What is Devil's Tower? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!


Communities

The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

What is Devil's Tower?
in Earth Science

By ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts edited August 2017


Scientism's explanation:
The igneous material that forms the Tower is a phonolite porphyry intruded about 40.5 million years ago, a light to dark-gray or greenish-gray igneous rock with conspicuous crystals of white feldspar. As the magma cooled, hexagonal (and sometimes 4-, 5-, and 7-sided) columns formed.


Magma? Seriously? They must think we are fools to believe such horsesh!t. This beautiful structure was not formed from an old volcano.


Anyone whose seen magma will be able to verify that magma doesn't cool in nearly perfectly straight hexagonal shoots like that. Let's just compare magma to devil's tower.



Are geologists smoking crack? Turning a blind eye? These hexagonal patterns have only been found with and by intelligent design. 



More importantly, plants.


So let's now compare devils tower and other geological features to plants.







Is your mind opened? Take a look at these pictures from the petrified forest.


Scientisms claim: Petrified wood is a fossil. It forms when plant material is buried by sediment and protected from decay due to oxygen and organisms. Then, groundwater rich in dissolved solids flows through the sediment, replacing the original plant material with silica, calcite, pyrite, or another inorganic material such as opal.

So, according to science, these "trees"(probably branches from the tree in the background) fell, chopped themselves up...



Then were quickly buried somehow so that instead of ROTTING, like everything else we have ever observed does, were slowly replaced by gemstones in flowing water? I don't know about anyone else, but I can tell when my leg is getting pulled. I'm not making any claims here, just asking questions, but what if...







Source: https://www.secretenergy.com/news/are-these-giant-prehistoric-trees/
passedbillEvidenceSilverishGoldNovaWoodenWoodBaconToesEmeryPearson
  1. What is Devil's Tower?

    9 votes
    1. A tree stump!
      66.67%
    2. An old volcano!
      33.33%
Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

Wayne Dyer
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments

  • Is an old volcano, magma can dye like that. 
    EmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    @passedbill

    Is this something that can be observed or are you just parroting what you've been sold?
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • What I want to know is the real story behind Jack the Giant Slayer?
    I know we have historical document in the Bible talking about Giants, like when Joshua led the Children of Israel to the Promised Land, the men reported
    seeing people so big, that they felt like grasshoppers in comparison. These photos give a whole new meaning to those stories!
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Do you think J.R.R. Tolkein actually visited Middle Earth?
    I personally think Tolkein's books were works of pure fiction. Tolkein found inspiration in certain geological landmarks and locations.
    As for the Bible. Mythology at best. Loosely based on actual people and places.
    As for the Devil's Tower. If it had been named the Rocky Mountain and had not been immortalised in a movie, you probably wouldn't be the slightest bit interested.

    EmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    Do you think J.R.R. Tolkein actually visited Middle Earth?
    I personally think Tolkein's books were works of pure fiction. Tolkein found inspiration in certain geological landmarks and locations.
    As for the Bible. Mythology at best. Loosely based on actual people and places.
    As for the Devil's Tower. If it had been named the Rocky Mountain and had not been immortalised in a movie, you probably wouldn't be the slightest bit interested.

    I think he may have visited somewhere, middle earth is a term related to and dependent on a spherical, hollow earth, like admiral Byrd claims to have visited but calls it "the land beyond the south pole"



    But, as I've established,  the earth isn't spherical, and the hollow idea is likewise out. Hollow earth is likely more to my left.






    It's interesting, but I can't know for sure until they open Antarctica up.
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Come on people, .. I mean just look at those pictures, could all this evidence be just a coincidence that those mountains "look like" cut down trees?
    Have we been so brainwashed with sci-fi fairytale stories that we are afraid to look at reality that we may have been lied to about everything regarding space, planets, galaxies, redshifts, black holes, bosons, quarks, leptons and clip-ons!?
    Is everyone here OK with being called an "evolving ape"?





    ErfisflatEmeryPearsonBaconToes
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    Evidence said:
    Come on people, .. I mean just look at those pictures, could all this evidence be just a coincidence that those mountains "look like" cut down trees?
    Have we been so brainwashed with sci-fi fairytale stories that we are afraid to look at reality that we may have been lied to about everything regarding space, planets, galaxies, redshifts, black holes, bosons, quarks, leptons and clip-ons!?
    Is everyone here OK with being called an "evolving ape"?





    I would like to know if there is anyone here that believes that these multi-mile high trees could have existed on a spherical spinning ball... I can see it wobbling through space now...
    EvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • "Anyone whose seen magma will be able to verify that magma doesn't cool in nearly perfectly straight hexagonal shoots like that. Let's just compare magma to devil's tower."

