Noah's Ark Flood Theories

[Vile Atheist]

Here is an interesting take on whether it was a local or worldwide flood, leaning toward it being local.

Thanks.

I couldn't get through all of it, but I did get about 1/3 down (I had an exam today...).

A local flood is much more reasonable than a global one. I look forward to reading the rest of that page to find the evidence for a local flood.

 

[darkendless]

I think another reasonable conclusion is that it's not based on any specific literal flood, but instead it's a parable or metaphor (or maybe simply plain ol' fiction) that uses the imagery of a flood for dramatic effect or to communicate its message.

Of course, but if people want to believe there actually was a flood then a local flood is the only plausible option to discuss. Even then i'd like to see where and when such floods apparently occured.

 

[footprints]

Forgive me because I am still pretty new here, but is it common practice for you to dance around logical arguments? If so, I apologize for even starting this with you if this is all you can muster.

I suppose your arguing on the last page about the possibility of a flood was what... something you didn't intend?

JeLy, if you feel a need to turn your wrong around on to me, then I hope this need serves you well.

I leave a lot of open ended statements. Simply because this is where facts and probability ends. Though I cannot deny I get a lot of amusement, because it generally doesn't stop there, you wouldn't believe some of the crap, fairytales and imaginations which come back to me. Just like your reply pertaining to fossils found on moutains, I am sure it was the best your intelligence could come up with.

 

[footprints]

Please don't lie. You specifically offered it as evidence of a global flood.

Did I do that camanintx? Or is this just how your perception perceived it or wants to perceive it. What other fairytales do you have?

I don't have any evidence of what type of flooding these type of events would do, a lot or none, each has probability.

 

[Madhuri]

My theory: Noah's Arc = Vedic story concerning ancient history millions of years ago. Story was probably adopted by other nations and changed slightly (names, location). This legend is very important in Hinduism as it relates to the first Avatar of Vishnu on Earth during the current cycle of the universe. This Purana was compiled over 5000 yrs ago but the legend had been passed down orally in India long before that time.

 

[Vile Atheist]

My theory: Noah's Arc = Vedic story concerning ancient history millions of years ago. Story was probably adopted by other nations and changed slightly (names, location). This legend is very important in Hinduism as it relates to the first Avatar of Vishnu on Earth during the current cycle of the universe. This Purana was compiled over 5000 yrs ago but the legend had been passed down orally in India long before that time.

I don't know much about it. Do you mind elaborating? And do you think it literally happened?

 

[footprints]

When it comes to this i don't need to. Facts are enough for me not to need to fabricate my position against people who are intillectually dishonest.

From my perception reading your answers I doubt you would even know what a fact was.

So you don't need to fabricate your position to yourself.

Twisting and warping what? You're the one claiming there was a flood, i don't need to use a bible to do anything buddy. You make the claims, the rest of us challenge them, thats how it goes.

I cannot answer delusions created in your head, I have never made a claim that such a flood actually happened, just probability which suggests it may be correct. The rest you have added from a very vivid imagination of your own creation.

You really should stop, its quite embarrassing. I can see the post below yours has already shown you why.

Why would I stop because an intellectually dishonest person says I should?

Its possible (if we could get that far down) to find fossils nd very young rocks in the mantle. Its called rifting, google it.

I do not need to google such things, that you do, doesn't mean that other people do.

Actually, good example. You should go to a university and compare core samples taken before and after the flooding there. It will reinforce what im saying, but not majorly since the soil is still saturated. In maybe 10 years it would be interesting to look at a soil profile from the levys.

It was a good example, it shows how weather patterns can cause flooding. The Tsunami which hit Thailand et al, shows how movement of the earths crust can cause flooding. Long periods of rain are on record as causing flooding.

Read what I have said pertaining to human perception and localised flooding and actually understand it instead of being intellectually dishonest.

No, thats you sir. I simply present facts. The reason people like me are always denying what people like you are saying is because its always crap and always hitting and hoping. Nothing substantial.

