Noah's Arc and the Flood?

[Valjean]

I don't believe you.

If I link an informative YouTube series on the subject, would you watch it?

 

[dad]

If I link an informative YouTube series on the subject, would you watch it?

Videos tend to be like storytelling. Better to quote a relevant paragraph or something, and use the link as a reference.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Physical evidence does not tell us what forces used to exist. Geology interprets layers and patterns and all things in the light of its beliefs. Then you want to call that objective and anything else subjective. The reverse is true.

Looking at thing objectively is deined like this.

"in a way that is based on facts and not influenced by personal beliefs or feelings:"

Your feelings and beliefs totally influence how evidence is viewed.

dad, I need to remind you that you do not understand the concept of evidence so you really have no say in this matter. When you are ready to learn people here are ready to help you.

 

[Darkforbid]

Even though the Bible is not literal history there is a basis in history for may of the events of history. Even though the flood as described in the Bible did not happen there was likely a catastrophic event that the account was based on,

Based on the archaeological and geology evidence, and earliest flood accounts, I believe it is related to memories of catastrophic flooding of the Tigris Euphrates River Valley. Because of the potential of wide spread catastrophic flooding in these valleys up to hundreds of square miles can be flooded particularly in the lower flood plain and delta, it could appear to the people in the valley as the world was indeed mostly covered in water.

I will provide archaeological and geology (geomorphology) references to support this.

"Day-star of the heaven of justice shall be made manifest, and the Ark of divine guidance shall sail upon the sea of glory, a star will appear in the heaven, heralding unto its people the advent of that most great light."

 

[gnostic]

Well, as the CREATION of course is the same for all humans in all cultures, the very basics in all creation stories also is the same. These stories contains both physical observations and spiritual/intuitive revelations.
Read also my signature comment

I am sure that I have told all this before, in some old threads, but the ancient people had absolutely no understanding or explanation of what the Milky Way is.

And what the ancient people did see, was only a very tiny fraction of the Milky Way. They certainly couldn’t see the Milky Way’s centre.

From their perspective, they would see BAND of dark spots and glowing light, and may describe as a river, but such description isn’t very accurate or true.

The ancient star gazers wouldn’t see the galactic centre or the budge, and they wouldn’t know that what we can see from our angle on Earth, are only very portions of spiral arms (Orion, Sagittarius and Perseus).

Since the galactic spiral arms are moving along the galactic plane, from our sun’s position on the Orion spur (or the Orion-Cygnus arm), there are no direct line of sight to the centre of the Milky Way, because of the stars, gases and dust of the Carina-Sagittarius arm in front of that blocked most of our view.

Behind that (Carina-Sagittarius) arm, is a portion of Scutum-Centaurus (Crux-Scutum) arm with gases and dust...and behind that is the Norma arm, and again more gases and dust.

The light we see glowing behind the dark spots of dust, are some thousands stars on the Carina-Sagittarius arm. The light from these stars caused the gas to ionized.

The light we do see is not coming the centre of the galaxy, but on the spiral arm of Carina-Sagittarius. And that’s all anyone see without the telescopes.

So there are at least 3 spiral arms blocking everyone’s views of the galactic centre.

You cannot even see the centre the optical lens (visible range) of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST).

The only way to observe more, beyond Sagittarius arm is through detection of radio waves, hence radio telescopes.

From last century and this century, we have optical and radio telescopes and even space observatories that give us better views and understanding of the Milky Way than those ancient people.

We now know that many of the creation stories are inaccurate, misinformed or downright wrong.

Your stubborn reliance on ancient descriptions of the Milky Way, have only demonstrated that you have stuck your head so far deep in the sand, refusing to see the ancient views are archaic or outdated.

 

[dad]

dad, I need to remind you that you do not understand the concept of evidence so you really have no say in this matter. When you are ready to learn people here are ready to help you.

Need I remind you that spam and blasphemy are not really interesting?

 

[Valjean]

Videos tend to be like storytelling. Better to quote a relevant paragraph or something, and use the link as a reference.

Storytelling is like religion, and the links have their own references. The point of links is to explain something too lengthy to be dealt with on a talkboard.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Need I remind you that spam and blasphemy are not really interesting?

Those are your specialties. When you do spam the threads I try to pull you back to reality.

 

[dad]

Storytelling is like religion, and the links have their own references. The point of links is to explain something too lengthy to be dealt with on a talkboard.

You cannot defend any point. No sense running point after point in a video that does not support each point...or maybe any.

 

[shunyadragon]

"Day-star of the heaven of justice shall be made manifest, and the Ark of divine guidance shall sail upon the sea of glory, a star will appear in the heaven, heralding unto its people the advent of that most great light."

This is not 'objective verifiable evidence' of the world flood of Noah.

Still waiting . . .

 

[shunyadragon]

Physical evidence does not tell us what forces used to exist. Geology interprets layers and patterns and all things in the light of its beliefs. Then you want to call that objective and anything else subjective. The reverse is true.

Looking at thing objectively is deined like this.

"in a way that is based on facts and not influenced by personal beliefs or feelings:"

Your feelings and beliefs totally influence how evidence is viewed.

The 'objective verifiable evidence' of the geologic history of the earth is based on simple Newtonian Physics, and the fact that there is no evidence for a world flood. .

 

[Thief]

I just hate typos.....don't you?