    That's not what science claims happens. The lava cools in a general mass, but it can crack in straight lines for reasons that you could check if you bothered to look.

    For reference:

    http://www.lgoehring.com/M.Sc._files/Goehring_MSc.pdf
    http://blogs.agu.org/georneys/2012/11/18/geology-word-of-the-week-c-is-for-columnar-jointing/

    "Are geologists smoking crack? Turning a blind eye? These hexagonal patterns have only been found with and by intelligent design. "

    This is a ridiculous claim, as well as a logical fallacy as you are begging the question. Not only that but your claim that all the examples you list are examples of intelligent design is a massive unsupported claim that flies in the face of the vast scientific consensus and evidence on evolution.

    but ignoring all the massive holes in your argument and focusing on your actual claim:

    What does ice look like if you put it under a microscope?



    You'll note that completely contrary to your claim is is formed of series of hexagons. Minerology in general is a great example of this type of thing where because of their physical structure, crystals of a certain type will form the same shape and structure in a repeating fashion. By personal favourite is Bismuth:



    This is just how crystals form because of their properties. It's easier to see when you do it in a lab because it's easy to get a large sample of a pure material without a load of contaminants and room to grow, but even in nature you can see this, for instance a quartz is a common gem which will always try to attain a hexagonal shape:



    "So let's now compare devils tower and other geological features to plants.

    Is your mind opened?"

    No. "Here's some things that look kinda like some other things if you squint and ignore things like scale, scientific evidence, material, etc" is not a mind opener. 

    Is your mind opened? Take a look at these pictures from the petrified forest.

    "So, according to science, these "trees"(probably branches from the tree in the background) fell, chopped themselves up..."

    No, they aren't. Care to show where they made this claim?

    "Then were quickly buried somehow so that instead of ROTTING, like everything else we have ever observed does, were slowly replaced by gemstones in flowing water? I don't know about anyone else, but I can tell when my leg is getting pulled."

    That's not actual evidence, that's just you dismissing the work of experts out of hand for no reason other than it challenges your world view.
    ErfisflatBaconToesEmeryPearson
  • Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 

    Those aren't hexagonal those are squares. Oh they are big trees? ROFL And you talk about jack and the bean stalk? ROFL Oh wow man, just wow. You claim it's an oblong tree. haha

    Ok let's look up some info. You show pictures of magma on top of the surface for comparison to magma from inside the earth... not shocking. 180 feet by 300 feet so it is oblong. You don't name any of the others but some of them look much bigger. So the only way you get that flat surface is with a saw. Even if I can't look up the size of the others that means the saw would have to be 190 feet or more to cut it. Had you ever done any work with a saw you'd also know that to get those "flat" surfaces is a pain in the butt as the tree pinches the saw. And that doesn't cover the logistics of trying to make and use a piece of metal that big. 

    If you two could learn some critical thinking that would be lovely...
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNovaEmeryPearson
  • Thanks for an opportunity to finally debate this.

    "That's not what science claims happens. The lava cools in a general mass, but it can crack in straight lines for reasons that you could check if you bothered to look."

    From your source.
    "def. Columnar Jointing:
    A structure that forms in rocks (most commonly in basalt) that consists of columns (mostly commonly hexagonal in shape) that are separated by joints or fractures in the rock that formed when the rock contracted, most often during cooling."

    From my opening post:

    "As the magma cooled, hexagonal (and sometimes 4-, 5-, and 7-sided) columns formed." 

    https://www.nps.gov/deto/learn/nature/geologicformations.htm



    Youve given no explanation in your own words, so what is your (opposing) position? Exactly what i explained? This is not just random "cooling of mineral" cracking. There are zero patterns in the dry lake bed above. Try again. Look again.


    If you have a different opinion than the one stated in your source, please explain. So far this is just an appeal to the stone fallacy.




    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • @Erfisflat

    You seem to have offered no rebuttal to the vast majority of the issues, problems and logical errors that I pointed out in your argument? Are you therefore conceding on all the points you have not mustered a defence for?

    As to the two points you make here:

    ""From my opening post:

    "As the magma cooled, hexagonal (and sometimes 4-, 5-, and 7-sided) columns formed." "

    This was then followed up by you saying exactly the sentence I quoted word for word and responded to. Don't cherrypick.

    "Youve given no explanation in your own words, so what is your (opposing) position? Exactly what i explained? This is not just random "cooling of mineral" cracking. There are zero patterns in the dry lake bed above. Try again. Look again."