You do not present facts, you haven't presented any in our converstation, just instant denial of the facts I have offered. The closest you have come to facts are talking about New Orleans and seeking soil samples in 10 years.

 

[footprints]

Not only are there fish fossils high above the ocean's surface, there are also fossils of corals. How does a flood account for those fossils? Did god take his hand and swipe the water from the oceans, therefore tearing up some of the sea floor?

If your imagination says so Amill, it can be true for you.:yes:

 

[Sunstone]

If your imagination says so Amill, it can be true for you.:yes:

Nihilism

 

[Vile Atheist]

I just sit back and laugh lol. I don't know why you even try to reason with someone who clearly has no intention to present any scientific evidence for Noah's flood, be it global or local.

 

[footprints]

Nihilism

Yes Sunstone I would suggest your post containing just the word Nihilism, was Nihilism in its highest order.

 

[Madhuri]

I don't know much about it. Do you mind elaborating? And do you think it literally happened?

I don't know if it did literally happen or not and to be honest I don't actually care that much. I just like reminding people that there are older versions of this story. I did grow up being taught that this happened literally. For all I know it could have. If we go with the timeline accorded to Vedic legends then the flood would have occurred almost 2 billion years ago. The story relates to the Matsya Purana, which tells of Manu (aka. Noah) who collects the seeds and animals and puts them on the boat during the flood.

 

[footprints]

I just sit back and laugh lol. I don't know why you even try to reason with someone who clearly has no intention to present any scientific evidence for Noah's flood, be it global or local.

I just sit back and laugh when people look straight past evidence offered, especially that offered on climate change in my intitial post and still claim no evidence has been offered.

Guess it takes all types to make forums like this, the intelligent and the not so intelligent.

 

[darkendless]

From my perception reading your answers I doubt you would even know what a fact was.

So you don't need to fabricate your position to yourself.

Funny. However, i do forget that you are a newer member and probably havn't read the 200 threads ive been in trying to explain to biblicly hardened fools that a "global" flood could not have occured.

I cannot answer delusions created in your head, I have never made a claim that such a flood actually happened, just probability which suggests it may be correct. The rest you have added from a very vivid imagination of your own creation.

The probability of a global flood is zero. Such an amount of water would not be possible to generate.

Such an amount of water from a subterranial source would create vast instability underneath the earth. Geologically, we would have seen a lot more tectonic change in the form of rifting and folding is the source of water was from within the earth. This is under the assumption that the flood itself covered most or all of the middle east.

Another point:

The pore pressure which is an engineering property of soil would greatly reduce the vertical bearing stress of soils. If that water came out of the ground, it would have soaked back in, creating larger than expected voids in loose/porous rock strata below the surface of the earth. When geologists/geotechnical engineers take core samples to a lab, the first thing they would see would be big smudges on the outer layers of the rocks caused by water damaging weak rock, and then evaporating causing smudges and small scars on the outside.

Pore water pressure - Pore water pressure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why would I stop because an intellectually dishonest person says I should?

Dishonest? Why is it only ever people who try so desperately hard to stop the rest of us slamming the flood myth who attack my posts?

I do not need to google such things, that you do, doesn't mean that other people do.

Why would i need to google rifting? Rifting is the plates and lithosphere diverging. As a result, thinngs caught in a rift zone (on the fault line which rifting occurs) can often fall between plates.

It was a good example, it shows how weather patterns can cause flooding. The Tsunami which hit Thailand et al, shows how movement of the earths crust can cause flooding. Long periods of rain are on record as causing flooding.

Read what I have said pertaining to human perception and localised flooding and actually understand it instead of being intellectually dishonest.

Isn't it speculated that a flood wiped out the Sumerians and the Christians altered the story to suit themselves or stole it from sumerian mythology?

Question: If you think there was a flood, do you have anything to suggest the probability of it occuring is greater than 0.5 or 50%?

