Crystal skull impossible to duplicate in the here and now. Why?

[ChordatesLegacy]

DAD, the only thing you cover is magical mysticism; you seem to have difficulty in separating what your imagination can come up with and what is reality.

X-ray diffraction revealed traces of carborundum (SiC), a hard modern synthetic abrasive, on the Smithsonian skull.

So DAD your pre-flood world was awash with complex chemical processes

Due to the rarity of natural moissanite, silicon carbide is typically man-made. Most often it is used as an abrasive. More recently as a semiconductor and diamond simulant of gem quality. The simplest manufacturing process is to combine silica sand and carbon in an Acheson graphite electric resistance furnace at a high temperature, between 1600 and 2500 °C.
The material formed in the Acheson furnace varies in purity, according to its distance from the graphite resistor heat source. Colorless, pale yellow and green crystals have the highest purity and are found closest to the resistor. The color changes to blue and black at greater distance from the resistor, and these darker crystals are less pure. Nitrogen and aluminium are common impurities, and they affect the electrical conductivity of SiC.
Purer silicon carbide can be made by the more expensive process of chemical vapor deposition (CVD). Commercial large single crystal silicon carbide is grown using a physical vapor transport method commonly known as modified Lely method.
Purer silicon carbide can also be prepared by the thermal decomposition of a polymer, poly (methylsilyne), under an inert atmosphere at low temperatures. Relative to the CVD process, the pyrolysis method is advantageous because the polymer can be formed into various shapes prior to thermalization into the ceramic.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

DAD; your argument is that such skulls cannot be created today; total bull excrument, here are modern examples for sale.

From India and for sale.

India skulls for sale

From Brisil for sale

LINK

For China for sale.

LINK

DAD your arguments are as solid as bull slurry

Now your argument is destroyed, you have been shown modern skulls, even where to buy them. Also you have been given the evidence for the original skulls being fakes just like your creationist bull excrement.

You Lose.

 

[Bombila]

Dad, it doesn't even matter that hard quartz crystal can be carved today - as I've already mentioned and you seem to have missed, you don't need modern tools to carve the stuff - people have been carving it for centuries! And often making far more elaborate objects than solid skulls. The Chinese, Romans, Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and countless others made containers, vases, out of the stuff, with hollowed out interiors and everything from lions to goddesses carved on the exteriors.

http://www.worldartandantiques.com/waagallery/v/cry/?g2_page=4

http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fatimiddynastyegyptrockhl5.jpg

 

[pgp_protector]

Looks at old avatar image.

I love Crystal Skulls

 

[Bombila]

Looks at old avatar image.

I love Crystal Skulls

Looks fake to me - probably mold-cast reconstituted young amber.

 

[pgp_protector]

Looks fake to me - probably mold-cast reconstituted young amber.

What !!
Tell it to my bird

 

[agentorange20]

So if we send it to a lab, they will not know who made it, or what quarry it was from either?

Knowing 'who' made it is contingent upon the methods deduced to make it and its location when it was found. That said, we are left to deduce that some ancient Mayans (or whoever) couldn't have made such artifacts (thus a fake) as they didn't have the sophisticated tools and machinery required for such precision.

Your argument was this was evidence for some radically relatively advanced civilization back at this time or prior (da flood), though this too doesn't follow. Why, of all things, would only a crystal skull be remaining of such a civilization? Surely if we can find gold, trinkets and artifacts dating back to early Chinese empire and in other coulters 5000 years ago, surely we should find evidence for some advanced civilization prior to the flood myth. So far, nada.

Your response to the non-evidence for an advanced civilization? 'It was all destroyed in the flood!' Nope, sorry, absense of evidence isn't evidence for much.

 

[agentorange20]

Next, I never said they made it. If they never had the technology then, maybe it was found, and was a remnant from before the split, or flood, when the universe state was different.

Split? hmmmm, what? What evidence is there for any universe state that was different which would correlate and explain crystal skulls?

