- This topic has 6,416 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
Yep, they are coming to the truth slowly but surely. I just watched a PBS video of all people that spoke about catastrophism as the new understanding. They said there were multiple huge floods over 7,000 years. Well, what did you expect from them?
Im still waiting to see if t8 even believes in a world wide flood.
Hey guys. About Hugh Ross. I couldn’t care less what he believes. Well I do care, but I’m going to quote anyone I believe spoke the truth about something or at least offers a good argument worthy of scrutiny. I’ve quoted a Mormon, JWs, Atheists, etc. Why? Because I’m no respecter of persons and labels don’t usually put me off either. I will continue to quote anyone who I believe has a good point.
Too many people ignore others because of labels and things they have said in the past. I’m like this because for me, unlike most people that I have observed, I’m interested in the truth winning debates, regardless of other factors that might draw judgement or credibility issues.
So there you have it. I also post stuff I disagree with for scrutiny. I wish people understood this before jumping on their high horse. This site has always been about judging all things and making them subject to Jesus Christ. But deep down, I think I get criticised for this because people find it hard to find weakness in what I say sometimes, so they go for low hanging fruit and attack the person and not the argument.
Im still waiting to see if t8 even believes in a world wide flood.
I believe in scripture so what do you think?
Hopefully you don’t send prospective clients here to get an idea of what kind of site you can build for them. In this day and age, it really shouldn’t be that hard to make a site that just posts correctly the first time, and then allows you to edit and re-post the same thing with a couple of minor changes. I do it all the time on YouTube. I do it all the time on other forums. So what’s so hard about making your site so that I can do it here too?
Honestly, I never have these issues you speak of. It could be your own connection. You realise it is not working 100% of the time right. You do get untimely glitches from time to time. Also, when I post as T8, I’m a member just like you with no special privileges or faster access etc. Further, you might notice these things more because of the time you spend on it. Comparing a one man built website to YouTube is no comparison BTW.
HOWEVER, I know the site is a bit slow because it has a regular host unlike YouTube or Facebook who have server farms. And the forum is huge with half a million posts. Sure I could upgrade the host, but the site generates almost zero income, so I cannot put large resources into it.
Ironically, at the time of posting, I noticed that the Patreon link in the footer was broken. The message said ‘Down for maintenance’. Surely Patreon is much bigger than me. It happens Mike to the best of them. Even Facebook has gone down multiple times this year and their budget is in the billions. Mine is zero. And yes, I never use this site as an example of my work for prospective clients.
Funny thing is, I tried advertising to get revenue for better site resources some years back and if I remember correctly, you were not happy about the ads.
Hi guys.
I thought I would post this here to show that there are also other theories about the Earth besides it being flat. While I do not subscribe to the following theory, I personally think it fits observation way better than the Flat Earth and it also agrees with pics and videos from space, as well as no need to explain distances in the Southern Hemisphere that a flat earth requires. Simply put, it is a better theory IMO. But as I said, I do not subscribe to it even though it appears to answer some questions that the globe earth poses. Suffice to say, it also could be supported by scripture with regards to the flood, the land breaking apart, no more sea on the new earth, etc. What do you think?
“Hundreds of millions of years”.
You can’t get away from the evolution theory. My suggestion is to believe in the Bible or not. Don’t sit on the fence!
What are you rambling on about? I haven’t put a stake in the ground as to how old the earth is and I think evolution is a lie.
Try to focus when reading my posts. It will save further embarrassment.
Mt Ruapehu statistic
The highest treelines are those where mountain beech is present. In the central North Island at 39°S the mountain beech treelines range from about 1350 to 1500 m.
Source:
http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-DawFore-t1-body-d5-d6.htmlSee that Mike? The tree line is halfway up the mountain as Dazza points out if we accept that Ruapehu is 2797 m high. Yet in my photo, the treeline is at the bottom of the mountain not halfway up. Let me quote you on where the treeline is. See your own rendition below. Thus up to 1500 metres of mountain is missing. Where could it be I wonder?
Remember that Ohakune is 600 m above sea level which I believe is likely lower than the bottom both photos. Further, I bet that the top pic is taken from a hill because there are smaller foothills obscuring the view of the bottom and a hill was climbed to attain a better view. This means that there is more below that is obscured.
We don’t even need to prove your math is wrong do we Mike. Simple observation does that for us. Let’s recap.
Half the mountain or so is missing. The mystery continues.
Any ideas where it might be? Could it be be that the curvature of the Earth is the reason? Because that premise doesn’t just answer this mystery, but all the others that are related to this subject too. Convenient I know, but truth has a habit of being very convenient and answering lots of things and making sense of things.
Mike believed the trees were at the base of the mountain in my pic and he could be right. What he didn’t realise was the trees actually go halfway up the peak. I should know because I have done numerous walks in that forest. And yes the forest is on the southern flanks of the mountain, the face that my Ruapehu pic in question shows.
You can also confirm this by navigating up the mountain in Google Maps and see for yourself. My pic below that link is taken just below the tree line. You will see it on Google Maps too.
https://www.google.com/maps/@-39.3997249,175.415488,3a,75y,79.51h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcZJKTJtqeJOQQQkHFnO6A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Half the mountain is missing. As you say Dig, “It doesn’t look like those trees are on the mountain”. But I think Mike is right, the trees are visible at the base.
Simple basic observation is hard to get wrong compared to math equations that are fraught with error because of multiple variables.
Fact 1: The treeline extends half way up the mountain.
Fact 2: My photo appears to show the treeline near the base according to Mike.
Fact 3: So half the mountain is missing or thereabouts according to Mike’s own observation.Mike used my pic to prove the Earth is flat, but inadvertently made a good argument as to why the earth is globe shaped.
Priceless.
Also, couldn’t some of the trees be covered in snow? I have seen pictures where it appears that way. And what do trees look like at such distances? Basically like darker areas of the mountain without much detail at all. Look at some of these pictures and see:
MIKE AND DIG4TRUTH. ……you can see all the moon expidition on PBS their now showing them all. Check them out and tell us how do you think these clearly documented events with over ten thousand employees and contractors for over fifty years can be “conspiracy theories “. How could anyone pull that off, you make all kind of side arguments, about a flat earth, but completely deny and ignore truth right in front of your eyes given every day.
You say they are “conspiracy theories”, but can’t give a single reason for them being a conspiracy. Why not concentrate on this for a change. All these sidebar issues are simply a diversion from the obvious truth, and the mountain of proofs that are available for all to see, given over many, many, many, years and are still being given to this very day. Proof we can actually see with our own eye,
Peace and love to you and yours. ………gene
Dig.
That link doesn’t show one pic of Ruapehu’s south face which is the only face contain substantial forest. You can confirm that using satellite view on Google Maps.
What is pictured is Ruapehu’s east and west faces which lie in a desert like landscape.
Also, neighbouring Mt Ngaurahoe is also there. That is the volcano that appeared as Mt Doom in LOTR. That is not Ruapehu, but is in the same national park as Ruapehu.
As for trees obscuring the forest, well the trees would then be half way up the mountain and they are not.
Regarding the trees being covered in snow, Mike made a good argument against that premise when he compared my photo with a similar photo that was taken close by. He showed the same peaks and lines in my shot as all being above the forest and concluded that the treeline was at the base below these features. He did a video about it, but he might have deleted it which he seems to do a lot.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
