  If  the  gravity  on  the  surface  of  the  earth  were  stronger,  the  atmosphere  would  retain  to  much  ammonia  and  methane,  which  is  poisonous.  But  if  the  gravity  were  less,  the  atmosphere  would  lose  to  much  water.

6.  If  the  length  of  a  day  were  greater,  the  temperature  differences  would  be  to  grate  to  sustain  life.  But  if  the  day  were  shorter,  the  atmospheric  wind  velocities  would  be  to  great  to  surive.

These  are  just  6!!!  There  are  many  more.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  i  challenge  anyone  to  a  debate  on  the  argument  from  design.  I  am  about  to  leave  right  now,  headed  to  Phoenix.  I  dont  know  if  i  will  have  access  to  a  computer  while  i  am  gone.  I  will  be  back  on  Tuesday.  Hopefully,  you  people  are  man/woman  enough  to  accept  the  challenge.  Stop  dodging  me!!!

The bottom line is this folks... Their god as we know it today exists because of us.. If we didn't exist, their god as we know it today would not! You are debating things that are a statstical probablitlity based on all the stars in our galaxy and all the galaxies in the universe.... This leaves a pretty good (great)chance for 1 through 6 to happen.

There are at least....
200,000,000,000 Billion stars in a galaxy!
200,000,000,000 Billion galaxies in the known universe!

That means there are approximately....
40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in our universe alone

Statistics alone say that 1-6 could happen all too often....By the way, the mega-millions lotto (6 numbers) is only  1 in 195,000,000 chance

« Last Edit: January 15, 2010, 08:49:15 PM by DVZ3 »
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline gregoriodomingos

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • -Can't we all just get along. -No.
    • AZORES
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #219 on: January 15, 2010, 08:51:40 PM »
The bottom line is this folks... Their god as we know it today exists because of us.. If we didn't exist, their god as we know it today would not! You are debating things that are a statstical probablitlity based on all the stars in our galaxy and all the galaxies in the universe.... This leaves a pretty good (great)chance for 1 through 6 to happen.

There are at least....
200,000,000,000 Billion stars in a galaxy!
200,000,000,000 Billion galaxies in the known universe!

That means there are approximately....
40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in our universe alone

Statistics alone say that 1-6 could happen all too often....
You forget to take in to account the time factor. "given enough time it will happen for sure"
Is not tragedy a necessity in life?
Yes it is, may god give you hemeroids.

Offline Emily

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5770
  • Darwins +64/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #220 on: January 15, 2010, 08:53:36 PM »
1. If  the  axial tilt  of  the  earth  were  greater  or  lesser,  the  surface  temperatures  would  be  too  harsh  to  support  life.

2. If  the  distance  of  the  earth  from t he  sun  were  greater,  the  earth  would  be  to  cool  for  a  stable  water  cycle.  If  the  distance  were  less,  the  earth  would  be  to  warm  for  a  stable  water  cycle.

3.  If  the  earth's  crust  were  thicker,  to  much  oxygen  would  be  transferred  from  the  atmosphere  to  the  crust.  But  if  the  crust  were  thinner,  there  would  be  to  much  volcanic  and  tectonic  activity.

4.  If  the  gravitational  interaction  with  the  moon  were  greater,  the  tidal  effects  on  the  oceans,  atmosphere,  and  rotational  period  would  be  to  severe.  But  if  it  were  any  less,  the  earths  orbital  obliquity  would  change  to  much  causing  climatic  instabilities.

5.  If  the  gravity  on  the  surface  of  the  earth  were  stronger,  the  atmosphere  would  retain  to  much  ammonia  and  methane,  which  is  poisonous.  But  if  the  gravity  were  less,  the  atmosphere  would  lose  to  much  water.

6.  If  the  length  of  a  day  were  greater,  the  temperature  differences  would  be  to  grate  to  sustain  life.  But  if  the  day  were  shorter,  the  atmospheric  wind  velocities  would  be  to  great  to  surive.

These  are  just  6!!!  There  are  many  more.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  i  challenge  anyone  to  a  debate  on  the  argument  from  design.  I  am  about  to  leave  right  now,  headed  to  Phoenix.  I  dont  know  if  i  will  have  access  to  a  computer  while  i  am  gone.  I  will  be  back  on  Tuesday.  Hopefully,  you  people  are  man/woman  enough  to  accept  the  challenge.  Stop  dodging  me!!!

That's a whole lot of 'ifs'. Maybe I am being biased but it's because of all those ifs that makes the earth and our universe even more amazing. Then again, here's my thinking: The universe did this all through natural processes.

Those questions are from the point of view of living organisms were already.... um, living. Without those conditions then we'd be not here right now, true. But because of those conditions we are able to be here, and really it's just a matter that those simplest organisms "being in the right place at the right time", I guess. Abiogenesis was just able to "land" on planet earth.

Hardly an argument for a god. I see it as more of an appreciate of what our universe has to offer without a god.
"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Offline DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1962
  • Darwins +75/-11
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #221 on: January 15, 2010, 09:07:22 PM »

If it took a so called intelligent god 40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tries to get something just right.... you have to question intelligent design, or retarded accident.
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline Emily

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5770
  • Darwins +64/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #222 on: January 15, 2010, 09:17:58 PM »
^^ We haven't even been able to explore all those galaxies and stars.

Perhaps, just perhaps, there is a planet where life is thriving, other than earth, that we don't know about.

(Not saying there is, but I'm not ruling that out either.)

If so, those guys on that planet are probably worshiping the all mighty Otep, who gave up her son named Shamaya to save their humanity.
"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Offline DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1962
  • Darwins +75/-11
  • Gender: Male
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #223 on: January 15, 2010, 09:19:32 PM »

 ^^^ trust me, I haven't ruled that out either, but the bible says otherwise.
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline drunken_scot

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: 10 Questions: Please don't shoot me kind sir
« Reply #224 on: January 18, 2010, 10:44:19 PM »
It may just be I, but I rather suspect the "Evidence for a Global Flood" page is a joke.  You have the comedy mask, the name is rather cartoonish (Laurence the smart), and the degrees do not seem very brag-worthy.