Global Village :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For good-natured and mutually-respectful discussions of politics and current affairs. Soap-boxing and the promotion of extremist causes motivated by hate will not be tolerated by our moderators. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Go to: Forum HomeBoardNew Topic

Current Page: 151 of 158
Results 4501 - 4530 of 4726
11 years ago
Nolondil
Me wrote: > I felt that John's political failings made him a better man to > be king of England than Richard, who would never have allowed > Magna Carta to be passed. If we had enjoyed an endless line of > very politically capable kings we would not have developed a > democratic system to take away their powers. "Pot luck" is a well known problem with systems of heredi
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Yes, and fossils of insects, amphibians, and dinosaurs have been found in the Arctic. It is well known that the Arctic was much warmer at certain times in the past. What is the estimated date of this fossil? Is it outside any of those already recognized times?
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
gulsbo wrote: > I know I ought to know this...but...bear with me. > Thor Heyerdahl and others has stated that ancient cultures, > like the Sumerian and Egyptian, could not have reached such > high level without a long period of development....hidden to > us. I guess he was on line with those who believe that these > cultures was a result of heritage, not develompent at the site
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
gulsbo wrote: > Claude wrote: > > > ......like that a double 17....... > > what does it mean? She's noticing the time of your post: 17:17 Many people on this board have an obsession with numbers, in case you hadn't noticed. :)
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
The cloud tops have got to be affected by the level of solar activity. There would probably be a fair amount of variability during the solar cycle. What you'd want to measure is the surface. Since that can be done, at least approximately, with radar there might be records at some university astrophysics department that could be researched for any trends. And actually, with the level of solar act
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
This is so out of contact with reality that I can't even begin to figure out how you can believe any of it. There is no trace of logic or knowledge of science in your entire post. You plainly don't even understand the words and concepts your are manipulating. The Red Spot has nothing to do with ejecting anything into space. It's an atmospheric storm. Do hurricanes on Earth eject rocks into spac
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Yes, the core of Jupiter is believed to be rocky. But the part of Jupiter that would be ejected is the upper layers. Just as the Moon seems to consist of the same material of the crust of the earth, not the core. Why would some of the core shoot up through the outer layers and out into space? Again you have to resort to ever more outlandish imaginary phenomena to produce the desired result. &quo
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Diomede wrote: > Hi Jonny, > > However, the reason you make such ill-defined, unproven > statements/assumptions, it seems to me, is that you are both > (and as are many others) still deeply immersed within the > so-called College-taught Nebular Theory of planetary formation > (which is in itself also an assumption and just like > Swiss-Cheese...full of holes) And the
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
JonnyMcA wrote: > Chances are that Venus was struck by a large body in the early > universe, in its current orbit, to give it its characteruistics > we see today. But Nolonid was meaning that from that point on > it hasnt changed orbit, or been hit by anything. Take us for > example. Earth was struck by a large mars size planet, early > in its formation, which created the mo
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Laird Scranton wrote: > I'm looking for evidence either to explicitly support or > confirm the presumed billion-year old age of Venus, or to > support or confirm the idea that it could be much younger. > And we have been showing you that evidence over and over. You refuse to recognize it as evidence. > If we disallow extreme coincidence as a catch-all answer, > Venus's rot
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Laird Scranton wrote: > Thanks for the link Diomede. I don't pretend to be able to > explain all of the problems. However, I only need to look to > our own moon to know without doubt that, under the right > circumstances, an astronomical body can be ejected from > another astronomical body. > NO. The collision theory does not say that a 'body' was ejected from the Earth by
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Laird Scranton wrote: > Also, Nolondil, your view doesn't make sense. Venus's > retrograde and very slow rotation show beyond question that it > was subject at some point to a major impact. How does that > wash with an orbit so perfect that can never have been > disturbed? Either it was in a less perfect orbit before and > the impact put it into its now-perfect orbit, or else
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Laird Scranton wrote: > Only one. Everyone here is absolutely certain about their > position. Surely someone can offer a fact to support it. We have offered that fact numerous times. I've cited it in every previous thread I've bothered to argue in. Both JonnyMcA and legonromanes have cited again in this very thread. You refuse to recognize it. The planet Venus has 81 percent of the mass
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Voyager wrote: > Legion - you are correct with this post. Amazingly, > astronomers and even physicists such as Einstein, knew V was > wrong based on the physical laws. Since the book was > published, science, rather than vindicate V, has served to > confirm the original opinions of the experts, public opinion > notwithstanding. > > Quite frankly, and this is strictly m
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