    You're making empty claims again backed up by nothing. You state that it is not the cooling of minerals causing cracks, but offer no evidence. You state that there are zero patterns in a picture of a dry lake bed, but give no reason why we should assume this random picture of a random dry river bed should be representative of columnar joining.

    "If you have a different opinion than the one stated in your source, please explain. So far this is just an appeal to the stone fallacy."

    When you misuse fallacies like this, it harms your argument and makes you look unintelligent rather than the reverse. An appeal to the stone is an argument where you dismiss an argument as absurd without giving reason. If you check my post you'll find I did give reasons - like your various claims being clearly false as shown by the explanation and images I provided. 
    EmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited August 2017
    "Are you therefore conceding on all the points you have not mustered a defence for?"

    I'm trying to establish your position before we get into another topic entirely, water and crystals (which in their many forms are most assuredly intelligently designed), namely how this was formed. I gather that fractures in the rock that "formed when the rock contracted, most often during cooling.", which was your statement, with reliable source, and mine:
    "As the magma cooled, hexagonal (and sometimes 4-, 5-, and 7-sided) columns formed" with reliable source, and how those positions differ in any way. I'm looking for an explanation for your initial statement: "That's not what science claims happens.".
    If you have an opposing idea for what science claims, other than what i have already established, I'd need to know what exactly. I'd also need to know if this is verifiable, testable and repeatable on any scale. Any other demonstrable cooling magma results are not hexagonal.

    "You state that it is not the cooling of minerals causing cracks, but offer no evidence. You state that there are zero patterns in a picture of a dry lake bed, but give no reason why we should assume this random picture of a random dry river bed should be representative of columnar joining."

    I gave a practice example of a cooling and cracking of minerals in general, since you've not given one. You give me water, and try and pretend as if water isn't the most intelligently designed creation of all,(aside form us) and crystals, which are formed in entirely different circumstances, and are another debate altogether.
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    If you have an opposing idea for what science claims, other than what i have already established, I'd need to know what exactly. I'd also need to know if this is verifiable, testable and repeatable on any scale. Any other demonstrable cooling magma results are not hexagonal.
    No you don't. if someone puts forward a position they should be able to defend it on it's own merits regardless of what other people's opinions are. If you cannot your argument fails and can be disregarded. So far you have done nothing to defend it on your own merits.

    I gave a practice example of a cooling and cracking of minerals in general, since you've not given one. You give me water, and try and pretend as if water isn't the most intelligently designed creation of all,(aside form us) and crystals, which are formed in entirely different circumstances, and are another debate altogether.
    Why would this be of any relevance? Do you think it is being claimed that all minerals will always crack in this manner when any form of cooling is involved?

    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited August 2017
    Erfisflat said:
    If you have an opposing idea for what science claims, other than what i have already established, I'd need to know what exactly. I'd also need to know if this is verifiable, testable and repeatable on any scale. Any other demonstrable cooling magma results are not hexagonal.
    No you don't. if someone puts forward a position they should be able to defend it on it's own merits regardless of what other people's opinions are. If you cannot your argument fails and can be disregarded. So far you have done nothing to defend it on your own merits.

    I gave a practice example of a cooling and cracking of minerals in general, since you've not given one. You give me water, and try and pretend as if water isn't the most intelligently designed creation of all,(aside form us) and crystals, which are formed in entirely different circumstances, and are another debate altogether.
    Why would this be of any relevance? Do you think it is being claimed that all minerals will always crack in this manner when any form of cooling is involved?

     I am trying to determine your position. You've claimed that science does not claim what I said it does, while repeating the claim.

    And no, I do not claim that  it is being claimed that all minerals will always crack in this manner when any form of cooling is involved. I'm simply asking for verifiable evidence, or a practical example. Every other example we have of a mineral cracking from cooling show random results. Your kettle logic is diminishing to your argument.
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:
    If you have an opposing idea for what science claims, other than what i have already established, I'd need to know what exactly. I'd also need to know if this is verifiable, testable and repeatable on any scale. Any other demonstrable cooling magma results are not hexagonal.
    No you don't. if someone puts forward a position they should be able to defend it on it's own merits regardless of what other people's opinions are. If you cannot your argument fails and can be disregarded. So far you have done nothing to defend it on your own merits.

    I gave a practice example of a cooling and cracking of minerals in general, since you've not given one. You give me water, and try and pretend as if water isn't the most intelligently designed creation of all,(aside form us) and crystals, which are formed in entirely different circumstances, and are another debate altogether.
    Why would this be of any relevance? Do you think it is being claimed that all minerals will always crack in this manner when any form of cooling is involved?

