- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,981
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, but you did not follow the laws of hydrology. That was an example of extreme Dunning-Kruger Effect.
You still don't seem to understand what an Ad hom is. And that was an observation. Not an insult. That makes you doubly wrong.Ad homs don't help.
You still don't seem to understand what an Ad hom is. And that was an observation. Not an insult. That makes you doubly wrong.
You took the simplest possible way that water could flow and thought that you could apply it to the world as a whole. Hydrology does not work that way. To raise sea level, which you have to magically anyway, to the point where all the people are killed would involve massive turbulent flow since the Earth is not flat. It has terrain. It has topography.
You used the term to impugn my argument by impugning my intellect. That's ad hom.
Are you saying that people don't drown in calm water?
Yep, and the massive turbulence that such a flood would cause would leave behind massive evidence. You keep forgetting that you need a flood magnitudes of order stronger than any flood ever observed in the Earth's history.Sure, there would be areas of turbulence, but turbulence is the effect of water velocity and volume as well as topography.
Yes, but you did not follow the laws of hydrology. That was an example of extreme Dunning-Kruger Effect.
This is an example of a red herring. Another logical fallacy.
You took the simplest possible way that water could flow and thought that you could apply it to the world as a whole. Hydrology does not work that way.
Where do you live? Fargo, North Dakota? Seriously you are out of your depths here.Most of the earth's surface is flat to gently upward sloping. Water flowing over it would indeed be subject to the hydrology that I pointed out. Turbulence would of course be present, but not in the widespread massive form that you envision. Most flood events that we see have a main channel with fast moving violent water devolving into large areas of slow rising rather calm 'backwater'.
A combination of all but the last. And I have the experience of debating for years. Such an analysis is quite well supported by both my experience and your posts. Education can cure D-K.Is that a diagnosis, observation, opinion, speculation, or thinly veiled insult? And which one are you qualified to make?
I never made that claim. That was why it was a red herring.Where's the red herring?
I was addressing your assertion that massive amounts of turbulent water were needed to drown those people.
A combination of all but the last. And I have the experience of debating for years. Such an analysis is quite well supported by both my experience and your posts. Education can cure D-K.
I never made that claim. That was why it was a red herring.
Where do you live? Fargo, North Dakota?
Not that flat. I have lived in several areas, and visited many others. Most are not that flat. Flood plains tend to be flat. As are some old lake bottoms or salt flats. Your pictures are of flood plains. And even flood plains have turbulence from large floods. There was one that probably inspired your myth.I driven over most the U.S.; very flat.
Where's all this turbulence you're talking about?
Photos: Aerial views capture scale of deadly Midwest flooding
What the historic Midwest floods look like from space — and from the ground
Not that flat. I have lived in several areas, and visited many others. Most are not that flat. Flood plains tend to be flat. As are some old lake bottoms or salt flats. Your pictures are of flood plains. And even flood plains have turbulence from large floods. There was one that probably inspired your myth.
The posts that you write here support me extremely well. And again D-K is not a rating of intelligence. It deals with excessive confidence in an area where one is not educated.You don't know me well enough to apply that diagnosis. I perceive that you are pretty smart. I also am pretty smart, and by the most important metrics. Posting here is entertainment. I don't get into these arguments in the real world.
Paris might be. I have never been there. Man tends to control streams when and where he can. For example, though not hilly Minneapolis is not on a flood plain. Even in the worst of floods it is safe even though it is on the Mississippi river.I don't mean 'pancake' flat. Floodplains are defined by historic flooding. If the water overflows historic floodplains it creates new ones. Do you think those flooded cities, like Paris, are defined as floodplains?
Are you saying that the laws of hydrology don't apply to a mythical flood?
The posts that you write here support me extremely well. And again D-K is not a rating of intelligence. It deals with excessive confidence in an area where one is not educated.
Would you care to tell me what you do for a living? I may be able to give you an example that you may be able to relate to.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?