30,000 feet of water?????

[1213]

The Flood is a folktale which the Babylonians (a Semitic people) picked up from the Sumerians (not Semitic) when their cultures cohabited in Mesopotamia. A polished version of the original is found in The Epic of Gilgamesh,...

Sorry, I don't believe that. I believe the flood happened as told in the Bible, because it gives the most reasonable explanation for it. However, the others did not necessary copy the story from Jews. All people who survived from the flood, would have had the story with them, that is why it is possible that the children of Noah had the same story and told it to their children and so it was transferred in some way to all nations.

The God of the bible doesn't appear until around 1500 BCE, and as you know, [he] was originally simply a member of the Canaanite pantheon (and for a time had a consort, Asherah). [He} doesn't become the only god until the end of the Babylonian captivity, roughly the time Isaiah was written.

Funny how you speak like that your belief would be knowledge.

But if you want to go into the physics involved, the first thing to remember is that the ancient authors believed that the earth was flat ...

No intelligent reason to thinks so.

If indeed there had been a real Noah's flood, then evidence of it would be everywhere and there could be no doubt that it had occurred. We would find a single geological flood layer all over all continents and islands and the ocean floor.

No intelligent reason to except single layer in the event Bible describes.

Since all land species were reduced to two (or seven) pairs, we'd find a consequent genetic bottleneck in all species of land animals, all of the same date as the flood layer.

Not necessary.

And we'd be able to answer the question, That extra billion cubic miles of water which made it possible for the tip of Mount Everest to be something like 15 feet under water ─ where is it now?

I think I already explained it. After the flood, all the sunken stuff has been compressed, causing the water level go down. Also part of it is in the great glaciers.

And many many more evidences would be everywhere.

We have lot of evidence for it, maybe the greatest evidence is the modern continents.

 

[1213]

Sorry, but you keep cooking Noah and family. Besides that we know when the continents split. ...

Sorry, no good reason to think they were cooked. Also, I don't claim the continents have moved much. The original continent was broken, collapsed and sunk. the pieces are pretty much were they were before the collapse.

 

[blü 2]

Sorry, I don't believe that. I believe the flood happened as told in the Bible, because it gives the most reasonable explanation for it.

If such a flood had happened, it would have required an extra billion cubic miles of water over and above the water presently on the earth. It would have left a geological flood layer all over all continents and island and the ocean floor. It would have caused a genetic bottleneck in all species of land animal, all the bottlenecks dating to the date of the flood layer.

But we find nothing of the kind. If you want to argue that flood is real, show me real evidence of scientific quality that demonstrates your claim.

However, the others did not necessary copy the story from Jews.

You're not paying attention. The story is found in Sumerian Mesopotamia as early as 3500 BCE. two thousand years before the bible god appears in history..

Funny how you speak like that your belief would be knowledge.

Funny that you don't read what your bible says. The books of the Tanakh, up to Isaiah, freely acknowledge the existence of other gods. The Decalogue says "You shall have no other gods before me," for instance ─ it doesn't say, There ain't no other gods. Here are some others so you can check it out for yourself ─

Exodus 15:11
Who is like thee, O Lord, among the gods?
Who is like thee, majestic in holiness,
terrible in glorious deed, doing wonders?

Numbers 33:4
upon their gods also the Lord executed judgments.

Judges 11:23 So the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess.

Psalms 82:1
God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.

Psalms 86:8
There is none like thee among the gods, O Lord,
nor are there any works like thine.

Psalms 95:3
For the Lord is a great god,
and a great King above all gods.

Psalms 135:5
For I know that the Lord is great;
and that our Lord is above all gods.​

The term for acknowledging the existence of many gods but claiming your own is the biggest, is "henotheism". As I said before, the henotheistic part of the Tanakh ends about where Isaiah starts.

I notice from your reply that you didn't read the parts of the bible I pointed you to setting out their understand of cosmology. If you want to read your bible selectively so it only says things that you agree with, well, that's a matter for you. But against the possibility that you're actually interested in what it says, in this case about cosmology, here's that link again >Gravitational waves in Newton theory are 4-th order, in Einstein's are 2-nd!!!<.