See, I look at the possibility that they never made it also,

But you don't consider it. And yet you cite a resource to back up your claim that makes absurd claims backed by hollow evidence.

except that I do not assume it had to be made after, and therefore must be a fraud.

Says the guy who earlier stated such crystal skulls can't be made today. Please, keep yakking we love watching people hang themselves with their own rope.

The lifespans have nothing to do with crystal skulls.

You bet your [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] is doesn't.

The long lifespans were just a feature of the different state past.

A 'feature'? So, what caused the 'feature' to stop and not continue to present day where can people live 900 year long lives? How does this 'feature' work, what processes and mechanisms are invovled to allow for such a looooong life span? Evidence for any of this this?

The time when the big pyramid of Egypt could easily be built.

'the big pyramid of egypt'? mmmmm, which one, there are many of them? It's funny you mention the pyramids though, the dynasties involved in their construction occured directly when the 'no-way flood' occured. Somehow it didn't stop them from using expendable labor and in building such monuments.

The time when there were spirits marrying women of earth.

Could you at least throw a date out, 'the time' isn't very, shall we say, specific. Evidence for marying spirits?

The time when we were likely not meat eaters, etc etc.

Not likely meat eaters? And the evidence for this? Do 40,000 year old cave paintings of Aurochs and other hunted animals suffice as evidence? Or how about our dental arcade, specifically used for an omnivore diet?

 

[Bombila]

agentorange20, that'd be a windmill yer tilting at. Dad will whir around with great energy while standing still. Your horse is noble, your armour impeccable, best you'll acheive is to knock a shingle or two off.

Not that I take my own advice.

 

[dad]

DAD; your argument is that such skulls cannot be created today; total bull excrument, here are modern examples for sale.




Now your argument is destroyed, you have been shown modern skulls, even where to buy them. Also you have been given the evidence for the original skulls being fakes just like your creationist bull excrement.

You Lose.

Tha site I used in the OP did say that they couldn't be made today. The fact that they can, does prove that they are mistaken. That is IF you, rather than paste store adverts, show us HOEW they were carved!! If this part of the article I cited is wrong, that is fine, so far it isn't even dealt with. The point was not that crystals could not be carrved, but in a certain way that the old skulls were carved. You lose for now, again!!
The Mitchell-Hedges family loaned the skull to Hewlett-Packard Laboratories for extensive study in 1970. Art restorer Frank Dorland oversaw the testing at the Santa Clara, California, computer equipment manufacturer, a leading facility for crystal research. The HP examinations yielded some startling results.
Researchers found that the skull had been carved against the natural axis of the crystal. Modern crystal sculptors always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods."
(original link from OP)


"

Now, even if that part of the article was shown false, and I somehow wonder if you can do that, the main point remains that we don't know if they may be pre flood. The red herring of whether or not the Mayans or others could have carved them is, in other words, moot.

Before you is the puzzle of where they come from. They admit not even knoowing the quarry, or source! All that we have is evidence of some rotary action. Big deal. And the diamond like hard stuff was apparently used that is now found below the earth, or in space. Whipee doo.

You have not yet either ruled out the pre flood or pre split earth as the source, nor shown how the crystals are now carved, regarding the grain, as the artiicle mentioned.

Perhaps, rather than grasping at straws to get some perceived victory, you ought to focus??

When all is said and done, you just are not able to say that the pre split men could not have carved these weird things.

And I couldn't win any more than that.
Nice try.

 

[dad]

Dad, it doesn't even matter that hard quartz crystal can be carved today - as I've already mentioned and you seem to have missed, you don't need modern tools to carve the stuff - people have been carving it for centuries! And often making far more elaborate objects than solid skulls. The Chinese, Romans, Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and countless others made containers, vases, out of the stuff, with hollowed out interiors and everything from lions to goddesses carved on the exteriors.

http://www.worldartandantiques.com/waagallery/v/cry/?g2_page=4

http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fatimiddynastyegyptrockhl5.jpg

Can you show how that means that they did so against the grain, as the article says the skulls were done? Or how that means that some crystal skulls may not have been remnants of the pre flood time?

 

[dad]

DAD, the only thing you cover is magical mysticism; you seem to have difficulty in separating what your imagination can come up with and what is reality.

X-ray diffraction revealed traces of carborundum (SiC), a hard modern synthetic abrasive, on the Smithsonian skull.

So DAD your pre-flood world was awash with complex chemical processes

Due to the rarity of natural moissanite, silicon carbide is typically man-made.

Things that are rare in a post split earth would tend to be man made, unless from some meteor, or something. So??



You seem to be proving my point. Thanks for that.

 

[dad]

Knowing 'who' made it is contingent upon the methods deduced to make it and its location when it was found. That said, we are left to deduce that some ancient Mayans (or whoever) couldn't have made such artifacts (thus a fake) as they didn't have the sophisticated tools and machinery required for such precision.

Faulty reasoning. They did not need to make it, they could be from before the split. We can't know what they could do before that.

Your argument was this was evidence for some radically relatively advanced civilization back at this time or prior (da flood), though this too doesn't follow. Why, of all things, would only a crystal skull be remaining of such a civilization? Surely if we can find gold, trinkets and artifacts dating back to early Chinese empire and in other coulters 5000 years ago, surely we should find evidence for some advanced civilization prior to the flood myth. So far, nada.

No. Men can't even figure out where to look for evidence oof the flood, let alone pre flood knowledge. Remember also, that our sort of machinery and technology would not be needed to work with the rules in pplace in a different state.
For example, if there was a way to counteract the forces that acted as our gravity, then they wouldn't need rockets, or high tech stuff. For example, to move the great stones for the pyramid.We do not know what they would need. Maybe all they needed was a full moon! Ha, Or maybe they just simply didn't have great weight then? Maybe a force that worked on both a spiritual and physical earth did not affect physical mass in a way that big things were much heavier than little things? We just can't know how they did stuff, and if you think we ought to find present style machinations as some sort of evidence they coulld get things done, you are mistaken.

Your response to the non-evidence for an advanced civilization? 'It was all destroyed in the flood!' Nope, sorry, absense of evidence isn't evidence for much.

See above. You need to knoow where to look, and what to look for.

 

[dad]

Split? hmmmm, what? What evidence is there for any universe state that was different which would correlate and explain crystal skulls?

The evidence of history, for one thing, liike the long lifespans of Sumer, or the bible. The spiritual closeness to the physical realm of old, and all sorts of differences we see in the writing of the ancients, and bible.

In a world that is a different state, carving some crystal not against the grain, or some such is not hard to conceive. After all, science simple doesn't know.

But you don't consider it. And yet you cite a resource to back up your claim that makes absurd claims backed by hollow evidence.

Someone mentioned the skulls to me, as a mystery, so I googled them. There are thousands of sites on the mystery, I simply used the first article I found. Other things I look at, or that posters add confirm that science knows little aboout it. So, they need to know more, before making hollow claims, no??

Says the guy who earlier stated such crystal skulls can't be made today. Please, keep yakking we love watching people hang themselves with their own rope.

Well, if you read the article it talks of how they are carved, and how it would shatter if carved as the old ones were. If that is wrong, fine, they still have no clue, apparently, so I win either way. In the meantime, no one addressed the issue even, why yak??

A 'feature'? So, what caused the 'feature' to stop and not continue to present day where can people live 900 year long lives? How does this 'feature' work, what processes and mechanisms are invovled to allow for such a looooong life span? Evidence for any of this this?

The creator. In changing the laws, and fabric of the universe we live in, He limited our lifespan, and ability to do too much damage, and tooo much evil, in a long life. As it is, He already is going to have to step in one day, to sytop us from killing ourselves entirely. What other reasons He had, how could we know? But on a positive note, this silly death state is temporary, a new state universe and earth is coming forever, and these will be no more.