     I am trying to determine your position. You've claimed that science does not claim what I said it does, while repeating the claim.

    And no, I do not claim that  it is being claimed that all minerals will always crack in this manner when any form of cooling is involved. I'm simply asking for verifiable evidence, or a practical example. Every other example we have of a mineral cracking from cooling show random results. Your kettle logic is diminishing to your argument.
    You are trying to determine my position on a completely different point. Stop stalling and answer.

    Also in relation to your defence, it is illogical. I have stated your claims about how it works do not match the scientific explanation. Therefore quoting the scientific explanation is not a relevant defence, because my entire point is you made a strawman which did not match that argument.

     You also clearly lie here. You state "I'm simply asking for verifiable evidence, or a practical example". This is clearly untrue. In your last post, in the very point we were talking about, rather than asking for evidence you presented a picture which you thought should be treated as proof even though it did not meet the obvious criteria that would make it a relevant example and you provided no explanation for why it might be relevant despite all common sense. Please do not lie to cover up the errors in your argument.

    Your statement " Every other example we have of a mineral cracking from cooling show random results. Your kettle logic is diminishing to your argument." is also another clear lie. if you'd bothered to actually look at the links that had already been posted by me (such as http://blogs.agu.org/georneys/2012/11/18/geology-word-of-the-week-c-is-for-columnar-jointing/) you would see other examples from across the world of columular jointing in rocks. It seems that you don't even look at opposing evidence that is provided to you and just make meaningless claims to support your entrenched and unsupported views. I'm not surprised.
    EmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited August 2017
    @AlwaysCorrect

    "You are trying to determine my position on a completely different point. Stop stalling and answer."

    I'm trying to establish your position on the only point in question: how these structures are formed. You said specifically that I was wrong about what science claims, what exactly is the claim? If you're going to state that I don't have a clue what geologists claim these are, then link to a site where geologists claim the same thing as I, I'm not sure what to debate against. I'm not stalling, and I have answered most of your questions, as respectfully as possible.

    "Also in relation to your defence, it is illogical. I have stated your claims about how it works do not match the scientific explanation. Therefore quoting the scientific explanation is not a relevant defence, because my entire point is you made a strawman which did not match that argument."

    That isn't my defense. My defense is what is logical. Saying that (or silently agreeing with) volcanos somehow erupted underground and ended up with a flat surface, and cooled uniformly hundreds of feet vertically enough to form straight, hexagonal shoots would be the equivalent to saying a Volkswagen plant exploded and a Ferrari is formed from the ashes. It has never been demonstrated and is a theory supported only by graphs, diagrams and opinions. This is the definition of pseudoscience. 

    "You also clearly lie here. You state "I'm simply asking for verifiable evidence, or a practical example".
    This is clearly untrue. In your last post, in the very point we were talking about, rather than asking for evidence you presented a picture which you thought should be treated as proof even though it did not meet the obvious criteria that would make it a relevant example and you provided no explanation for why it might be relevant despite all common sense. Please do not lie to cover up the errors in your argument."

    I don't think you know what verifiable evidence or practical examples means. If your position is that a volcanic erupted and turned into this structure, then it would be scientifically sound to either recreate the circumstances and compare the results, or make some observations from another example and form a hypothesis. Your solution is more "trust what the experts say" and "but, but, muh science book!" I've given another example of a mineral cracking when it cools and it is completely random, I explained this when I provided the picture. So your accusations of me lying is a poor attempt to refute my argument. 

    "you would see other examples from across the world of columular jointing in rocks."

    Your last attempt at a rebuttal does not prove your point by given an explanation of a cooling and cracking of any mineral, but you point out that there are other examples of this, my reply is that if devil's tower was a giant tree, why would it be the only one?






    Upon researching the list from your source, any structures still tact enough to see good "jointing" can be unbiasedly also seen as a tree stump.

    EvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 
    "you two" im pretty sure I wasn't arguing for anything in this thread, but I'm pretty sure by you 2 you're secretly refering to me
    EmeryPearson
  • Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 
    "you two" im pretty sure I wasn't arguing for anything in this thread, but I'm pretty sure by you 2 you're secretly refering to me
    Don't feed the troll
    SilverishGoldNovaEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 
    "you two" im pretty sure I wasn't arguing for anything in this thread, but I'm pretty sure by you 2 you're secretly refering to me
    Don't feed the troll
    I plan on starving him. Just thought he deserves his last meal. 
    EvidenceEmeryPearson
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 
    "you two" im pretty sure I wasn't arguing for anything in this thread, but I'm pretty sure by you 2 you're secretly refering to me
    Don't feed the troll
    As you can see you tagged me to get me to this thread... then call ME the troll in the same breath? ROFL 
    SilverishGoldNovaEmeryPearson
  • edited August 2017
    I know this is ancedotal but I have seen magma and it doesn't look anything like a tree. 
    CovenyfeaWoodenWoodEvidenceErfisflatBaconToesEmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited August 2017
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm surprised there are no arguments against this, @Coveny,you pretend to know alot, care to take a stab?
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 
    "you two" im pretty sure I wasn't arguing for anything in this thread, but I'm pretty sure by you 2 you're secretly refering to me
    Don't feed the troll
    I plan on starving him. Just thought he deserves his last meal. 
    Sure you are going to "starve" me by not talking. Please don't throw me in the briar patch!!!!

    I really dont. Look at your second statement:
    "Those aren't hexagonal those are squares. Oh they are big trees?"
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    So what bats*** are you two spreading this time? 

    Those aren't hexagonal those are squares. Oh they are big trees? ROFL And you talk about jack and the bean stalk? ROFL Oh wow man, just wow. You claim it's an oblong tree. haha

    Ok let's look up some info. You show pictures of magma on top of the surface for comparison to magma from inside the earth... not shocking. 180 feet by 300 feet so it is oblong. You don't name any of the others but some of them look much bigger. So the only way you get that flat surface is with a saw. Even if I can't look up the size of the others that means the saw would have to be 190 feet or more to cut it. Had you ever done any work with a saw you'd also know that to get those "flat" surfaces is a pain in the butt as the tree pinches the saw. And that doesn't cover the logistics of trying to make and use a piece of metal that big. 

    If you two could learn some critical thinking that would be lovely...
    I really dont. Look at your second statement:
    "Those aren't hexagonal those are squares. Oh they are big trees?"
    You don't really what? Is that in response to "If you two could learn some critical thinking that would be lovely..." you admiting you really don't want to learn some critical thinking? I mean you didn't have to say it out loud but ok. Yes squares see red squares for reference from YOUR pictures.



    The oh they are big trees was sarcasm. I say this because at this point I don't think you got it. Physics would not allow trees to get as big as your suggesting. The wood couldn't support the weight of the limbs. Although to be fair I can't do the calculations to prove that so I prolly shouldn't state it even if I've been around enough lumber to know it's not possible to extend wood out 1,000s of feet from it's trunk without it cracking under the weight. I'm a rebel though.

    Also why did you respond to the one that doesn't include what you are responding to? I corrected it so you don't look like you are talking about make believe stuff... hmmm NM, I can't fix that part.
    SilverishGoldNovaEmeryPearson
  • @Coveny

    Yeah, his argument is stupid, but there are hexagonal formations there (although also 4, 5, and 7 sided according to the National park Service).





    It doesn't really matter because it's just as explainable through science and his arguments revolving around giant trees is just as stupid either way.
    EvidenceErfisflatSilverishGoldNovaBaconToesEmeryPearson
  • @Coveny

    Yeah, his argument is stupid, but there are hexagonal formations there (although also 4, 5, and 7 sided according to the National park Service).

    It doesn't really matter because it's just as explainable through science and his arguments revolving around giant trees is just as stupid either way.
    Most still look like squares to me, but they should all be hexagonal for his theory to be true.

    Oh I agree that it's all explainable by science even if it's weird looking.(there are tons of really weird looking things in nature) I also agree, the idea of trees that are miles tall with 200+ foot diameter trunks that were cut down is stupid. I can't do the physics with the changing variables of how the weight increases as the size increases, or the required transportation system between the roots/leaves but I'd bet this size tree is physically impossible. It's easy mentally to imagine something bigger and assume it will work the same way, but weight, physics and science tend to disagree with that assessment. 
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • Coveny said:
    @Coveny

    Yeah, his argument is stupid, but there are hexagonal formations there (although also 4, 5, and 7 sided according to the National park Service).

    It doesn't really matter because it's just as explainable through science and his arguments revolving around giant trees is just as stupid either way.
    Most still look like squares to me, but they should all be hexagonal for his theory to be true.