No intelligent reason to thinks so.

You'll realize your error when you read the quotes about biblical cosmology on that link. Or are you afraid to look?

Not necessary.

Once again I can tell by your answer that you didn't do any homework. Here's a piece about genetic bottlenecks so you'll now understand what the problem is for those asserting the reality of the Genesis flood:>Population bottleneck - Wikipedia<

I think I already explained it. After the flood, all the sunken stuff has been compressed, causing the water level go down. Also part of it is in the great glaciers.

Nope, you're not a flat earth as the authors of the bible believed. The waters have to rise above mean sea level by some 29,000 feet, and that would take an extra 1.1 billion cubic miles of water over and above the water presently on the earth. No such amount is hidden in subterranean caves. If you wish to argue otherwise, specify the caves and the surveys that have determined the quantities of water they hold.

We have lot of evidence for it, maybe the greatest evidence is the modern continents.

I take it you're aware of plate tectonics, but if not, just check it on Wikipedia. The continents began to form into roughly their present shapes and positions maybe some 200 million years ago, when the supercontinent Pangaea began to break apart. By about 65 million years ago, they were tending to their present positions.

As I mentioned, humans are maybe 200,000 years old, gods are likely to be at the least 10,000 years old, the gods of Sumer and Egypt had names and histories not later than the 3rd millennium BCE, and the god of the bible appears on the scene around 1500 BCE. As to your remark, if you have evidence of the bible god in history or archaeology before around 1500 BCE, please refer me to the historical or archaeological papers that support your claim.

 

[Mock Turtle]

@Mock Turtle You cannot control what other people choose to believe. You can't even control what they do most of the time. Nor do you have any special access to the truth of things, yourself. So I don't see why you are wasting time and energy trying to control what is not yours to control.

Well, if you have noticed, in general I don't bother, given that many are not willing to learn but are simply here to proselytise their beliefs.

 

[Brian2]

If such a flood had happened, it would have required an extra billion cubic miles of water over and above the water presently on the earth. It would have left a geological flood layer all over all continents and island and the ocean floor. It would have caused a genetic bottleneck in all species of land animal, all the bottlenecks dating to the date of the flood layer.

But we find nothing of the kind. If you want to argue that flood is real, show me real evidence of scientific quality that demonstrates your claim.

You can get rid of the idea that the earth has not enough water for the flood. There is a vast amount of water in the earth mantle.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/science/water-thrice-the-volume-of-all-oceans-found-in-earths-mantle-says-study-101712139635235.html

You're not paying attention. The story is found in Sumerian Mesopotamia as early as 3500 BCE. two thousand years before the bible god appears in history..

Why isn't an earlier story of a huge flood seen as evidence that the Biblical account is true?

Funny that you don't read what your bible says. The books of the Tanakh, up to Isaiah, freely acknowledge the existence of other gods. The Decalogue says "You shall have no other gods before me," for instance ─ it doesn't say, There ain't no other gods. Here are some others so you can check it out for yourself ─

Exodus 15:11
Who is like thee, O Lord, among the gods?
Who is like thee, majestic in holiness,
terrible in glorious deed, doing wonders?

Numbers 33:4​

upon their gods also the Lord executed judgments.​

​

Judges 11:23 So the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess.​

​

Psalms 82:1​

God has taken his place in the divine council;​

in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.​

​

Psalms 86:8​

There is none like thee among the gods, O Lord,​

nor are there any works like thine.​

​

Psalms 95:3​

For the Lord is a great god,​

and a great King above all gods.​

​

Psalms 135:5​

For I know that the Lord is great;​

and that our Lord is above all gods.​

The term for acknowledging the existence of many gods but claiming your own is the biggest, is "henotheism". As I said before, the henotheistic part of the Tanakh ends about where Isaiah starts.

There certainly were other gods in the OT. They are usually called idols. And the angels are sometimes referred to as sons of God and I think as gods also at times.