Noah's Ark

and any rise of water that floods farm land
sufficiently to starve the population

is indeed a great flood

 

[Thief]

especially salt water

 

[rational experiences]

Science, as a study of science.

Seeing science is a human male as a group, their thoughts, beliefs and theories.

Inferring Laws about science inside of an atmospheric body, where they exist, exactly where they are.

Inferred LAWS for SCIENCE....and not for anything else.

A sane human says, since when do you male human talk on behalf of natural existence in its natural forms?

And then realize what an egotist you all are.

Science says is looked at natural Earth history when the Sun collapsed and attacked God O bodies...mass. Earth survived. It owned a flood, and then evaporation of water eventually allowed living life forms to emerge.

When a human male group owned their first life, they invented science, and talked about the laws that enabled science to be practiced whilst living inside of an atmosphere.

You all know the types of buildings that first science used...but you do not know what machinery they used.

What they reviewed in history was now totally opposite to how it existed, but it was opposite to being a flooded Earth, the ONLY OPPOSITION.

So if you oppose natural laws and natural history in creation then you would cause...….

Earth as a natural body of MASS to shift is natural mass...and you infer that space is how you shift one higher mass to a lower mass.....and you say by a hot radiation space.

Therefore that hot radiation space previously does not exist, for COLD FUSION.

Science caused it.

The body of MASS sitting in NATURAL COLD SPACE, therefore had to shift its natural body and it fell into deeper colder space. What you liars in science do not even infer...what cause you do to the history natural MASS.

You just think for science, self male and a machine.

Earth therefore brought the flood up from beneath your feet.

For you put mass down beneath water....by taking cold radiation mass and sending into water....what you see the UFO doing.

Cold radiation mass is a particular cold in a gas atmosphere.....and therefore to make it colder, it has to enter water, like your machine metal in metallurgical processes owns. Cold presence metal mass...to be a machine to apply first reaction.

ICE, holder of water above the ground, the stone, melts.

Males in science said if ICE in water melted that the pressure of ice on water, versus its melt would not displace water.

But if ICE melts on the ground, it does displace.

ICE owns a body of pressure itself....ICE also owns the history snap freeze of the body of stone in its owned history.....presence on Earth.

All conditions claim that the stone fusion snaps off and drops the plates beneath the water....for that is how you get the coldest form of radiation metal, by plunging it and holding it beneath the water.

Males say, science is the INVENTION of all evil, and a male says if I pretend that I will create by my machine, then he forces natural LAW to be applied to his science machine LAWS.

Why Earth life plunged beneath the water, as the flood opposition changed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

especially salt water

Where is the evidence of that? And for salt water to be a problem in the Noah's Ark sense it would also have to retreat.

 

[Thief]

salted ground is not good

 

[Subduction Zone]

salted ground is not good

We know that. But there is no evidence of such a flood. The only evidence out there is for floods of limited time and extent.

 

[rational experiences]

Males should ask, where did fresh water come from, if not created in space?

If a male said fresh water fell onto the ground, then what form of ground condition would have changed that fresh water?

If a male says to self, it was given by God to the water, from stone owned chemical conditions, then water as fresh water was stated to be the holy life support.

For we know that salty water is not.

If a male says I taught a story for a reason Holy Mother in space was defined to own the coldest natural place in created history....emptiness/cold as space.

When mass in space reacted, it changed the space around itself.

Space then allowed it to evolve......so he would teach in science natural evolution is the only scientific truth and would not support any other form of science, such as nuclear conversion.

For he would teach against the occult/UFO metallic radiation CULT history theme his own self as a taught scientist from his own wrong choices.

For if a male says to self I am learning and learnt from my mistakes, then science has to be owner of making that mistake itself.

For natural history can only be explained as owning natural history and does not own a science explanation.

2 forms of teaching existed against the OCCULT science/machine nuclear fake themes. One form said that if a male wanted to own an ideal about where creation came from, it was given as the state eternal....as just a one worded statement, without owning pretend I know in creation.

Which the spiritual human and spiritual scientist can believe in, without being an egotist.

If a male then said, yet whilst I live as a male on Earth I want to defend humanity against a scientist who changed natural life and attacked it. Then I would own the evolution theory teaching about life existing for a human being only after a monkey life.

So the occult scientist would own no human reason for lying and coercing in science conditions about what he believes is his group right to use machines to attack and change our life, claiming that their group is allowed to do whatever it wants.

Yet they all only own the exact same natural human life, created by the act of human sex, as a baby to adult self. And human sperm and an ovary the place where our life began as fact...as just a SELF. For we cannot claim we talk on behalf of our 2 human being parents. And were taught to honour the presence and life of our Human Mother and Human Father.

To say evolution is the only truth.

And evolution does not place a human parent or a baby life as beginning from any metallic radiation UFO alien image.

 

[Darkforbid]

This is not 'objective verifiable evidence' of the world flood of Noah.

Still waiting . . .

No, buddy it's the Bahá'u'lláh. From writings telling you how member of the Bala'i faith should interpret the great deluge story's

None of which you have shown in this topic.

Have any of the Bala'i here ever been to a Bala'i meeting?

 

[dad]

The 'objective verifiable evidence' of the geologic history of the earth is based on simple Newtonian Physics, and the fact that there is no evidence for a world flood. .

Not true. It is based on the same physics having always existed in earth history. In other words, it is based on the present nature.