Why we know that there was no global flood.

[Subduction Zone]

I once read an interesting hypothesis from Isaac Asimov.
He suggested that a strong seismic event, or even a meteor strike, in the Persian Gulf might have pushed a giant wall of tsunami up the Tigris and Euphrates River valleys. The backwash could have dragged substantial wooden buildings, much less river barges, out to sea where they might drift for days or weeks.

Survivors aboard such a vessel would become the stuff of legends.
Tom

Here is a link to the article that I promised:

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth

Isaac Asimov made an untested hypothesis with little to no evidence to support it. In the article they go over the evidence of a flood that was found and how large that flood was. It has undergone testing, though whether or not it was the ultimate source is still debatable, but at least this has evidence behind it.

 

[Thief]

Here is a link to the article that I promised:

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth

Isaac Asimov made an untested hypothesis with little to no evidence to support it. In the article they go over the evidence of a flood that was found and how large that flood was. It has undergone testing, though whether or not it was the ultimate source is still debatable, but at least this has evidence behind it.

I see the title of your offering is much like a previous post I've made in this thread

maybe you should read this thread again
and just knock off the shallow retort that I don't understand

or maybe you could participate in another thread.....
Last Post Is the Winner

 

[Thief]

Handling your dark side by Jordan Peterson

the Flood gets mention as the speech unfolds

he makes a point

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see the title of your offering is much like a previous post I've made in this thread

maybe you should read this thread again
and just knock off the shallow retort that I don't understand

or maybe you could participate in another thread.....
Last Post Is the Winner

Once again there is no need. Your inability to follow a conversation is not my problem. We were discussing your latest failure in regards to understanding how to use an analogy.

Can you stay on topic? Let me remind you of what my analogy had shown. It showed that absence of evidence can be evidence of absence. I am merely trying to help you with the basics right now since logic and reasoning do not appear to be tools that you know how to use.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Handling your dark side by Jordan Peterson

the Flood gets mention as the speech unfolds

he makes a point

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? So far you have been afraid to discuss the topic of the thread.

Here is a simple question for you: Can you be honest?

 

[Thief]

and so I reiterate

Handling your dark side by Jordan Peterson

the Flood gets mention as the speech unfolds

he makes a point

 

[Subduction Zone]

and so I reiterate

You have never made a point. If you can't stay on topic please don't post here.

 

[Thief]

I'm sure if you looked you would find sea fossils near the top of mount Ararat. But the story is not contingent on the Ark landing on mount Arafat, Mt Ararat was probably named after the Biblical account existed. Multiple historical accounts by different civilizations have story of a major flood and the hero escaping in a boat, why is it so hard for you guys to believe that it might be somewhat based on fact. They're just finding that a great flood written about in China 4000 years ago was an actual event confirmed by archaeological evidence, archaeologists are also documenting a major flooding of the Black Sea and a dramatic rising of the shore level, the same may well be true with the Middle Eastern stories. Its not so easy to prove a flood never occurred.

thank you

 

[Subduction Zone]

thank you

His errors were explained to him. Would you like to make the same claims? I can explain what is wrong with them to you.

 

[Lyndon]

your errors were explained to you, too.

 

[Subduction Zone]

your errors were explained to you, too.

Nope, now you are just spreading falsehoods. I can go back and quote your post directly and explain your errors to you again. You did not catch me making any errors.

But then literalists cannot be honest. That is the only way that they can remain literalists if they debate at all. I used to be a Christian and I never appreciated other Christians that used to make Christianity look bad.

 

[Thief]

Nope, now you are just spreading falsehoods. I can go back and quote your post directly and explain your errors to you again. You did not catch me making any errors.

But then literalists cannot be honest. That is the only way that they can remain literalists if they debate at all. I used to be a Christian and I never appreciated other Christians that used to make Christianity look bad.

atta boy......

 

[Subduction Zone]

It has been a while here. Let's see if there are any defenders of the Ark myth out there.

Of course to refute your version of the Noah's Ark myth I need specifics. Merely saying "the version in the Bible" is not good enough since different people interpret the story in different ways.

 

[Thief]

It has been a while here. Let's see if there are any defenders of the Ark myth out there.

Of course to refute your version of the Noah's Ark myth I need specifics. Merely saying "the version in the Bible" is not good enough since different people interpret the story in different ways.

and WHAT do you think is acceptable evidence?

no need to send people on your wild goose chase
belief is done without evidence

 

[Thief]

It has been a while here. Let's see if there are any defenders of the Ark myth out there.

Of course to refute your version of the Noah's Ark myth I need specifics. Merely saying "the version in the Bible" is not good enough since different people interpret the story in different ways.

and WHAT do you think is acceptable evidence?

no need to send people on your wild goose chase
belief is done without evidence

 

[Subduction Zone]

and WHAT do you think is acceptable evidence?

no need to send people on your wild goose chase
belief is done without evidence

I usually rely on scientific evidence. The concept is well defined and unbiased.

Belief that is not evidence base is not rational belief. It is not a reliable pathway to knowing correct things.

 

[Thief]

I usually rely on scientific evidence. The concept is well defined and unbiased.

Belief that is not evidence base is not rational belief. It is not a reliable pathway to knowing correct things.

finding what's left of Noah's Ark is a wild goose chase

not even a toothpick will be found

and belief is not irrational
some people do nod their heads too quick....but not all

 

[Subduction Zone]

finding what's left of Noah's Ark is a wild goose chase

not even a toothpick will be found

and belief is not irrational
some people do nod their heads too quick....but not all

Of course. One cannot find that which never existed.

Why post a strawman argument?

And there is more dishonesty in your post. People believe based upon evidence all of the time. You proposed an irrational belief . It appears that you conflated belief and faith.

 

[Thief]

Of course. One cannot find that which never existed.

Why post a strawman argument?

why the wild goose chase?

 

[Subduction Zone]

why the wild goose chase?

No wild goose chase. An inability to reason by one party doesn't mean that there is a wild goose chase.