You'll realize your error when you read the quotes about biblical cosmology on that link. Or are you afraid to look?

Poetic metaphors should be no problem.

Once again I can tell by your answer that you didn't do any homework. Here's a piece about genetic bottlenecks so you'll now understand what the problem is for those asserting the reality of the Genesis flood:>Population bottleneck - Wikipedia<

Yes I suppose there should be a genetic bottleneck if a global flood did happen. imo the Bible does not describe one global flood however. Thinking it does these days seems to be the result of the translations and also reading the creation story as a literal 7 days 5-6 thousand years ago, and wanting the fossil record to be evidence for a the flood.

As to your remark, if you have evidence of the bible god in history or archaeology before around 1500 BCE, please refer me to the historical or archaeological papers that support your claim.

Yes there is Egyptian archaeological evidence for the first mention of YHWH. The nomads of Yahweh around 1400 to 1500 years ago just where the wondering Israel would have been. This supports to Exodus story and what God said to Moses,,,,,,,,,,,, that He had not told the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) his name (YHWH) but gave it to Moses first from the burning bush.

The Soleb Inscription: Earliest-Discovered Use of the Name 'Yahweh'

And evidence for the much-debated era of the Exodus

armstronginstitute.org

 

[SonOfElyon]

I've always been curious about the great flood story in the Bible.
Supposedly God flooded the earth with a rainstorm for 40 days and nights.
That does not jive with me for several reasons.....
Mt. Everest is the highest natural point on earth and over 29,000 feet. The flood supposedly covered the entire earth with enough water to kill everything and everyone including the Nepheliem which were reported to be giants.
That means 30,000 feet just came and went from nowhere. There is not enough water on earth to provide that much rain.
Then the earth was repopulated by only 8 people that were one family ( Noah sons and wives ) which would mean that not only would our current civilization would be based on incest but there would only be one race on the entire planet.( not meant as racism!!!!!!) Apparently this is not true which makes me even more suspicious especially after finding out the holy Bible has been edited as early as 1875 or 1877 AD...this is the first time the words "God" and "Lord" were ever in the bible.

30,000 feet of what? Water? You do know there is water underground do you not? There was Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons. So, the three wives weren't related, incest didn't have to happen.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't believe he did , but that's just my opinion and I why I asked if those references could be explained?

How about this for an explanation: it's a myth.

 

[Argentbear]

Sorry, no good reason to think they were cooked. Also, I don't claim the continents have moved much. The original continent was broken, collapsed and sunk. the pieces are pretty much were they were before the collapse.

which ignores the simple fact that the continents are all in motion now.

 

[Argentbear]

You can get rid of the idea that the earth has not enough water for the flood. There is a vast amount of water in the earth mantle.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/science/water-thrice-the-volume-of-all-oceans-found-in-earths-mantle-says-study-101712139635235.html

actually what is down there is not water it is in the form of a hydroxyl radical (OH), which is bound into crystal structure.

Why isn't an earlier story of a huge flood seen as evidence that the Biblical account is true?

there are many cultures with the myth of the sun being moved across the sky by various forms of animals. Should the existence of so many myths like that be taken as evidence that the sun is pulled across the sky by horses?

 

[PureX]

All this silly arguing over a mythical story, and not one comment yet on what anyone thinks the story is intended to tell us about the world. I guess in this sense the religion haters succeed at distracting everyone away from the actual purpose and message of these kinds of myths by obsessing on factuality. It's too bad that the 'believers' keep taking the bait. But why? Perhaps they are not that interested in the message of the myth, themselves, but only in defending their irrational insistence that the myth is not a myth.

Like two fools chasing each other around the idiot tree.

Perhaps this particular myth is about how God, through nature, forces a 'clean slate' on we humans, occasionally. A 'restart'. Especially when we become incorrigible. An interesting thought given that humanity is now facing a similar possible 'restart' due to our inability to reign in our own greed and stupidity.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

All this silly arguing over a mythical story, and not one comment yet on what anyone thinks the story is intended to tell us about the world. I guess in this sense the religion haters succeed at distracting everyone away from the actual purpose and message of these kinds of myths by obsessing on factuality. It's too bad that the 'believers' keep taking the bait. But why? Perhaps they are not that interested in the message of the myth, themselves, but only in defending their irrational insistence that the myth is not a myth.

Like two fools chasing each other around the idiot tree.

I don't get this comment.
Those presenting the arguments on why this story can't be factual, are responding to those who are claiming they ARE factual.
You seem to assume that if one responds to such a claim, then that MUST mean they are "religious haters" and / or can't read this mythical story and get some type of "moral of the tale" out of it. Quite a ridiculous as an assumption if you ask me....

I can perfectly read things like, say, the greek myths of the iliad and consider it to be about communicating ideas about what the authors thought about the "human condition" while at the same time pointing out to people who claim they aren't myths but factually true, why they aren't or can't be factually true.

One does not rule out the other.

This very thread is about if the stories are factually true. Not about any "deeper meaning" or "moral of the story" type thing.

Perhaps this particular myth is about how God, through nature, forces a 'clean slate' on we humans, occasionally. A 'restart'. Especially when we become incorrigible. An interesting thought given that humanity is now facing a similar possible 'restart' due to our inability to reign in our own greed and stupidity.

Perhaps, whatever.
It's a good idea for a thread. But this thread isn't about that.

 

[Tomef]

When the galaxy was swallowed by the mighty Ugg, he threw a few ice cubes in the glass to make it go down easier. In the stomach of might Ugg, the ice melted, thence the additional water. The water was then used up cleaning 40 days worth of **** out of the ark.

 

[Mock Turtle]

All this silly arguing over a mythical story, and not one comment yet on what anyone thinks the story is intended to tell us about the world. I guess in this sense the religion haters succeed at distracting everyone away from the actual purpose and message of these kinds of myths by obsessing on factuality. It's too bad that the 'believers' keep taking the bait. But why? Perhaps they are not that interested in the message of the myth, themselves, but only in defending their irrational insistence that the myth is not a myth.

Like two fools chasing each other around the idiot tree.

Which is what - as to promoting one belief over another? And stop with the religion haters - more as to religious problems!

Perhaps this particular myth is about how God, through nature, forces a 'clean slate' on we humans, occasionally. A 'restart'. Especially when we become incorrigible. An interesting thought given that humanity is now facing a similar possible 'restart' due to our inability to reign in our own greed and stupidity.

No, it's just another way of trying to understand our world even if the explanations are usually just a load of nonsense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry, no good reason to think they were cooked. Also, I don't claim the continents have moved much. The original continent was broken, collapsed and sunk. the pieces are pretty much were they were before the collapse.

Even Answers in Genesis has admitted that. And I gave you a good reason. **mod edit*

Now as to your new claim, how could continents sink?

 

[Audie]

You can get rid of the idea that the earth has not enough water for the flood. There is a vast amount of water in the earth mantle.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/science/water-thrice-the-volume-of-all-oceans-found-in-earths-mantle-says-study-101712139635235.html

Why isn't an earlier story of a huge flood seen as evidence that the Biblical account is true?



There certainly were other gods in the OT. They are usually called idols. And the angels are sometimes referred to as sons of God and I think as gods also at times.



Poetic metaphors should be no problem.



Yes I suppose there should be a genetic bottleneck if a global flood did happen. imo the Bible does not describe one global flood however. Thinking it does these days seems to be the result of the translations and also reading the creation story as a literal 7 days 5-6 thousand years ago, and wanting the fossil record to be evidence for a the flood.



Yes there is Egyptian archaeological evidence for the first mention of YHWH. The nomads of Yahweh around 1400 to 1500 years ago just where the wondering Israel would have been. This supports to Exodus story and what God said to Moses,,,,,,,,,,,, that He had not told the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) his name (YHWH) but gave it to Moses first from the burning bush.

The Soleb Inscription: Earliest-Discovered Use of the Name 'Yahweh'

And evidence for the much-debated era of the Exodus

armstronginstitute.org

 

[Audie]

You can get rid of the idea that the earth has not enough water for the flood. There is a vast amount of water in the earth mantle.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/science/water-thrice-the-volume-of-all-oceans-found-in-earths-mantle-says-study-101712139635235.html

Why isn't an earlier story of a huge flood seen as evidence that the Biblical account is true?



There certainly were other gods in the OT. They are usually called idols. And the angels are sometimes referred to as sons of God and I think as gods also at times.



Poetic metaphors should be no problem.



Yes I suppose there should be a genetic bottleneck if a global flood did happen. imo the Bible does not describe one global flood however. Thinking it does these days seems to be the result of the translations and also reading the creation story as a literal 7 days 5-6 thousand years ago, and wanting the fossil record to be evidence for a the flood.



Yes there is Egyptian archaeological evidence for the first mention of YHWH. The nomads of Yahweh around 1400 to 1500 years ago just where the wondering Israel would have been. This supports to Exodus story and what God said to Moses,,,,,,,,,,,, that He had not told the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) his name (YHWH) but gave it to Moses first from the burning bush.

The Soleb Inscription: Earliest-Discovered Use of the Name 'Yahweh'

And evidence for the much-debated era of the Exodus

armstronginstitute.org

You really still don’t understand that a rock like limestone or gypsum that contains hydrogen and oxygen is not “water”?

 

[blü 2]

You can get rid of the idea that the earth has not enough water for the flood. There is a vast amount of water in the earth mantle.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/science/water-thrice-the-volume-of-all-oceans-found-in-earths-mantle-says-study-101712139635235.html

No, all that water under the earth is under the earth, and all that water in the streams lakes and oceans is in the streams lakes and oceans and all the water in the atmosphere is in the atmosphere, but you're still 1.1 billion cubic miles of water short of what would be required to cover the tallest mountains 20 feet deep.

And there remains the problem of the missing genetic bottlenecks.

And the absence of a single geological flood layer all over all continents and islands and the ocean floor.

And those three are not the only elephants in the room, only (in my view) the biggest.

Why isn't an earlier story of a huge flood seen as evidence that the Biblical account is true?

For the same reasons as above.

And the fact that the Sumerian story is attested some two thousand years or so before the god of the bible appears in history.

There certainly were other gods in the OT. They are usually called idols. And the angels are sometimes referred to as sons of God and I think as gods also at times.

Yes, henotheism for a start, then from about the end of the Babylonian captivity monotheism, then the division into the Jewish god and the Christian god when Paul renounces the covenant, then the division of the Christian god into three when the Trinity notion is adopted in the 4th century, then the division into West and East, then Catholic and Protestant, then &c &c &c

Poetic metaphors should be no problem.

So in your view the ancient authors of the Tanakh, and the early Christians, were familiar with the theory of gravity, and orbits, and satellites, and planets, and deep space, and the nature of stars, and galaxies, and the expanding universe and so on?

Funny, then, that there's absolutely no evidence to that effect, then, and they talk instead about the earth being immovably and unshakably fixed and the sun going round it, and the sky being a hard dome you can walk on, to which the stars are attached such that if they come loose they'll fall to earth, don't you think?

Yes I suppose there should be a genetic bottleneck if a global flood did happen. imo the Bible does not describe one global flood however. Thinking it does these days seems to be the result of the translations and also reading the creation story as a literal 7 days 5-6 thousand years ago, and wanting the fossil record to be evidence for a the flood.

There is absolutely no basis for asserting that when the bible speaks of a day, you're at liberty to read that as a thousand years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You really still don’t understand that a rock like limestone or gypsum that contains hydrogen and oxygen is not “water”?

I do not think that they have any understanding of even basic chemistry. They see articles from lying sources that abuse science articles and believe them rather than trying to learn.