SphinxGirl wrote: > Over in Inner Space. It's entitled, "Why I am an atheist - > post your testimony here" I named you by name and expect > (hopefully) each of you to do so. All you have done with your attempted dismissal of all criticism of the shroud is expose your own bias even more literally than before. How can you be so simple-minded as to believe that anyone who doub
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
SphinxGirl wrote: > Nolondil - you ignored what we linked to and understand (or, > actually, do not understand) about the image on the cloth. > Please read my response to Fuzzy. I think I posted the same to > you, but maybe you never read it or didn't understand what it > said? Are you referring to the Latendresse paper? () Yes, I read it. Besides the bizarre argument t
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Richard Fusniak wrote: > "They didn't apparently wrap it the way you would like it, > Fuzzy." > > How did they 'wrap it' then, Janet? The shroud was not > suspended in a flat plane above the face, was it! > > Explain why the face appears correctly proportioned when logic > suggests the shroud was draped over the head which could only > give a distorted asp
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
SphinxGirl wrote: > No, Lee. When the 70's C14 testing came back that the shroud > was created somewhere around 1300 or so, I felt let down by my > intuition, but I accepted the science done on the cloth. Turns > out the wrong part of the shroud was used in the testing and > the cloth really does come from Christ's time! So, there is > restored faith in my intuition, and in
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Richard Fusniak wrote: > "Their is no indication in the shroud image that any side > material was used to form the image" > > Precisely. A cloth would naturally drape by gravity round the > face of a head facing skywards and would therefore give - > assuming an imprint could be conjured up somehow - a stretched > horizontal profile of a face. The face doe
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
In other words, you refuse to accept that the laws of physics are any constraint on this thing. So, you are arguing that "God made it that way". Never mind. I won't waste any more of my time arguing about religious convictions.
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Cesar wrote: > AndyBlackard wrote: > > > "...cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being > attested > > by the artist who had painted it..." > > Obviously he lied-(and the church representatives believed > him); the scientific analyses of the shroud image bears that > out fairly easily. > > Some of the science regarding the claims of bei
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Quibbling is quibbling. It proves nothing. That's the definition of quibbling. Where you draw the lines makes no difference to the comparison. It's a quibble. And I note that you have juxtaposed the face on the shroud with the image of a skull, not a human face. If you had actually placed a human face next to it, you might possibly have recognized how heavy (as in distorted) the features are. As
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
SunSword wrote: > > The body is shown in a relaxed state. > > Yet his hands reach and cover his genitals. > > In reality, a man's hands can only reach his genitals only by > stretching his arms downwards. > > Interesting point -- but inaccurate. Try this (if you are an > adult male) > (a) While standing, arms down, try to cover your genitals. You > cannot.
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Yes, quibbling about using the nose instead of the eyes as a reference point is a cute technicality. All you have to do is compare the face on the shroud to a normal human face, side by side. It doesn't matter where you draw any reference lines. The shroud does not represent a normally proportioned human face. It is an artistic representation, clearly in the style of Byzantine art. You can see th
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Regardless of any cute technicalities of definition, you can easily compare the image on the shroud to real human faces and see that it's not human in proportion. Case closed. Same for the arms. You can measure the arms on the shroud and compare them to human proportion. They are not of normal human proportion. Case closed. And that doesn't even bring up the problem of the distortion that shoul
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
legionromanes wrote: > > > aren't they dissimilar > > ;) > Now what kind of a 'skeptic' are you? You missed the really relevant point. Look at the image on the shroud. It's not a human face! The proportions are wrong. Regardless of the authenticity of the shroud itself, the image is a fake. --- The secret to the Shroud's authenticity lies not in carbon dating or chemic
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Heh... on this board you gotta check the thread again before you hit the post button. Someone else may have posted the answer while you were searching & writing. :)
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
legionromanes wrote: > Hi Duane, I think you have it the wrong way round, Melanin in > the skin produces vitamin D on contact with Sunlight. Melanin > is the dark pigment we associate with dark skin. > > when we left those areas where there was not sufficient > sunlight to provide that vitamin D we needed another source, > this was most likely at first fish and then later d
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Diomede wrote: > Hi Nolondil, > > > "You continue to make unsupported and unsupportable > assertions. This is the problem with the Velikovsky method. > Science isn't done by by Jedi Mind Trick. > > Sure I do, > > Fair criticism. > > Why? > > In short: > > Dissent! > > Surely and equally in support of your comments..."Science
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
Nolondil
Diomede wrote: > > "our debt of gratitude to Velikovsky and von Daniken is to > acknowledge their part in bringing these ancient stories to a > much wider audience. > > Not really. > > Velikovsky was a "scientist" in his own right and a noted > Historian too. > That's good that you put it in scare quotes. He was a psychiatrist by training. He had
Forum: Mysteries
Current Page: 151 of 158