You do not present facts, you haven't presented any in our converstation, just instant denial of the facts I have offered. The closest you have come to facts are talking about New Orleans and seeking soil samples in 10 years.

You say this because you don't have a damn clue what im talking about.

The ground doesn't BS as well as you do.

 

[darkendless]

I just sit back and laugh when people look straight past evidence offered, especially that offered on climate change in my intitial post and still claim no evidence has been offered.

Guess it takes all types to make forums like this, the intelligent and the not so intelligent.

Can you link me to your post please, its well buried in this thread.

 

[Sunstone]

Yes Sunstone I would suggest your post containing just the word Nihilism, was Nihilism in its highest order.

I bet you could not have passed a breathalyzer test when you came up with that comment.

 

[Vile Atheist]

I just sit back and laugh when people look straight past evidence offered, especially that offered on climate change in my intitial post and still claim no evidence has been offered.

Guess it takes all types to make forums like this, the intelligent and the not so intelligent.

I just sit back and laugh when people think anthropogenic global warming has anything to do with Noah's flood.

Guess you're the "not so intelligent" type you're whining on about.

 

[footprints]

Funny. However, i do forget that you are a newer member and probably havn't read the 200 threads ive been in trying to explain to biblicly hardened fools that a "global" flood could not have occured.

One I am not a biblical hardened fool, and your disrespect for these people leaves much to be disired.

Being new or old doesn't have anything to do with being credible. So you have spent 200 threads trying to explain things from your perspective. Get over it.

If it is possible for you, which I do not believe it is, try understanding this is not one of your past 200 threads, I am not what you like to infer as a biblically hardened fool, I am an agnostic, and it is not my fault if some evidence goes against your belief patterns. I would suggest you stop reading what your mind puts there from past experience, and start reading what is actually there. Albeit, I cannot help it if you want to make up fairytales in your head, and try to turn them into realities.

The probability of a global flood is zero. Such an amount of water would not be possible to generate.

The only mention of a global flood by me, is imagination from your own head.

Such an amount of water from a subterranial source would create vast instability underneath the earth. Geologically, we would have seen a lot more tectonic change in the form of rifting and folding is the source of water was from within the earth. This is under the assumption that the flood itself covered most or all of the middle east.

See answer above pertaining to Global Flood and your imagination.

Another point:

The pore pressure which is an engineering property of soil would greatly reduce the vertical bearing stress of soils. If that water came out of the ground, it would have soaked back in, creating larger than expected voids in loose/porous rock strata below the surface of the earth. When geologists/geotechnical engineers take core samples to a lab, the first thing they would see would be big smudges on the outer layers of the rocks caused by water damaging weak rock, and then evaporating causing smudges and small scars on the outside.

Pore water pressure - Pore water pressure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See answer above, pertaining to Global Flooding and your imagination.

Dishonest? Why is it only ever people who try so desperately hard to stop the rest of us slamming the flood myth who attack my posts?

Dipstick, It wasn't me who attacked your post, it was you who attacked mine based on your imagination. This is the resultant.

Why would i need to google rifting? Rifting is the plates and lithosphere diverging. As a result, thinngs caught in a rift zone (on the fault line which rifting occurs) can often fall between plates.

As you do not to google it, why would you feel I needed to?

Isn't it speculated that a flood wiped out the Sumerians and the Christians altered the story to suit themselves or stole it from sumerian mythology?

Question: If you think there was a flood, do you have anything to suggest the probability of it occuring is greater than 0.5 or 50%?

Do you understand what the word speculation means?

Even your question denies logic and reason. If a person thought there was a flood the probability for it happening would be 100% to them. As I go with facts, not just the facts you offer, but facts that all fields of science offer, the probability for a flood is in the realm of 70 to 80%, this flood in all likelihood was localised. Hence the term I use, something doesn't have to be real for a person to believe it is real. To an ancient culture, if their whole known world was flooded, then to them, the whole world would be flooded. As no exact timeframe can be placed on this alleged flood, it makes it hard to even determine where in the earths surface to even look for evidence, and to that ends we cannot even be certain we know the exact place the alleged flood was said to have occurred. How significant was this flood, and was the loss of life implied from it directly attributed to the flood, is something else which has to be determined. In my original thread, I gave evidence of a suggested global climate change which occurred approximately 5,200 years ago.

You say this because you don't have a damn clue what im talking about.

The ground doesn't BS as well as you do.

The ground doesn't know sociology, psychology and anthropology as well as science does.

 

[footprints]

I just sit back and laugh when people think anthropogenic global warming has anything to do with Noah's flood.

Guess you're the "not so intelligent" type you're whining on about.

LOL I just laugh when people deny evidence in order to support their fantasies. No I was talking about you pertaining to not so intelligent, just another thing you have wrong.

 

[darkendless]

One I am not a biblical hardened fool, and your disrespect for these people leaves much to be disired.

Because they refuse to acknowledge sound science that they disagree with and you act the way they do.

I have no respect for biblical hardened fools.

Being new or old doesn't have anything to do with being credible. So you have spent 200 threads trying to explain things from your perspective. Get over it.

Its not about credibility, its simply that you have not seen my other posts on this topic where the person i was debating was actually trying to match science with science, instead of ignoring everything.

If it is possible for you, which I do not believe it is, try understanding this is not one of your past 200 threads, I am not what you like to infer as a biblically hardened fool, I am an agnostic, and it is not my fault if some evidence goes against your belief patterns. I would suggest you stop reading what your mind puts there from past experience, and start reading what is actually there. Albeit, I cannot help it if you want to make up fairytales in your head, and try to turn them into realities.

Agnostics don't assume that facts = belief. Since you know so much about belief, would you care to tell me what about what i have said lately is a belief, and what is a fact.

Experience. You see i dislike talking about my profession, i don't think i need to once again, you know what it is i do. Tell me, what changes? My story never changes, i've been presenting facts to ignorant people for almost a year here. Sometimes the bible changes to suit their positions.

I'm not the one making up fairytales, you were the one suggesting local flooding.

The only mention of a global flood by me, is imagination from your own head.

You did mention a flood.

Dipstick, It wasn't me who attacked your post, it was you who attacked mine based on your imagination. This is the resultant.

Petty insult. I find it amusing how you ignored my paragraph on pore water pressure.

As you do not to google it, why would you feel I needed to?

Until you prove me wrong, i assume you are severely lacking in scientific education.

Do you understand what the word speculation means?

Even your question denies logic and reason. If a person thought there was a flood the probability for it happening would be 100% to them. As I go with facts, not just the facts you offer, but facts that all fields of science offer, the probability for a flood is in the realm of 70 to 80%, this flood in all likelihood was localised. Hence the term I use, something doesn't have to be real for a person to believe it is real. To an ancient culture, if their whole known world was flooded, then to them, the whole world would be flooded. As no exact timeframe can be placed on this alleged flood, it makes it hard to even determine where in the earths surface to even look for evidence, and to that ends we cannot even be certain we know the exact place the alleged flood was said to have occurred. How significant was this flood, and was the loss of life implied from it directly attributed to the flood, is something else which has to be determined. In my original thread, I gave evidence of a suggested global climate change which occurred approximately 5,200 years ago.

Speculation. You are speculating about what may have happened as a result of writings by a culture that might have written this sort of thing down.

If the flood was 5200 years ago covering Egypt and that area, it shouldn't be hard to find. We can see that Queensland Australia was part of the continental shelf 200000 years ago.

If the flood was as young as you suggest, then it would be very easy to find. Yet no one in the science community has bothered because theres nothing to be found because a flood never happened.

The ground doesn't know sociology, psychology and anthropology as well as science does.

All the reliable evidence is in the ground. The ground doesn't lie as well as humans do.