    Oh I agree that it's all explainable by science even if it's weird looking.(there are tons of really weird looking things in nature) I also agree, the idea of trees that are miles tall with 200+ foot diameter trunks that were cut down is stupid. I can't do the physics with the changing variables of how the weight increases as the size increases, or the required transportation system between the roots/leaves but I'd bet this size tree is physically impossible. It's easy mentally to imagine something bigger and assume it will work the same way, but weight, physics and science tend to disagree with that assessment. 
    https://bigpictureeducation.com/possibility-silicon-based-life
    EvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    So are they trees or silicon-based life? Or you just "know" it's not what science shows it is, but still haven't figured out which of your dingbat theories is the most defensible? 
  • Erfisflat said:
    Yes big trees are VERY difficult to understand that is the reason I dismissed it as absurd.../sarcasm off
  • Erfisflat said:
    This only works when someone dismisses a cogent and meaningful argument simply because it is absurd. As has already been pointed out multiple times "Here's some things that I personally think look kinda like some other things if you squint and ignore things like scale, scientific evidence, material, etc" is not an actual argument and does not logically mean there is any connection between the two.

    You have no argument, hence it is fair to dismiss your argument as absurd on that basis.
    EvidenceErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Erfisflat said:
    This only works when someone dismisses a cogent and meaningful argument simply because it is absurd. As has already been pointed out multiple times "Here's some things that I personally think look kinda like some other things if you squint and ignore things like scale, scientific evidence, material, etc" is not an actual argument and does not logically mean there is any connection between the two.

    You have no argument, hence it is fair to dismiss your argument as absurd on that basis.
    Another strawman.   "Here's some things that I personally think look kinda like some other things if you squint and ignore things like scale, scientific evidence, material, etc" 

    Is not my argument. 
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • @Erfisflat

    Which bit of it misrepresents your argument?
  • That science has a poor explanation for this. There is zero evidence for the claim and you continue proving that. I'm not ignoring scale, "evidence" (or lack thereof), or material. I'd be willing to consider evidence, but so far you've given me snowflakes (crystals) and crystals...


    CovenyEvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Alright, persuaded. 
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Alright, persuaded. 
    Persuaded on what? 
    Coveny
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I don't even think 
    Finally something we agree on.
    Yet another instance of you cutting out someones sentence so they look dumb. 
    EvidenceCovenyErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • At this point he's just trolling
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    At this point he's just trolling
    I see he's decided to go back to arguing in my thread tho
    EmeryPearson
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Alright, persuaded. 
    Persuaded on what? 
    The topic... why do you have such a hard time understanding even the most simplistic statements?
    I don't even think I was talking to you. If he is persuaded that multi mile high trees existed in the past, logically, since it would be impossible on a spinning ball, he could be persuaded of a flat realm. That is the point of most of my debates. So allow him to clarify himself, your name isn't woodenwood.
    On the magma thing
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Alright, persuaded. 
    Persuaded on what? 
    The topic... why do you have such a hard time understanding even the most simplistic statements?
    I don't even think I was talking to you. If he is persuaded that multi mile high trees existed in the past, logically, since it would be impossible on a spinning ball, he could be persuaded of a flat realm. That is the point of most of my debates. So allow him to clarify himself, your name isn't woodenwood.
    On the magma thing
    So you agree that it's possible that multi-mile high trees once existed, could you see these trees on a spinning ball?
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Alright, persuaded. 
    Persuaded on what? 
    The topic... why do you have such a hard time understanding even the most simplistic statements?
    I don't even think I was talking to you. If he is persuaded that multi mile high trees existed in the past, logically, since it would be impossible on a spinning ball, he could be persuaded of a flat realm. That is the point of most of my debates. So allow him to clarify himself, your name isn't woodenwood.
    On the magma thing
    Do you agree that these could have been silicon trees?
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited October 2017
    @Evidence

    Can you post the best content for giant silicon life from your research? I think you may have a better explanation that I do altogether, I didn't get far enough down that rabbit hole yet. I'm interested now because of a possible relation to dinosaurs.
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    @Evidence

    Can you post the best content for giant silicon life from your research? I think you may have a better explanation that I do altogether, I didn't get far enough down that rabbit hole yet. I'm interested now because of a possible relation to dinosaurs.

    @Erfisflat
    Well, Sam Hancock has undeniable proof that it is what's left of a broken leg of a giant!



    Time 0:17 even shows his "credentials", .. OK, .. so it's not much, but what do I have, and yet here I am offering my opinions. For now, I'm just taking it all in, and try to fit it all in like a puzzle.

    I mean if these mountains were actually Giants, then Dinosaurs were like dinosaur-gummy bears for their kids.
    Seriously though, I am, sure of one thing, that we were created from the dust of the Earth, not petrified wood, or petrified giants, .. (if we consider our mountains either giant trees, or Giant creatures).