What is so disappointing is that it is not hard to learn the basics. And even quite a bit of advanced science is not that hard to understand. The hard part was solving the problems. It is amazing how once a scientist solves a problem that existed for thousands of years all of a sudden it becomes "obvious". It really isn't. In fact I doubt if more than 5% of average people even understand Newtonian gravity. The formulas that most are familiar with are Galilean gravity. His work describes gravity very close to Earth. His work does not explain planetary motion.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

All this silly arguing over a mythical story,

You say mythical implying you don't consider the story to be a factual account.

and not one comment yet on what anyone thinks the story is intended to tell us about the world.

So, you recognize neither side is attempting to expound on any overt or hidden meanings about the world that are found within the story.

I guess in this sense the religion haters

But you bias your derision to a group that your own prior evidence insists you see as only a side in this and not alone as the sole cause in the overall failings by all sides that you claim are shared.

succeed at distracting everyone away from the actual purpose and message of these kinds of myths by obsessing on factuality.

When one side, let's call it the "literalist" side, claims a story is an account of an actual event and the other side, the "dissenters" reject that claim, why does anyone need to discuss details that are not part of that claim/dissent argument? Does it matter how Mrs. Johnson uses a car in the discussion and debate on the origins and history of the automobile. Ignoring her specific use doesn't make her use any less meaningful in a discussion of a different context, just that it is irrelevant to the particular topic of discussion.

It's too bad that the 'believers' keep taking the bait.

"Believers" often toss the bait. A matter of record.

But why? Perhaps they are not that interested in the message of the myth, themselves, but only in defending their irrational insistence that the myth is not a myth.

I believe that is it. The reasons for the formation of the organization are forgotten and the defense has turned to the perpetuation of the organization instead.

Like two fools chasing each other around the idiot tree.

Ah, now we see the crux of your claims. There are really three here, but only two of them are fools. The third then is...? I have an answer.

Perhaps this particular myth is about how God, through nature, forces a 'clean slate' on we humans, occasionally. A 'restart'. Especially when we become incorrigible. An interesting thought given that humanity is now facing a similar possible 'restart' due to our inability to reign in our own greed and stupidity.

Perhaps it is just that we can sin and see the errors of our ways with a means to redeem ourselves that has always been in front of us if we would only look and work for it. That salvation can come in the form of intellectual, philosophical or spiritual growth. I don't dismiss acquired knowledge as meaningless and irrelevant as befits the want of straw to compose the argument I think is the point here.

So never mind that. I'm more interested in what I see as your elaborate, straw man. As the evidence of history and many posts indicate, the actual argument is between those claiming an event is real and unable to demonstrate that, opposed to those rejecting that prior claim and using evidence to do so. There is no need in this argument to discuss any meaning within the statement, however interesting it might be. The "literalist" claim is not about meaning. Claims requiring the necessity, rejection or disregard of meaning is the straw man. Delivered as I see it so the third man can tsk, tsk, tsk, one particular side and while seeming to offer empty sacrifice of the other for arguing around this tree of knowledge. All while ignoring that third man's perceived great wisdom.

I've never seen any effort to demonstrate a need to know some sort of life lesson contained in the stories is relevant to a determination of the factual or mythical basis of the story the lesson comes from. I've not seen the "dissenters" claim that no lessons exist therein. A connection of that nature doesn't appear to exist or accompany reason that a connection of the type is present and needed. At worst, a statement or two has been made implying the quality of the lesson, but not that it does not exist or is entirely valueless. In that, this third man argument bears the hallmarks of a straw man to attack one side instead of the actual points of the discussion. As I said, I believe the bias is further revealed by method as well as misdirection. Here the literalist lambs are modestly sacrificed as "fools" themselves in order to purge the real villains. Those demons of dissent that favor evidence over desire.

 

[PureX]

You say mythical implying you don't consider the story to be a factual account.

So, you recognize neither side is attempting to expound on any overt or hidden meanings about the world that are found within the story.

But you bias your derision to a group that your own prior evidence insists you see as only a side in this and not alone as the sole cause in the overall failings by all sides that you claim are shared.

As I have explained many times and ways, now, obsessing over factuality completely misses the point. As is evidenced by the fact that no one is even discussing the meaning or message of the story, which is the whole point of it's existence.

Including you.