The Definitive MADhouse Quote Page.

[_DrW]

To put a cap on this discussion, I agreed that Tarski was correct in his claim that it is theoretically possible to create a water laden atmosphere on an Earth sized planet that would "crush all life".

However, as I claimed, a quick inspection of PV=nRT, indicates that such a scenario could not have occurred on Earth in the last few billion years, let alone in the time of Noah.

In fact, on an Earth sized planet with enough water in the atmosphere to crush all life, surface temperatures would be far higher than the boiling point of water. Consideration of the situation on Venus gives some idea of how high the surface temperatures would have to be. The atmospheric pressure on Venus is about 92 times that on Earth. Such pressure (1300 psi or so) would definitely crush a lot of the life on Earth. However, the surface temperature on Venus is about 460 degrees C. Solid wood ignites at something around 250 degrees C. (460 C is about 860 degrees F.)

Tarski offered to do the actual calculations rather than simply use Venus as an example. However, I felt that the point had been made, and Tarski agreed that we had found common ground.

Had the sometimesaint thought about his statement, he would have realized that under the scenario of a water laden high pressure atmosphere he described, all life on Earth would have been boiled and burned long before it would have been crushed.

Hope this is not belaboring the point, but when folks are make claims that can be checked by others, they need to think about what they say.

Apologists often miss this point, because much of what they claim cannot be checked, and that is just the way they like it.

[_Buffalo]

Agreed. And this of course accounts for the language of the King James translation appearing in the Book of Mormon.

It always amazes me how the cases of most critics against the church require a simplistic and literalistic interpretation of events, with little sophistication. The irony is that we are usually seen as the country bumpkins being hoodwinked by a fraud, when in fact, it is the arguments of the critics which are, ... well, a mite unsophisticated to say the least.

Hilarious. This is from a threat where apologists are trying to convince themselves that the Deutero-Isaiah problem in the Book of Mormon isn't a problem. They're coming up with all kinds of speculative theories like Deutero-Isaiah was actually written by the real Isaiah but then somehow re-written by Deutero-Isaiah without anyone knowing, so Joseph quoted what was on the brass plates but made (minor) changes where Deutero-Isaiah in KJV conflicted with the super secret "true Isaiah" writings. All this without a scrap of evidence.

Yes, critical arguments are "unsophisticated" by comparison. We simply let the evidence speak for itself. No wild conjecture needed.

[_Buffalo]

Adobe (dried mud) and cement could not be confused with each other in Joseph's day. Cement (a Latin word) had been used for thousands of years by Joseph's time, and the basic ingredient was calcium carbonate (limestone). The Romans were particularly good at using it in all major construction, which is why many Roman structures still stand. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cement .

Apparently the Book of Mormon uses very precise language only when apologetic necessity demands it. Otherwise, it's full of loan words and imprecision.

[_DrW]

Adobe (dried mud) and cement could not be confused with each other in Joseph's day. Cement (a Latin word) had been used for thousands of years by Joseph's time, and the basic ingredient was calcium carbonate (limestone). The Romans were particularly good at using it in all major construction, which is why many Roman structures still stand. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cement .

Actually the key ingredient in Roman cement was silicate rich volcanic ash that undergoes a (relatively slow) pozzolanic reaction when mixed with lime (which is made by calcining limestone) and water.

The reason why some of the Roman structures made with the pozzolanic cements are still around is because the pozzolanic reactions that increase the hardness of the cement or concrete can continue at a slow rate for hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of years.

In modern cements, silicate rich, low carbon coal fly ash is often mixed in to take advantage of pozzolanic reactions. This was done at Hoover Dam, for example, and was a key factor in making this concrete structure possible at the time it was built.

[_Darth J]

Adobe (dried mud) and cement could not be confused with each other in Joseph's day. Cement (a Latin word) had been used for thousands of years by Joseph's time, and the basic ingredient was calcium carbonate (limestone). The Romans were particularly good at using it in all major construction, which is why many Roman structures still stand. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cement .

I am glad to see that the Italian Geography Theory is gaining more and more traction. As Robert F. Smith points out, the use of cement by the ancient Romans and the mention of cement in the Book of Mormon is another strong parallel corroborating the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

Remember: don't look for the Book of Mormon in Italy. Look for Italy in the Book of Mormon.

[_Buffalo]

Adobe (dried mud) and cement could not be confused with each other in Joseph's day. Cement (a Latin word) had been used for thousands of years by Joseph's time, and the basic ingredient was calcium carbonate (limestone). The Romans were particularly good at using it in all major construction, which is why many Roman structures still stand. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cement .

I am glad to see that the Italian Geography Theory is gaining more and more traction. As Robert F. Smith points out, the use of cement by the ancient Romans and the mention of cement in the Book of Mormon is another strong parallel corroborating the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

Remember: don't look for the Book of Mormon in Italy. Look for Italy in the Book of Mormon.

Darth J has, I think, pretty much killed, buried and nailed the coffin shut on the idea the Mesoamerica is the setting for the Book of Mormon, and then thrown the coffin into Mount Doom, before dropping Mt. Doom under the continental plates.

[_bcspace]

Darth J has, I think, pretty much killed, buried and nailed the coffin shut on the idea the Mesoamerica is the setting for the Book of Mormon

How so?

[_Darth J]

Darth J has, I think, pretty much killed, buried and nailed the coffin shut on the idea the Mesoamerica is the setting for the Book of Mormon

How so?

Because the Italian Geography Theory has greater explanatory power and requires far fewer ad hoc assumptions and self-serving changes to the plain meaning of the text of the Book of Mormon.

[_gramps]

Wade Englund wrote:

I wouldn't worry in the least about teaching the so-called Old Testament literalism to seminary-aged students. Generation after generations have been raised that way without significant problems. Besides, from a developmental standpoint, seminary-aged minds can still benefit from a certain degree of fundamentalism/literalism prior to transitioning into adulthood. Often, their frontal lobes aren't developed enough to properly handle the nuances and divergence of views. And, it may be enough that our teens are under significant societal pressure as it is to grow up faster than is needed or may be healthy. So, feel free and comfortable to let them grow up slowly in this area. Just a thought.

Oh, brother.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/55921-seminary-help-fundamental-literalistic-dogmatisms/

[_Buffalo]

Darth J has, I think, pretty much killed, buried and nailed the coffin shut on the idea the Mesoamerica is the setting for the Book of Mormon

How so?

He has demonstrated that the parallels between the Book of Mormon and ancient Italy are FAR, FAR GREATER than any location in the Americas.

Game, set, match.