    OR, .. like some Scholars have suggested (which actually renewed my interest in that theory) which is that there may be a big difference between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 and no time better to consider this than now, especially with all this new information on the Flat Earth (which itself leaves a lot of questions unanswered?)

    For me, I'm going with the Bible, even though as you said "was written by man", because I KNOW without a doubt that there is a Devil, and this world is his. All one has to do is look around and see how the cities were made in his honor. I mean look at New York at the goddess that welcomes the immigrants as they come in on the boats, none other than ISIS, .. yeah, the Statue of Liberty my behind. We now know who ISIS really is, and what kind of "liberty goddess" that she really is?
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1618 Pts
    edited January 14
    Wow, 100% agree. "Scientific consensus is lying or ignorant, because they were wrong about this. Im projected to win by debra.
    EmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Erfisflat said:
    Wow, 100% agree. "Scientific consensus is lying or ignorant, because they were wrong about this. Im projected to win by debra.


    Hey buddy, how far are you on the Flat Earth evidences?

    Here are the things that I have out on my, .. umm drafting table, which I desperately need help putting together?

    * Mud Fossils, especially the mountain sized giants, (first I said "yeah, so these guys found some mountains that look like giant people, so what?") but there are just way too many of them. Especially that my wife grew up near these two mountains that they named "Man and Woman Mountains" in Tagalog, which at first look just seem like regular mountains, until you examine it closer. Or
    * Mountains that are actually cities that look like they've been deteriorated by long standing flood (not just the few months of Noah's flood!?
    * Big hill sized rocks that show parts of machines, just like the CNC machines I used to work on!?
    * Precision drilled holes with tool marks, .. flat, and spaced within thousandths of an inch!? Why isn't the main stream media on archeological finds not on this like flies? But will write books upon books on some dried up jaw bones they claim of the missing-link bs. that were found by "accident" in a cave!
    * YouTube MrE's more and more convincing revelations that not only are 90% of all those tall skinny female supermodels men (tranny's) but the more we look, actors may be the opposite sex of what they portray.
    For instance, look at this:



    time 2:50 - Meryl Streep stops short of saying "bust my balls", .. why? Because the internet is now buzzing with the revelation of Trannyes in Hollywood. and why not? Remember in the old B&W movie days where men played all those woman parts? Well that was ingeniously played out as a joke so we would accept it, but today, well all I can say is that I've seen it with my own eyes, in my younger days visiting go-go bars with my biker friends, the most beautiful and sexy dancer in this one bar turned out to be a Tranny.
    Now look at Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep and try to picture them nude just their bone structure (I know, yuck!) but seriously, I honestly could see Tom as a woman, and Meryl as a man. 

    * Was TV invented specifically as a mass-mind control apparatus to delude the whole world? (well duh, right? They are called Diva's Stars, Actors, .. I mean: "The Magic of Disney" says it all, .. everyone pretends, and the ones that can pretend, or give the best illusion of a particular real life character gets the most money!
    Imagine about 100 years, every day from 3 to 10 hours a day that some people sit before the tube, .. of brain washing, watching actors pretend, play "make-belief"!?
    No wonder that there are so few of us that actually question all the B.S., life is too hard, people can't wait to go home and watch actors portrayal of an alternate reality. We don't even have to exhort any energy to laugh, .. they have the laughing machines laughing for us every few seconds.
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Evidence said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Wow, 100% agree. "Scientific consensus is lying or ignorant, because they were wrong about this. Im projected to win by debra.


    Hey buddy, how far are you on the Flat Earth evidences?

    Here are the things that I have out on my, .. umm drafting table, which I desperately need help putting together?

    * Mud Fossils, especially the mountain sized giants, (first I said "yeah, so these guys found some mountains that look like giant people, so what?") but there are just way too many of them. Especially that my wife grew up near these two mountains that they named "Man and Woman Mountains" in Tagalog, which at first look just seem like regular mountains, until you examine it closer. Or
    * Mountains that are actually cities that look like they've been deteriorated by long standing flood (not just the few months of Noah's flood!?
    * Big hill sized rocks that show parts of machines, just like the CNC machines I used to work on!?
    * Precision drilled holes with tool marks, .. flat, and spaced within thousandths of an inch!? Why isn't the main stream media on archeological finds not on this like flies? But will write books upon books on some dried up jaw bones they claim of the missing-link bs. that were found by "accident" in a cave!
    * YouTube MrE's more and more convincing revelations that not only are 90% of all those tall skinny female supermodels men (tranny's) but the more we look, actors may be the opposite sex of what they portray.
    For instance, look at this:



    time 2:50 - Meryl Streep stops short of saying "bust my balls", .. why? Because the internet is now buzzing with the revelation of Trannyes in Hollywood. and why not? Remember in the old B&W movie days where men played all those woman parts? Well that was ingeniously played out as a joke so we would accept it, but today, well all I can say is that I've seen it with my own eyes, in my younger days visiting go-go bars with my biker friends, the most beautiful and sexy dancer in this one bar turned out to be a Tranny.
    Now look at Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep and try to picture them nude just their bone structure (I know, yuck!) but seriously, I honestly could see Tom as a woman, and Meryl as a man. 