'the big pyramid of egypt'? mmmmm, which one, there are many of them? It's funny you mention the pyramids though, the dynasties involved in their construction occured directly when the 'no-way flood' occured. Somehow it didn't stop them from using expendable labor and in building such monuments.

If I recall, the pattern was for the pyramids to get smaller with time. bet they needed more labor for some of the small ones, than for the great one.

Could you at least throw a date out, 'the time' isn't very, shall we say, specific. Evidence for marying spirits?

About 45-4600 years ago. Gen records it just before the dire warning from the Almighty Himself to man, that something BIIG was coming down the pipes in 120 years. (I used to assume that was the flood, but now assume it is the split, which was a centusry after the flood, as I deduce the evidences)

Not likely meat eaters? And the evidence for this? Do 40,000 year old cave paintings of Aurochs and other hunted animals suffice as evidence? Or how about our dental arcade, specifically used for an omnivore diet?

If men fled to caves at the start of the flood, they would have maybe a month or two, if high up, before dying. Lots of time for the kids to draw animal pics, cause they saw the animals there too, trying to flee the water. Either that, or after the flood, maybe some lived in caves, travelling, and had some ddodle time. If so, that means that more intricate drawings need not represent great time, rather just that an adult doodled sometimes!!

If they were hunting the animal in the pic, I guess this new thing man did was of note in the minds of people, and reflected in the doodling post flood. I doubt they hunted for food pre flood. Hoowever, they might have killed predators, or pesky critters, or even deer, and etc, for furs!! God did, after Eden, Personally, and presented them with the world's first fur coat, yoou mayy recall!

Amazing stuff.

 

[Bombila]

Can you show how that means that they did so against the grain, as the article says the skulls were done? Or how that means that some crystal skulls may not have been remnants of the pre flood time?

Go to the library and look for some decent volumes on ancient artifacts and/or art. It's almost impossible to find good photos online because there are thousands of sites on crystal skulls because of the movie. I did link to two sites, one of which has a photo of a hollowed out rock quartz crystal vase (same material as the skulls) with elaborate carved handles.

I have seen with my own eyes, because I have been in museums that display such objects, much more elaborate ancient carvings in this stone and many other stones. Yes, parts of these objects are carved 'against the grain'. It is more difficult to do this because you run the risk of the stone shearing, but it can be and was done by thousands of artisans in the past, and it can also be achieved without electric tools today.

Here are two links describing some of the tools and techniques the Egyptians used. Note that plain sand played a major role in carving hard stone like quartz. The ancient Chinese used equivalent techniques, and also used quartzite sand as their main abrasive.

http://books.google.com/books?id=jP...X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA167,M1

http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_stone_vase_making.html

Whoever wrote the article you linked to in the first post must be completely ignorant of modern and ancient carving, and has spent little time in museums.

Nothing can prove your 'split' happened or didn't happen, as far as I can tell, nor that crystal skulls were made before, during after. The only thing that can be proved in this instance is that the skulls are in no way out of the ordinary.

 

[agentorange20]

Faulty reasoning. They did not need to make it, they could be from before the split. We can't know what they could do before that.

Sure, they specfically didn't need to make it, but even if they didn't it still doesn't follow that some 'pre-flood' civilization did, it could just as well be some hypothetical 'citizens from Atlantis. If you're willing to exclude the Mayans simply for lack of evidence on their part, how can you conclude which civilization would be responsible for making it in the first place?

No. Men can't even figure out where to look for evidence oof the flood, let alone pre flood knowledge.

And why not? You're now just placating ignorance b/c lacking evidence isn't on your side. Humanity (at least the western christian judeo world) has been looking for 'flood evidence' for many 100's if not 1000's of years. In fact the early Geologists were so adiment about the creation flood narative that this is largely what they went looking for, only to find not much being consistant with story and evidence.

