Why we know that there was no global flood.

[gnostic]

Well you have absolutely no evidence that Noah did not build an ark, set sail after a major flood, and land months later in the middle east, as recorded in the stories of multiple world cultures. I think I would agree that there has not been a flood that covered Mt, Everest, for instance, but there may well have been a flood that covered the low lying area Noah had lived in, and you have presented no evidence to support the idea that that story is impossible, maybe its unlikely, but it is not impossible.

Again, you don’t understand the available evidences.

There were no flood of the magnitude that Genesis narrated in 6 to 8, not in geological records, not in archaeology.

You are right, there were no flood covering Mount Everest. But there were no flood covering Mount Ararat too, the supposed landing site of Noah’s Ark.

There are also no evidences of the Ark been found anywhere on Mount Ararat, or the smaller neighboring peak (Little Ararat).

There are not enough melted ice to cover over 5000 metres high Mount Ararat. It is even doubtful that any water can cover Little Ararat, which has elevation of nearly 3900 metres.

And even if there this magical flood, where did all the water go. It cannot cover mountaintop, and then simply just disappear within 6 months.

Have you look at the recent records of the sea-level?

Have you noticed that there are annual flooding, here and there, the largest often caused by tropical storms, but it never to have impact on the sea level?

If you have water covering Mount Ararat, that would mean it would have huge impact on the sea-level. That much water should have affected the sea level.

But there are no evidences of Mount Ararat ever being underwater. And you have no evidences for the Ark. that tell me, you really have nothing at all.

 

[David T]

Your poor analogy only demonstrates a lack of understanding of how science is done.

And please, why do you keep repeating the error of thinking that refuting the Ark myth is an attempt to refute God? I never made that claim. That is simply a very poor understanding of what this thread is about. There is no cherry picking, except by you perhaps.

Since you clearly have no clue as to what this thread is about you should be asking questions instead of making ridiculous false statments.

Are you actually a PhD in science? In what field exactly.? If not wtf I don't understand science? Lame.
. Dude I build buildings all day long what the hell do you do "scientifically" program chatbots? I mean really your response is just a lame excuse to not think just talk. What the hell do you make? Noise. Oh never mind. .

 

[Lyndon]

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.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.

Are you actually a PhD in science? In what field exactly.? If not wtf I don't understand science? Lame.
. Dude I build buildings all day long what the hell do you do "scientifically" program chatbots? I mean really your response is just a lame excuse to not think just talk. What the hell do you make? Noise. Oh never mind. .

You are making the same error that Lynden made. One does not need to be a Phd to show that others are in error. This seems to be some extremely strange and backwards appeal to authority. But then so far the flood believers have nothing but trolling.

If you do not understand a concept you should not oppose it. If you discuss the topic you might learn something. Trolling is not discussing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm sure if you looked you would find sea fossils near the top of mount Arafat. But the story is not contingent on the Ark landing on mount Arafat, Mt Arafat 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.

Nope, no sea fossils on top of Ararat. Geologists would be very surprised if any were found there.

There are significant differences in different myths and one must cherry picks similarities. And yes, there have been all sorts of local floods all around the Earth. The problem is that they are not simultaneous. That means that they are evidence that local flood stories could be based upon local floods, they are not evidence for the Noah's Ark myth since that was a supposed one time event. If all of those floods happened at the same time you might have a point. They did not and that harms your claims.

 

[Lyndon]

if you don't find it possible to find sea fossils on the top of Mt Ararat, you don't have a very good understanding of geology.

 

[Subduction Zone]

if you don't find it possible to find sea fossils on the top of Mt Ararat, you don't have a very good understanding of geology.

Wrong try again.

Perhaps you might try doing a Google search before making claims that only show you have no understanding of the topic at hand. I know why there are no fossils on top of Ararat. If you thought you might be able to think of a reason why one would not expect to find any there.

ETA: I am feeling generous. One would be extremely surprised to find sea fossils on the top of Mt. Rainier or hundreds of other mountains around the world.

 

[Lyndon]

Sea fossils where found at the 10,000 foot level on mountains right next to Ararat. but you don't seem to understand how that is possible??? Sea fossils have been found on Mt Everest and many mountains all over the world. Google is your friend,

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sea fossils where food at the 10,000 foot level on mountains right next to Ararat. but you don't seem to understand how that is possible??? Sea fossils have been found on Mt Everest and many mountains all over the world. Google is your friend, I thought you said you were a scientist??

Do you have a link for that claim? And yes, sea fossils on top of Ararat are not possible. In fact sea fossils on top of Ararat would be one of the few possible examples of evidence for the Noah's Ark myth. Sadly you won't find any up there.

And yes, I know that fossils can be found on Mt. Everest, those fossils are evidence against a worldwide flood. I understand geology. You are grasping at straws and making yourself look bad.

 

[Lyndon]

You're the one that doesn't seem to understand how sea fossils can end up on top of a mountain, and you're calling me ignorant??

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're the one that doesn't seem to understand how sea fossils can end up on top of a mountain, and you're calling me ignorant??

Wrong, I know how fossils end on top of a mountain and that is how I know that you are ignorant.

It is amazing that you did not do a simple Google search to find out what your error was. Once again this indicates that you are trolling. Trolling the trolls can be fun, but it is too tempting to break the rules here so let me put you out of your misery:

Ararate is a volcano. It would be shocking to find sea fossils on top of a mountain that is a volcano and was never under water

Mount Ararat - Wikipedia

"Mount Ararat (/ˈærəˌræt/ ARR-ə-rat;[4] Turkish: Ağrı Dağı; Armenian: Մասիս, Masis and Արարատ, Ararat) is a snow-capped and dormant compound volcano in the extreme east of Turkey.:

 

[Lyndon]

Actually I know for a fact calling someone a troll is against the TOS

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually I know for a fact calling someone a troll is against the TOS

Once again, I pointed out that you have been trolling. That is not calling you a troll. You made terribly ignorant and wrong statements, you ignored corrections, you made more claims that you did not research at all in support of false claims. That sounds like trolling to me.

It is funny that whenever you are shown to be utterly wrong that you try to claim others are making personal attacks against you.

One question, do you realize how terribly wrong and ignorant you were about Ararat yet?

 

[Lyndon]

So my being unaware that Ararat is a volcano makes me terribly wrong and ignorant???. I will concede that its less likely you find sea fossils on a volcano, but I don't think you have any way of knowing if the mountain started out as an undersea volcano, and as I said sea fossils were found at the 10,000 foot level 10 miles from Ararat.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually I know for a fact calling someone a troll is a violation of the tOS, don't ask me how I know that. I will concede that its less likely you find sea fossils on a volcano, but I don't think you have any way of knowing if the mountain started out as an undersea volcano, and as I said sea fossils were found at the 10,000 foot level 10 miles from Ararat.

You made that claim but you did not substantiate it in any way at all. Now I have severe doubts that you were ever there. And creationist sources are of no use in a discussion on science. So where is your evidence that supports your claim?

And you should have read the source that I gave to you,. It explains the sort of volcano that Ararat is and its history. Unlike you I do check out my claims before I post them. The only claims of fossils near Ararat that I have seen are not reliable sources. There very well could be since the local area was compressed and uplifted due to the tectonic activity that also caused the eruption event that formed Ararat. But if found I am sure that those fossils would actually be evidence against the flood.

It seems that you do not understand the nature of the scientific method. One of the acts one must perform when using that method is to create a testable hypothesis that explains what one observes. The evidence that supports your claims must fit your model. If it doesn't then it is actually evidence against ones model. Those on the creation side tend to be afraid to make testable models. All existing ones that I am aware of have been refuted. Perhaps you know of one that has not been, I can assure you that I do not know of any.

 

[Lyndon]

No I was never at Mt Ararat, did you think I said I was??

 

[Subduction Zone]

No I was never at Mt Ararat, did you think I said I was??

Nope, you never said it, and I did not think that you were. Yet you made a claim about fossils. Would you care to substantiate that claim? If not with your poor history here there is no reason to believe that claim at all.

By the way, do you understand how fossil can be evidence against the flood story? If not I can go into more detail for you.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I think the Bible is a fairly accurate historical document

ROFL

I think the moon is made of green cheese!

 

[Lyndon]

Maybe there are sea fossils on the moon, that would prove that the flood was so universal it extended to the moon??

 

[gnostic]

No I was never at Mt Ararat, did you think I said I was??

But that’s where Genesis 8:4 say the Ark came to rest when the water receded:

4 and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

Unless you think Noah and sons pull the ark there, or sprout wings and flew there.