No it wasn't. It led with a strawman argument. Which is, as noted, an intellectually dishonest one.
You do that a lot. Not only with strawmen, but moving the goal posts, false binary choices and many of the rest.
That isthmus in the photo is going to look radically different depending on the time of day because of the more than a meter tidal swing that the chart shows. Given the isthmus is in a bay, that means the wave energy is going to be reduced from the coast. Since wave energy dictates the slope of the beach, that means the slope is less, maybe significantly less than on the coast. On the Texas Gulf Coast, we have a tidal swing of under a half a meter. Because of the shape of the Gulf, we don't have a 24.5 hour tidal cycle with two highs and two lows. There can be multiple ones because of the way it sloshes back and forth. Still, even with far less of an amplitude change, the grassline to waterline can move tens of meters.
Long story short, a more than a meter tidal swing means the width of the isthmus varies a lot over the tidal cycle. Depending on the point in the tidal swing, the width is going to look radically different at different points.
Unless you know the point in the tidal cycle and control of that, such pictures don't mean shit.
Your sophistry notwithstanding.
Sorry about being uppity and not knowing my place. Respect is earned. You haven't earned it. |