If it occurred there should be bountiful evidence for it. Ark? nope...and heck they even tell you where it should be ! Genetic bottle necks in all organisms populations 4000 years ago? Nope. How is that the 5th and 6th Egyptian Dynasties went on fully uninterrupted and built the Pyramids during the flood period?

Remember also, that our sort of machinery and technology would not be needed to work with the rules in pplace in a different state.

Physics is physics, they are what they are and they are unchanging laws and there is no evidence in the past that they were different to any degree let alone enough for the nonsense you talk of. Rationalize much?

For example, if there was a way to counteract the forces that acted as our gravity, then they wouldn't need rockets, or high tech stuff.

'IF' being the key operative word here...gravity is gravity, call it by any other name it will still be the same. So, what you're proposing is that in 'pre-flood' time gravity was 1) weaker (evidence please), or 2) didn't exist (evidence please).

Problem: Gravity is what keeps us earth bound and ensures that our muslces develop in response to exertion in movement, with little to no gravity (as it would be on a trip to Mars) muscles antrophy (shrink) and become weaker, as well as bones becomming more brittle. This type of condition wouldn't help much in lifting it by brut strength and or pullies (which is about as sophisticated as they could have been) Oh I know, next you'll just whip up another *miracle* in which IF musles were super duper stronger anyway....

For example, to move the great stones for the pyramid.We do not know what they would need.

Tools, engineering. Not magic.

Maybe all they needed was a full moon!

Uh, no. A moon and its mass is always full, regardless if it's a 1/2, 1/4 or full. Again, you're appealing to ignorance.

Ha, Or maybe they just simply didn't have great weight then?

Evdience for this? Sure, keep rationalizing, lets see how far you can bend it!

Maybe a force that worked on both a spiritual and physical earth did not affect physical mass in a way that big things were much heavier than little things?

Again, maybe being the key operative word here. Evidence for this?

We just can't know how they did stuff,

Nice defeatist attitude. We certainly wont if we placate to ignorance and engage in 'IF's and 'maybe's' built on no evidence at all.

and if you think we ought to find present style machinations as some sort of evidence they coulld get things done, you are mistaken.

And why not? If they in the pre-flood were so sophisticated to build such skulls and such they would have plenty of technology besides just this lying around.

You need to knoow where to look, and what to look for.

You're on crack, the bible tells you twits where to look for the Ark and still haven't found it. The Tower of Babal? Same result. Ark of the covenant? Same. Absense of evidence isn't evidence of anything.

 

[agentorange20]

The evidence of history, for one thing, liike the long lifespans of Sumer, or the bible.

And this indicates what, that people wrote fanciful stories about kings (and royalty only) living to absurd ages? So what.

The spiritual closeness to the physical realm of old, and all sorts of differences we see in the writing of the ancients, and bible.

And not any *other* holly texts, huh? Not all holy books are uniform in their claims on anything in the 'spiritual sense', what indication is there that one above all others is correct in this regard?

In a world that is a different state, carving some crystal not against the grain, or some such is not hard to conceive.

I guess anything is conceivable in 'fantasy candy land' where no natural laws need apply, still what you propose is absurd and backed by nothing empircally testable.

After all, science simple doesn't know.

Uh, huh. I guess you didn't read that science article earlier denoting it a fraud?

Someone mentioned the skulls to me, as a mystery, so I googled them.There are thousands of sites on the mystery, I simply used the first article I found.

1000's of sites doesn't make it legit, sorry to say. Anything scientifically peer reviewed? Using the first article you find and not going any further is about what we'd expect from a person making a comment in which you had the audacity to imply that no modern technology could make them. This is to be expected.

Other things I look at, or that posters add confirm that science knows little aboout it. So, they need to know more, before making hollow claims, no??

Hollow, yes. You reviewed ONE article, you said so yourself. A sample size of 'one' is hardly anything substantial, do more research into it and quit parsing to cherry pick.

Well, if you read the article it talks of how they are carved, and how it would shatter if carved as the old ones were.

I did read it, don't presume so much. Nothing on it is sourced, cited, or referenced anywhere let alone on that page, it has about as much credibility as the National Enquirer. I guess you (somehow?) also missed the head line near the bottom challenging you:

"P.S.
Crystal Skulls 'are Modern Fakes' ?

By Paul Rincon
Science reporter, BBC News"​

The creator. In changing the laws, and fabric of the universe we live in, He limited our lifespan, and ability to do too much damage, and tooo much evil, in a long life.

Naaa, you're now just begging the question, entirely false logic. You make a claim, and then can't support it based on evidence and now appeal to supernatural magic by some agent which you also can't explain. You've done nothing but extend the ignorance to another level, it didn't explain anything. Evidence for this, what processes were used, something ya know, testable?

What other reasons He had, how could we know?

Cowtow and appeal to ignorance enough?

You ---> Bowing to ignorance. if you don't know, say you don't know, that is fine, but don't *pretend* to know by injecting some imaginary agent which neither of us can objectively substantiate in the first place. You might as well be claiming Magical Pixies allowed for such nonsense to occur.

bet they needed more labor for some of the small ones, than for the great one.

Don't you mean they would need LESS labor for the smaller ones? Are you high?

(I used to assume that was the flood, but now assume it is the split, which was a centusry after the flood, as I deduce the evidences)

Sure, no real supportive evidence for the no-way flood, so its time to give up on that one and turn over to some other myth.

'split' = ? Define, in details and what processes are used and how we objectively know and have tested this 'split' event.

If men fled to caves at the start of the flood, they would have maybe a month or two, if high up, before dying. Lots of time for the kids to draw animal pics,

(Palms Face) :o Again, the operative word here being 'IF'. Unless you have some supportive evidence, quit the assumptions already. No, the cave paintings are INSIDE caves, and these caves are subterranean and are in the lowlands are located throughout mostly western Europe. Such flooding would have devastated these areas first. Sorry, but no kiddos could draw such art, this was something a little more carefully articulated.

 

[dad]

Go to the library and look for some decent volumes on ancient artifacts and/or art. It's almost impossible to find good photos online because there are thousands of sites on crystal skulls because of the movie. I did link to two sites, one of which has a photo of a hollowed out rock quartz crystal vase (same material as the skulls) with elaborate carved handles.

I have seen with my own eyes, because I have been in museums that display such objects, much more elaborate ancient carvings in this stone and many other stones. Yes, parts of these objects are carved 'against the grain'. It is more difficult to do this because you run the risk of the stone shearing, but it can be and was done by thousands of artisans in the past, and it can also be achieved without electric tools today.

Here are two links describing some of the tools and techniques the Egyptians used. Note that plain sand played a major role in carving hard stone like quartz. The ancient Chinese used equivalent techniques, and also used quartzite sand as their main abrasive.

http://books.google.com/books?id=jP...X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA167,M1

http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_stone_vase_making.html

Whoever wrote the article you linked to in the first post must be completely ignorant of modern and ancient carving, and has spent little time in museums.

Nothing can prove your 'split' happened or didn't happen, as far as I can tell, nor that crystal skulls were made before, during after. The only thing that can be proved in this instance is that the skulls are in no way out of the ordinary.

Speaking of missing the point, how about the way they are carved? Against the grain, or with it??

 

[dad]

Sure, they specfically didn't need to make it, but even if they didn't it still doesn't follow that some 'pre-flood' civilization did, it could just as well be some hypothetical 'citizens from Atlantis. If you're willing to exclude the Mayans simply for lack of evidence on their part, how can you conclude which civilization would be responsible for making it in the first place?

Who cares what you think would follow? The fact is we don't know. Deal with it. Now, if you can make these things without shattering them, against the grain, maybe we could look at what you have to say. IF you also establish that they never had the things in the Mayan or ancient times as well!

And why not? You're now just placating ignorance b/c lacking evidence isn't on your side. Humanity (at least the western christian judeo world) has been looking for 'flood evidence' for many 100's if not 1000's of years. In fact the early Geologists were so adiment about the creation flood narative that this is largely what they went looking for, only to find not much being consistant with story and evidence.

Why not? Because they are not aware that a greater change on earth and in the universe happened after the flood.

If it occurred there should be bountiful evidence for it. Ark? nope...and heck they even tell you where it should be ! Genetic bottle necks in all organisms populations 4000 years ago? Nope. How is that the 5th and 6th Egyptian Dynasties went on fully uninterrupted and built the Pyramids during the flood period?

Easy, because your dates are wrong! Look at the basis for them, and you will see same state past dating methods. I kid you not. As for evidence of high water on a planet that later saw an ice age, and continental separation, mountain building, and etc, need you really ask??!

Physics is physics, they are what they are and they are unchanging laws and there is no evidence in the past that they were different to any degree let alone enough for the nonsense you talk of. Rationalize much?

Theeey are what they are, yes. But what was what it was and will be what it willl be? That is the question. Unless of course, you want to stay in the here and limited now.

'IF' being the key operative word here...gravity is gravity, call it by any other name it will still be the same. So, what you're proposing is that in 'pre-flood' time gravity was 1) weaker (evidence please), or 2) didn't exist (evidence please).

Precisely!!!!!! Evidence that gravity, and laws of the universe as we know them existed??? = zero.

Problem

: Gravity is what keeps us earth bound and ensures that our muslces develop in response to exertion in movement, with little to no gravity (as it would be on a trip to Mars) muscles antrophy (shrink) and become weaker, as well as bones becomming more brittle. This type of condition wouldn't help much in lifting it by brut strength and or pullies (which is about as sophisticated as they could have been) Oh I know, next you'll just whip up another *miracle* in which IF musles were super duper stronger anyway....

Without a force in place to govern the universe, whatever state it is, you would have a probllem. Relax, God always has rules in place for whatever state universe exists.

Tools, engineering. Not magic.

What sort of tools would be needed in heaven? How about a different state, spiritual inncluded past? Oh, you have no idea? OK.

Uh, no. A moon and its mass is always full, regardless if it's a 1/2, 1/4 or full. Again, you're appealing to ignorance.

In any point on earth almost, we can see phases of the mooon. This is news to you!!? In Egypt, is there some reason you have that they woulld not see moon cycles??? What, it was hovering?

Evdience for this? Sure, keep rationalizing, lets see how far you can bend it!

We need no evidence foor how a different state works, nor can we have any in the here and now, at least direct evidence. We are limited to the laws and state of our present universe. This is news??

Again, maybe being the key operative word here. Evidence for this?

There is evidence in history that men belived spirits were right here among us. Also other differences that are imppossible in a present state. Yes.

Nice defeatist attitude. We certainly wont if we placate to ignorance and engage in 'IF's and 'maybe's' built on no evidence at all.[/quoote] Do not confuse honesty with defeatism. How could yoou know how the spiritual also works???????

And why not? If they in the pre-flood were so sophisticated to build such skulls and such they would have plenty of technology besides just this lying around.

Says who??? Why would grandious tools be needed there?

You're on crack, the bible tells you twits where to look for the Ark and still haven't found it.

False. No one tells us to look for squat. Who is on what here!!???

The Tower of Babal? Same result. Ark of the covenant? Same. Absense of evidence isn't evidence of anything.

The evidence of different tongues seem to be here. The evidence of spirits not being in the cloud level seems to be here. The evidence that we live a short life seems to be here. The evidence trees no longer can grow in a week seems to be here. Etc. Am I missing something??

 

[dad]

And this indicates what, that people wrote fanciful stories about kings (and royalty only) living to absurd ages? So what.

How would you know that the spirits they spoke of, or other things were not real??

And not any *other* holly texts, huh? Not all holy books are uniform in their claims on anything in the 'spiritual sense', what indication is there that one above all others is correct in this regard?

So you accept some boooks on spirits??? Or is this a silly self righteous tirade masking the fact you accept none at all!!??? Be honest.

I guess anything is conceivable in 'fantasy candy land' where no natural laws need apply, still what you propose is absurd and backed by nothing empircally testable.

Speaking of testable, please test the same state past now for us!!! What's sa matter, lost your nerve??? Spiritual things have tested well all through history. Of course they never used your labs, and physical only limited tests.

Uh, huh. I guess you didn't read that science article earlier denoting it a fraud?

The skull is a fraud because..... the Mayans didn't have the wherwithall to carve them. Ha. Pay attention. I agree. The Mayans, if these were pre flood relics, found them. Not carved them. Get it??

1000's of sites doesn't make it legit, sorry to say. Anything scientifically peer reviewed? Using the first article you find and not going any further is about what we'd expect from a person making a comment in which you had the audacity to imply that no modern technology could make them. This is to be expected.

Neither do you make it wrong. So, unless you have evidence here, why flap the jaws???


[[quoote]
Hollow, yes. You reviewed ONE article, you said so yourself. A sample size of 'one' is hardly anything substantial, do more research into it and quit parsing to cherry pick.
[/quoote] I have asked you folks to show us how these things can be carved without shattering, against the grain. If yoou can't provide that, why pretend you have a case??

I did read it, don't presume so much. Nothing on it is sourced, cited, or referenced anywhere let alone on that page, it has about as much credibility as the National Enquirer. I guess you (somehow?) also missed the head line near the bottom challenging you:

"P.S.
Crystal Skulls 'are Modern Fakes' ?

By Paul Rincon
Science reporter, BBC News"​

If you claim they are fakes, or modern now would be a good time to shoow your stuff. Otherwise we will have to resort to smelling your stuff.
​

Naaa, you're now just begging the question, entirely false logic. You make a claim, and then can't support it based on evidence and now appeal to supernatural magic by some agent which you also can't explain. You've done nothing but extend the ignorance to another level, it didn't explain anything. Evidence for this, what processes were used, something ya know, testable?

How is God fallse unless you had some proof??? You expect me to explain how God changed the created state to what we now have??? Ridiculous. But the bible happpens to have that strange 120 year dire warninng from God. I kid you not.

Cowtow and appeal to ignorance enough?

No. There is a differnece between honest ignorance of how God did it, and the false claims of so called science, pretendingthey know.

You ---> Bowing to ignorance. if you don't know, say you don't know, that is fine, but don't *pretend* to know by injecting some imaginary agent which neither of us can objectively substantiate in the first place. You might as well be claiming Magical Pixies allowed for such nonsense to occur.

Magical pixies were not witnessed rising from the dead by many. Nor did they affect the lives of billions through history, or have a bible full of fulfillled prophesy. The bible and sacred scripture is anything but imaginnary. They are real records passed carefully down through the ages.

Don't you mean they would need LESS labor for the smaller ones? Are you high?

No. I mean that, after the different state universe, building even a small one took more labor, Get it???

'split' = ? Define, in details and what processes are used and how we objectively know and have tested this 'split' event.

The separation of the spiritual from the physical about 4400 years ago. Try to test that with physics. Or not.

(Palms Face) :o Again, the operative word here being 'IF'. Unless you have some supportive evidence, quit the assumptions already. No, the cave paintings are INSIDE caves, and these caves are subterranean and are in the lowlands are located throughout mostly western Europe. Such flooding would have devastated these areas first. Sorry, but no kiddos could draw such art, this was something a little more carefully articulated.

No. The flood was more than a century before the split. Subduction and uplift were at work. You need to look at the particular painting, and area. It 't hard to conceive that people ran to the nearest height, even, if, in the big picture of today, it is pretty low. Gwet serious.