    * Was TV invented specifically as a mass-mind control apparatus to delude the whole world? (well duh, right? They are called Diva's Stars, Actors, .. I mean: "The Magic of Disney" says it all, .. everyone pretends, and the ones that can pretend, or give the best illusion of a particular real life character gets the most money!
    Imagine about 100 years, every day from 3 to 10 hours a day that some people sit before the tube, .. of brain washing, watching actors pretend, play "make-belief"!?
    No wonder that there are so few of us that actually question all the B.S., life is too hard, people can't wait to go home and watch actors portrayal of an alternate reality. We don't even have to exhort any energy to laugh, .. they have the laughing machines laughing for us every few seconds.
    Hey, flat earth is now 99.9% confirmed. Of course there is the one thing that bugs me, but it isn't about the earth, it's about the firmament. The whole south celestial so called pole. The earth is without a doubt flat, but I can't figure out the mechanics of the firmament, or at least our perception of this part of it. What I wouldn't give for a chance to see the flat earth before the flood. In the time of giants. Whether they were trees or humanoid, the level of intelligence could have been astronomical, pun intended. Have you confirmed that the south celestial pole exists? I've seen Jeranism demonstrate the illusion with a dome shaped glass, and I've seen explanations with relevance to anti-crepuscular rays. What's your take?

    I searched for man and woman mountain and found nothing. It sounded very interesting and I would like to see more. As for "take a closer look", have you took a look from further away? This helps with giants. I'm reminded of the occultic movie Moana's Te Fiti. If you haven't see the movie I highly suggest it as it is surprisingly aligned with this topic in code, and may even give you more insight. So you're leaning more toward giants than giant trees?

    ODD first pointed it out as far as I know.



    Would also like more information on the city mountains and rock machines, as well as ancient tools. Drop me a link or two.




    EvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • @Evidence They took down the video from your above post about mud fossils. Lucky I got to watch it. I'll have to look for more. May lead to something we aren't supposed to see.
    EvidenceEmeryPearson
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • @Erfisflat Well I'm just scratching the surface on the giants and or giant trees, also the timing since we know there were giants in those days, meaning before Noah's flood, then we see that we have again giants after the flood.

    Here is what I'm looking at:
    * Our "msn kind" existence started with Adam and Eve, right? We read that God built a Garden and put it in the East side in Eden. So we know Eden existed before.
    * we don't know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden before their fall, the Bible only hints on important events, and living in the Garden with God, everything went peaceful, so there was no need to name all the children born to Adam and Eve before their fall, but we know that Cain, after killing his brother Abel, went away from his parents, found a wife and built a city named after his son Enoch.
    ****************

    Genesis 4:13 And Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear! 14 Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.”

    Who was there that would want to kill Cain, .. who, .. his mom and dad Adam and Eve? And where did he find a wife if he was the first born of Adam and Eve?

    Genesis 4:16 Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch.

    We have a place called Eden that preexisted before God made the Garden where He put Adam and Eve. God put this garden in the east of Eden. And now we see there was a land called Nod. That's clear as day!

    My first notion was that Adam and Eve must have had children IN the Garden, maybe even a lot of children where they must have been told to leave along with Adam and Eve, the problem is that WHY is there no mention of  all these Children (if there really were) leaving, or with Adam and Eve when they beget  Cain and Abel?

    Genesis 5:1This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created.

    I think I found the answer, will have to look deeper into it though.

    Yes, I know THEY are following me and deleting videos that I use to prove a point. Not all, but some that I may have gotten right. Some of these people I feel are here on this sight, ..  also???
    EmeryPearson


  • That's funny, .. ODD says it's another MK-ultra movie loaded with symbolism, serves as mental conditioning and predictive programming, .. yet says he watched the movie 5 times, and he's goin to watch it at least a few more times, .. lol

    Sounds like his purpose is the same as Alex Jones's, .. MK over MK!?
    EmeryPearson
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch