How we know that there was no Flood of Noah.

[Subduction Zone]

I searched for the quickest link I could find for this. It's the scientific discovery I'm concerned with.

What would you like to know about it?

 

[Cacotopia]

Most creation scientists can't get in to peer reviewed journals because they have unethical practices like confirmation bias. Only publishing results that support their argument.

In layman's terms it's called cheating.

 

[Cacotopia]

The last thing a scientist wants is to be wrong and to publish false results, that's why they test and re-test, and encourage their colleagues to challenge and test their ideas. And for the purpose of double blind experiments. When other scientists are testing the same hypothesis without each other's knowledge to the effect of if they both get the same results then the hypothesis is confirmed.

Not creation scientists, they have an answer already, and design an experiment around achieving their predetermined answer. But when their experiment is given to honest people, guess what happens.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Most creation scientists can't get in to peer reviewed journals because they have unethical practices like confirmation bias. Only publishing results that support their argument.

In layman's terms it's called cheating.

If they admitted to their past wrong doings they might be forgiven for them. For example years ago Steve Austin tried to refute radiometric dating by making errors that an undergrad would not make, and yet he is supposedly has a PhD in geology. Sanford and Snelling stand out on that list too. When one links the works of liars and idiots one tends to look like one too.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I searched for the quickest link I could find for this. It's the scientific discovery I'm concerned with.

The discovery isn't what you seem to think it is.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

How long ago do you think the flood was? Where did the water come from? Where did it go? Why do you think the Earth was flat, when there is so much evidence to the contrary?

The Earth can't be flat, otherwise the interior hollow part wouldn't be an inverse sphere!

 

[gnostic]

There are plenty of people who believe the Flood myth is based on some real world event, or possibly several different incidents rolled into one. Personally, I like the theory of "The Flood" being a garbled cultural memory of the Black Sea Inundation event. There were certainly humans living in the basin that is now the Black Sea, and the event certainly would have seemed Apocalyptic to them. It also seems geographically pertinent to the various cultures that believed the myth.

I would opt for the latter.

Some of the JEDPR folks like Friedman trace the J narrative to sometime between 922 and 722 BCE. Others suggest that it's considerably more recent.

The Black Sea Inundation event (sic) is posited to have occurred roughly 5 millennia earlier. Can you share anything that suggests that cultural memory can be sustained over such a period? Conflation strikes me as a far better explanation.

Note that your reference to Black Sea Inundation event is prejudicial in that "event" suggest something far different than does "process." You might wish to review this ...

I used to think this is great when I first heard about it in 2004, and it should be interesting.

But the more I found out about the Black Sea Deluge and the deeper I dig into this subject, I realised how little substance this hypothesis has.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"While this is very distressing, by God’s grace there is a growing body of scientific evidence that supports the reality of the Biblical flood. We have witnessed how encouraging this evidence can be to Christians. An elite cadre of Bible-believing scientists uncovered this evidence, and many of these same scientists are now taking part in this new project, which is expected to further affirm the historicity of the Biblical flood. These scientists are very highly credentialed, and are committed to do their best to use high-quality science to affirm Scripture. They have come together to launch this new project, because they are convinced that the project is crucial to understanding how the Genesis flood created much of what is called the geologic column. Large parts of the geologic column are made up of precipitates (not evaporites) that defy explanation in terms of conventional geological processes. The objective of this newly-formed team is to develop new models that account for these precipitates in the context of a very violent global flood. The name for this new project is RAPIDS (RApid Precipitation In Deposition of Strata).


The scientists who will be involved in this new research project include Dr. Steve Austin (PhD in Geology), Dr. John Baumgardner (PhD in Geophysics), Dr. Robert Carter (PhD in Marine Biology), Dr. Aaron Hutchinson (PhD in Chemistry), Dr. Robert Kalbach (PhD in Chemistry), Dr. John Sanford (PhD in Genetics), Dr. Andrew Snelling (PhD in Geology), Raymond Strom (President of Calgary Rock and Materials Services, Inc.), Dr. Larry Vardiman (Ph.D. in Atmospheric Science), Dr. Alan White (PhD in Chemistry), and Dr. John Whitmore (MS in Geology and PhD in Biology). The team leader is Dr. White.


This project will examine, among other things, the potential for rapid precipitation/deposition of salt, gypsum, calcite, and chert. These materials will be studied under extreme conditions of temperature and pressure, capable of creating what is called “super-critical” water. This research will require the development of special instrumentation and new laboratory procedures.


Our investigators will also examine the question of whether the oceans are actually at steady state in terms of salt concentrations as is currently claimed. Because the amount of salts going into the ocean appears to us to far exceed the amount of salts leaving the ocean, it seems that the concentrations of salts in the ocean would be much higher than we currently observe if the oceans have been in existence for billions of years. Many salts in the ocean are nowhere near saturation. We hope to show that the current explanations for how the salts might leave the ocean are unconvincing and that the current salt concentrations are supportive of a young earth. "
logosresearchers

How cute! I got bored and read the article. It claimed "scientific evidence" , but it did not mention one bit of of. It appears that they will be doing research but have not done any yet. But they already have a name for their results.

Talk about approaching a project bass ackwards.

 

[74x12]

The discovery isn't what you seem to think it is.

Well, I didn't know you read minds.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, I didn't know you read minds.

Some minds are easier to read than others.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Well, I didn't know you read minds.

I've had this "but the fountains of the deep!" conversation, and this particularly discovery quote mined to support it enough times before to guess.

The discovery of large amounts of water in the mantle isn't a discovery of free flowing liquid water.

 

[74x12]

I've had this "but the fountains of the deep!" conversation, and this particularly discovery quote mined to support it enough times before to guess.

The discovery of large amounts of water in the mantle isn't a discovery of free flowing liquid water.

What's your point? I already knew that. My point is simply that enough water exists in or on the planet to make the great flood. It's true it would take great pressure to release the water. But then we're not pretending the flood was a normal every day occurrence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What's your point? I already knew that. My point is simply that enough water exists in or on the planet to make the great flood. It's true it would take great pressure to release the water. But then we're not pretending the flood was a normal every day occurrence.

Sorry, you can't get that water out. It is already under great pressure, and even if it did it would only cook Noah. I don't think it can be liquid at the temperatures it would be under.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

What's your point? I already knew that. My point is simply that enough water exists in or on the planet to make the great flood. It's true it would take great pressure to release the water. But then we're not pretending the flood was a normal every day occurrence.

If you can't provide a mechanism for said water to be released into the oceans, there's no point citing it to try to provide scientific support for "The Flood". You might as well claim that the water in The Flood came from interstellar space, for all it does to make The Flood story scientifically explainable.

If you believe the Flood happened as described in Genesis as a matter of faith, that's fine. Don't try to shoehorn the scientific evidence into supporting a faith based position, though, because the objective scientific evidence simply doesn't show any evidence of the Flood. If you believe the water was created and dissappeared again miraculously, fine. But don't sorta kinda half claim scientific support with convenient miracles just to fill in the gaps.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Since we are starting into this I want to say my faith neither stands or falls on the flood being true. So I will not be offended if you do not go along with anything I say. I do however believe it to be true, we may not fully understand what is said or are misinterpreting what is said.

I do not feel there were icecaps before the flood, why do you believe they were? I assume by their age, but how do you know they are millions of years old?

Scientists have drilled deep into the ice caps, using hollow bits-- removing cores that are very long.

Close examination of these cores, we can count the seasons as layers-- and those caps? Millions of layers and more.

Ergo, we know how old they are from that.

But. That's not the only method, there are others. Radiocarbon dating of the trapped gasses (snow often traps tiny bubbles of air, which get captured and pressed down by the upper layers).

And there are still other methods.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I feel there is massive evidence. It is said before the flood that the earth was basically flat and there were no oceans. Everything was watered from the deep.

Impossible. To re-shape the face of the earth from mostly-flat, to the modern mountains?

Would release enough energy to melt the planet, if it took place in the few short years your narrative requires.

Since the planet shows no evidence of having been melted, subsequent to a global flood?

Your hypothesis fails. The earth was not a featureless cueball prior to the mythical flood.

 

[gnostic]

I do not feel there were icecaps before the flood, why do you believe they were? I assume by their age, but how do you know they are millions of years old?

You have of “ice core” samples, haven’t you?

They drill out ice, and like people who do the tree rings or study the rock strata for dating purposes, the same could be done with ice cores.

Scientists who specialised in these research, can determine if annual amount of specific gases in the atmosphere, before another layers of ice covered it; these gases get trapped between layers. They can also determine if there were heavy rains in the past or not. They can also determine if the specific layer of ice is the result of sea water or from snowfalls.

The last I have heard, the oldest date they found from the ice core the Antarctica, is 1.5 million years. I don’t know if this record being broken or not.

Did you know the similar sort of method can be done with archaeological sites.

A lot of ancient cities in the Middle East, were built on top of even older settlements.

Sometimes a city would lay abandoned for hundreds of years (possibly due to famine, or trades drying up, for examples), before new population build another on top of the older one. They can also determine if some parts or the entire were destroyed by lava, by earthquake, by fire, by flood water, or by wars. Each one of these possibilities will give different evidences as to what happen to particular layer of settlement.

Jericho for instance, have at least 20 different settlements, all built one settlement on top of older settlement, and the oldest one was dated back to the start of the Neolithic period in Levant, 11,500 years ago.

But getting back to my ice core example.

Had their been a global flood, if the ice were destroyed by the water, it still would have left sign that such a Flood happened some times during the 3rd millennium BCE (to be more precise, between 2500 and 2100 BCE) if you want it to coincide with Noah’s Flood. But there are no evidence that such Flood happened in the ice core.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientists have drilled deep into the ice caps, using hollow bits-- removing cores that are very long.

Close examination of these cores, we can count the seasons as layers-- and those caps? Millions of layers and more.

Ergo, we know how old they are from that.

But. That's not the only method, there are others. Radiocarbon dating of the trapped gasses (snow often traps tiny bubbles of air, which get captured and pressed down by the upper layers).

And there are still other methods.

Radiocarbon is only good for the first 50,000 years. Even that is enough to refute the flood myth. For older dates radiometric dating of volcanic ash is used. Especially in Antarctica where there are active volcanoes there will be layers of ash that can be dated to give the age of a specific layer.

 

[Valjean]

What's your point? I already knew that. My point is simply that enough water exists in or on the planet to make the great flood. It's true it would take great pressure to release the water. But then we're not pretending the flood was a normal every day occurrence.

The "water's" already under huge pressure, and it's not free water but fused into mineral hydrates. How the water could be squeezed out into the atmosphere is anyone's guess, as is how it would get back there.

Sorry, you can't get that water out. It is already under great pressure, and even if it did it would only cook Noah. I don't think it can be liquid at the temperatures it would be under.

Temperatures at that depth are >6500 degrees F. For reference, lava is 1,300 to 2,200 degrees F.

 

[ecco]

"While this is very distressing, by God’s grace there is a growing body of scientific evidence that supports the reality of the Biblical flood.

Any article that starts off with a flat out lie can be immediately thrown into the trash heap.

There is no "growing body of scientific evidence that supports the reality of the Biblical flood".