Atlantis Online
March 28, 2024, 02:10:57 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: USA showered by a watery comet ~11,000 years ago, ending the Golden Age of man in America
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050926/mammoth_02.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Geology of Atlantis

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Geology of Atlantis  (Read 2458 times)
0 Members and 93 Guests are viewing this topic.
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« Reply #30 on: September 17, 2010, 01:55:25 am »

My reasoning for the non-existence of Atlantis, comes from researching what science teaches us, in a number of different fields.

Very good, Qoais. So does mine about the possible existence of Atlantis. You mention many facts that I accept completely.  The disagreement is with your conclusions.

You say scientific logic is a fallacy.

Nope. Never said it! You are misquoting something that I did say.

Quote
[What I actually said:] Your reasoning is flawed by the "argument to ignorance" fallacy.

You are not science. Neither are your conclusions.

I surmise that you didn't take the time to understand what a "argument to ignorance" is. Wikipedia defines it as something that "asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa). Carl Sagan once pointed out that, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

The problem with some of your assertions is that, because we currently have no evidence of something, you conclude that we will never have such evidence. That's the fallacy. It's your fallacy, not that of science. Read this carefully: I agree that such a future lack of evidence is entirely possible, but the current lack does not prove that such evidence never existed.

If you don't understand this point, then I can't help you, except to say "study it," "meditate on it," and "pray you understand it some day." I'll pray with you. Honest!

Science was never my best subject, but it seems to me that the water would freeze and gravity would bring it back to earth.  It would never get to outer space.  I could be wrong and I don't intend to spend any time checking to see exactly what would happen.

Perhaps logic was not your best subject, either. Perhaps we've spent way too much time on the subject of "splashing water," but water in space would evaporate (or if some of it did momentarily freeze from extreme evaporation, it would then sublimate [ice to vapor]). Because of the volume of water within a splash (if not tiny droplets, but a large wave) would remain liquid until gravity pulled it back down. Just because something is in space does not mean it will remain there. Such a splash would not necessarily achieve orbital velocity. Whether or not a splash makes it to outer space depends on the speed of the original impactor (meteor, asteroid or comet), its size and its trajectory (angle of impact). And again, no, it wouldn't necessarily destroy Earth. I know enough physics, astrophysics, planetology and math to know that.

If I was to go to the trouble of getting you the core samples, would you then come back at me and say it was a fallacy?  That the people taking the cores didn't take them properly or something? 

Fallacy? Nope! Qoais, you really, really need to look up "logical fallacy." It is a term of logical debate. Facts, on the other hand, are facts. Your logical fallacies are not facts, they are erroneous conclusions based on scientific facts. You are confusing your conclusions with scientific facts. They are not the same.

Would I think "that the people taking the cores didn't take them properly or something?" Perhaps, and perhaps not. It depends on the data. If I see photos of the cores and a change of texture that is not documented in their analysis, I would question the nature of that change in texture. Did they overlook some layer? If everything appears to be documented, then I would likely be satisfied.

Quote
Lonestar
The problem with your approach, here, is that these are the dates we know.

You are talking in circles.  As I said, I have to go with what we know.  What else is there?  And who teaches us what we know?  Science.

Qoais, apparently you didn't read the rest of my paragraph. And most certainly you do not understand what "argument to ignorance" logical fallacy is all about. Please look it up.

Talking in circles? Not at all.

Yes, you have to work with what you know, but you jump to some unfounded conclusions from what is known. For instance, you talk about the earliest dates of horse domestication. You are, by your reasoning, taking this as gospel and absolute, which it ain't. That's not science. That's illogical. Science gives us a date, but it's not absolute. It is only the currently known date. That could change. Like the example I gave in the same paragraph that you apparently didn't read. The earliest dates of the use of boats has apparently been pushed back to at least 130,000 BC! The New York Times article is pretty neat. You should check it out. Prior to this discovery, many scientists would not have believed such a date. But like you said, we go with the evidence science discovers. But please, please! PLEASE! Do not confuse your conclusions with facts of science. They are not the same. Got it?

And 130,000 BC for the first known sea travel! That's about 120,000 years before the demise of Atlantis. Could humanity have had boats when Atlantis came around? If Atlantis existed, perhaps so.

You yourself, are studying those very sciences and yet you say that those who came before you and compiled all that data for you to learn, didn't know what they were talking about. 

For shame, Qoais! Again you claim that I said something that I didn't. You are not reading carefully enough. And when you make such a claim, wouldn't it be helpful to quote exactly what was said? You do that sometimes, but when you make a claim about what someone else said, it is particularly helpful to quote word-for-word, so any misunderstandings may be cleared up.

Not only did I never say such a thing, I have never believed such an idea. Scientific misconduct, though not rare, is thankfully in a minority of cases.

Quote
There have been numerous illustrations of the K-T event of 65 Mya (when the dinosaurs were destroyed). Some of those illustrations (likely all following what scientists told the artists) show water from the ocean being splashed several hundred kilometers into space.

Apparently this even never happened either.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11142304
The theory that a large impact from space killed off mammoths and other beasts 13,000 years ago has been discounted.

The theory had relied on small diamonds that would have been created in the collision however now scientists believe the initial interpretation was wrong when further examinations failed to find any traces of them.

I'm sorry to say, Qoais, that this just goes to prove my point. You don't read carefully enough! I was talking about the event 65 million years ago which destroyed the dinosaurs, and you counter with the apparent disproof of the event 13,000 years ago which destroyed the mammoths. Dinosaurs do not equal mammoths. They are completely different creatures living at completely different epochs of Earth's past. 65 million years ago does not equal 13,000 years ago. Enough said!

Ye gads, Qoais! I've had bad days, but you seem to be striking out left and right.

And even if we were talking about the same event (which we weren't!), the fact remains that artists' technical renditions are typically based on what the scientists tell the artists. If scientists were to tell artists to paint waves 300 kilometers high, then they would likely paint them reaching above the atmosphere (temporarily), arcing to fall back to Earth. Got it? I hope so.

Warm regards,  Wink
Rod Martin, Jr.
Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy