It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientific Evidence of a Global Flood

page: 18
22
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid


The archaeological record of 5,000 years ago would be replete with Pompeii-style ruins — the remains of thousands of towns, villages and cities, all wiped out by flood waters, simultaneously. It would appear that the near annihilation of the human race, if it happened, left no imprint on the archaeological record anywhere.

Ken Feder, "The Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology"




posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Putting aside what science says is impossible for a
moment, there is this.


“Over the years, I have collected more than 200 of these stories, originally reported by various missionaries, anthropologists and ethnologists. While the differences are not always trivial, the common essence of the stories is instructive as compiled below:

Is there a favored family? 88%
Were they forewarned? 66%
Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%
Is catastrophe only a flood? 95%
Was flood global? 95%
Is survival due to a boat? 70%
Were animals also saved? 67%
Did animals play any part? 73%
Did survivors land on a mountain? 57%
Was the geography local? 82%
Were birds sent out? 35%
Was the rainbow mentioned? 7%
Did survivors offer a sacrifice? 13%
Were specifically eight persons saved? 9%


And this.




Stories of the Nochian Flood have been found in almost every civilization in the world. Dr. Aaron Smith of the University of Greensboro collected a complete history of the literature on Noah’s Ark. He found 80,000 works in 72 languages about the flood. About 70,000 of them mention the wreckage of the Ark.



Source

Somebody explain how a local flood could be responsible for worldwide
ancient knowledge of what is obviously the same event?



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

At the end of the last glacial period, 10-12 thousand years ago there was tons of flooding all over the place. Not a single one of those legends can actually confirm that the entire planet was covered in water at once. We're talking about ancient people that had no technology or deep knowledge of the earth. They had NO CLUE what was going on anywhere outside of their immediate region. Again, there is no physical scientific evidence of a global flood, only folklore. I know you badly want it to be true, but that's not good enough. If it actually happened and was worldwide, there would be evidence all over the place that goes well beyond folklore and myths, for example mass extinctions of land plants and animals along with sedimentary evidence as well. It seems obvious that those stories are referring to the end of the last ice age when there was indeed flooding all over the earth because temperatures rise and ice melts raising the sea level.

Occams razor wins in this case. It wasn't one giant flood created by an angry vengeful god that overreacted and then mysteriously vanished later on. There's simply too many unanswerable questions that arise from accepting that account. It was in reference to various local floods that we ALREADY KNOW FOR A FACT OCCURRED when the ice age ended and the ice melted.

A comet collision around 7-8 thousand years ago leading to flooding isn't out of the question either, as there is evidence of an event that caused a sudden big drop in temperature and lots of dust in the atmosphere, follow by a mini warming period.

This thread clearly says "scientific evidence" of a global flood, so quoting myths and legends doesn't qualify.
edit on 1-10-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-10-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: iterationzero


It would appear that the near annihilation of the human race, if it happened, left no imprint on the archaeological record anywhere.

It would ALSO appear that mainstream science has a massive religious agenda...

Nothing is going to make a bit of sense as long as one ignores this fact.

If this isn't an imprint on the archaeological record, I don't know what the heck would be.


Have you ever seen a map showing the bronze age port cities of the world? You certainly have not, because the darwinists will tell you sea level at circa 2000 B.C. was little different than today, yet the presence of hundreds of submerged ruins’ sites from the Gulf of Chambay to Bimini, and from Cornwall to Nan Madol, certainly belie that notion, with most of the submerged ruins worldwide in the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic, right where you’d expect them to be, where Sidon, Peleg, Javan, Tarshish, and Atlas plied the waters, building their port facilities, now submerged since the end of the Ice Age. Here is a partial list of the submerged ruins worldwide, with pictures where available, to be soon updated as more photos will undoubtedly roll-in from interested “submergie” aficionados, so help out if you can, hard as it may be for a darwinist to do, but certainly not for a soon-to-be ex-darwinist, we shall see.

Submerged Ruins Atlantis



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

So we're supposed to take personal anecdotes from other posters and biased creationist websites as realistic sources and ignore glaringly obvious things like that complete void of evidence for a worldwide flood event in the geological record? How exactly do you reconcile the fantasy with the lack of physical evidence to support it? And the geologic record is just the tip of the iceberg in regards to a nonexistent flood event that consumed the entire world simultaneously. If we're supposed to believe the biblical story of Noah to be a true historical account, could you explain to me how exactly Noah and his family, let alone every other surface creature on Earth managed to survive under the atmospheric conditions that are laid out in the Hebrew text? For the entire planet to be encapsulated under a canopy of water vapor with enough water to cover the tallest mountains on earth once the vapor condensed into liquid water would create a surface pressure that was the equivalent of being crushed under 9 atmospheres. Essentially all land creatures would be living inside a 10,000 psi pressure cooker. Even on the extraordinarily rare chance that this was a reality, any life form that was able to survive under those conditions pre flood would not be suitable for life in a post flood world where the atmosphere and its pressure reduced to what we see here and now. Likewise, nothing living today would have been able to survive under the alleged pre flood conditions as outlined in Hebrew scripture. But really, its all moot because there's not an iota of correlating sedimentary deposits in the geological record to support the notion. If you can support the position that there is evidence of that sort and its not an anecdote supplied by another poster I would love to see it.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
Somebody explain how a local flood could be responsible for worldwide
ancient knowledge of what is obviously the same event?


Because that "same event" was likely the end of an ice age, where hundreds of floods took place all over the planet over a thousand + year period. That isn't something that cultures are going to forget. Of course folks will exaggerate them and the stories will change over time.

Also, if those cultures all have similar legends, and do refer to the same flood, then the Noah story is flat out wrong because it claims Noah and his family & ark animals were the only survivors. If this is the case, then how did all those annihilated cultures write stories about it? Why are all those races still in existence if all modern humans descended from Noah?



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs




Was flood global? 95%


This seems to be anthropological evidence.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs

Somebody explain how a local flood could be responsible for worldwide
ancient knowledge of what is obviously the same event?


Its an inherent byproduct of Bronze Age infrastructure. The vast majority of burgeoning civilizations depended on and were based around or near a large water source. Mesopotamia was situated between the Tigris and Euphrates, the Indus Valley Civilization was centered on the Indus River, Egypt on the Nile, in Chine the Shang and Zhou dynasties were centered around the Yellow river and on and on.

What is a natural occurrence when living near these sources of water? Frequent and sometimes devastating flood events. Many of these areas relied on seasonal flooding for agriculture, notably Egypt comes to mind in that regard.

Since you want to gloss over all the relevant scientific data that assures me that a singular world wide flood did not take place during just prior to the Bronze Age, lets take this approach... why are all of these flood myths not contemporaneous to one another? They are all ascribed to widely varying dates and ages, often separated by millennia. How many are directly plagiarized from the Mesopotamian flood myth? There was a tremendous amount of trade between far away and varying places and with the goods went people who traded stories and shared myths on their travels. It is a far more likely scenario than the entire planet being covered in water for 40 or 150 days, depending on which verse from Genesis one is quoting from. Either way, if a world wide flood occurred why did every civilization not make a record of it at the time it occurred? Some have no flood myth for hundreds of years after they developed writing. If it was such an important and life altering event in their collective history, then it stands to reason that records of it would originate from a similar time frame and not be spread out over hundreds or in some cases well over a millennia after the first flood myths appear.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Have you ever seen a map showing the bronze age port cities of the world? You certainly have not, because the darwinists will tell you sea level at circa 2000 B.C. was little different than today, yet the presence of hundreds of submerged ruins’ sites from the Gulf of Chambay to Bimini, and from Cornwall to Nan Madol, certainly belie that notion, with most of the submerged ruins worldwide in the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic, right where you’d expect them to be, where Sidon, Peleg, Javan, Tarshish, and Atlas plied the waters, building their port facilities, now submerged since the end of the Ice Age. Here is a partial list of the submerged ruins worldwide, with pictures where available, to be soon updated as more photos will undoubtedly roll-in from interested “submergie” aficionados, so help out if you can, hard as it may be for a darwinist to do, but certainly not for a soon-to-be ex-darwinist, we shall see.]


Note the bold. That's exactly what I was saying about the flooding from the end of the ice age. But geologists are now "darwinists"? LMAO! It always boils down to hatred of evolution for you guys. Anybody that doesn't believe in the bible literally must be an evilutionist or darwinist.

Science may gets things wrong sometimes, but it does indeed follow the evidence. I'll trust the word of scientists today over the word of shepherds and scribes from 4000 years ago.

Plate tectonics, natural disasters, and climate change can explain all of that. I don't understand why it always becomes a war on evolution.


It would ALSO appear that mainstream science has a massive religious agenda...

Nothing is going to make a bit of sense as long as one ignores this fact.


Ah yes, the evil mainstream science, the atrocity that is responsible for bringing you things like computers, wireless internet, refrigerators, TVs, cars, smart phones, video games, and thousands of other things that work and make our lives convenient.
edit on 1-10-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Barcs




Was flood global? 95%


This seems to be anthropological evidence.




If you can explain how the people who wrote the stories were able to verify that the flood was worldwide, you'd have a point. But there wasn't wifi internet back then. They couldn't just text their friend a few thousand miles away to see how far it went. It may have been their world, but there's no evidence to suggest that it was the entire world at once. Plus the fact that all the cultures that are claimed to be wiped out still exist.

I still think that a comet hit the Indian ocean 8000 (give or take)years ago. It may have even contained salt water that raised the sea level. But flooding the whole world at once to the tops of mountains? No chance. A comet impact actually has way more geological evidence to support it than a worldwide flood does.

edit on 1-10-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

If all the cultures we're speaking of can be traced back
to this one family. The story of a deluge would certainly
be handed down and begin to vary as mankinds memory
would fade and change the truth of the matter from
culture to culture. This is exactly what we see until Moses
jots down the truth of exactly what really happened straight
from the horses mouth. You gave a good example of exaggerating
the story yourself, throwing in the need for cell phones. And of
course the cultures we know about today would've sprang up
after the flood, having only diluted stories but mostly of a
worldwide flood with variations. That's just what we have isn't it?

I don't see where they would need to verify a tradition of truth?
And I know this doesn't account for the lack of scientific evidence
even tho there are trace amounts.

But I think to much is ignored for some nefarious reason.
edit on Rpm100114v322014u36 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar




Either way, if a world wide flood occurred why did every civilization not make a record of it at the time it occurred?


For someone I have a lot of respect for on this site both
socially and intellectually. I want to make sure you don't want
to rephrase this question?

Also the need for something to be scientifically possible? Goes right out
the window when God is involved. So if you don't believe in a God why
would he want to stand in your way with evidence for himself or a flood?
And I can't tell another man what to believe. But for those of us who do?
There be evidence enough for us.
Funny how that works out, I think.
edit on Rpm100114v272014u51 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: peter vlar




Either way, if a world wide flood occurred why did every civilization not make a record of it at the time it occurred?


For someone I have a lot of respect for on this site both
socially and intellectually. I want make sure you don't want
to rephrase this question?


I appreciate the kind words and as always, though we may civilly disagree on a number of topics, I very much reciprocate the respect. As to the query, I believe I further clarified it in my original post by pointing out that many cultures did not make mention of a world wide flood event until centuries after they developed written script and with massive chronological intervals from one culture to the next in their versions of the narrative. Thus I feel rather confident that it is a relevant question to ask.


Also the need for something to be scientifically possible? Goes right out
the window when God is involved.


I suppose that depends on which and who's version of god we're referring to. Even if we're approaching from a strictly Christian point of view we still have to reconcile between the OT god and the new and improved NT god of love and forgiveness. No matter how you look at it though, it stands to reason that as the universe, at least what we know if it, seems to operate with a high degree of order and is based on strict rules, ten the god who created it all likewise should be operating under some specific rules as well. If that is the case, then I simply can't concede the likelihood of a whimsical creator who doesn't have to follow his own rules because if that god is omnipotent and omniscient, he IS the universe and thus must operate within the parameters he has set in motion.


So if you don't believe in a God why
would he want to stand in your way with evidence for himself or a flood?


I'm much more in the realm of agnosticism than atheism. I don't particularly believe but I'm also not arrogant enough to insist that I'm definitely correct. Just as with any approach I take with a scientific issue, I take the same in regards to god or gods, if the evidence is there I would certainly change my tune if it presents itself to me. I have yet to see anything to convince me of the truth and the large number of faiths and disciplines on Earth makes me question it even more because you can't all be right, but I digress. Again, while I don't believe per se, I'm certainly open minded enough to entertain the possibility of that sort of enlightenment.


And I can't tell another man what to believe. But for those of us who do?
There be evidence enough for us.


That's fine and I truly mean no disrespect but let's be honest, the evidence at hand is simply faith, faith in Bronze Age oral traditions handed down for generations until written script came into being and ignoring/discounting the fact that the Noah story is entirely plagiarized from the original Mesopotamian story. This in all liklihood came to be when the Israelites were held captive in Babylon. You want to believe so you're so focused on similarities between the various flood myths across the world but are so driven by faith you all fail to notice the greater prize, the vast discrepancies between them all. Just my 2 cents for what its worth.

God or no god, you simply can't have a flood of that magnitude without leaving clear signs in the geological record. Sedimentary deposits across the world at the same fixed point would be extremely evident. Trust me, if I had ever seen the evidence for it, I would be the first to admit it. For me science is about discovering the truth not pushing an agenda, wherever that truth lies in the rabbit hole I live to uncover it even if it disagrees with what I've believed all my life.



posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar


For me science is about discovering the truth not pushing an agenda, wherever that truth lies in the rabbit hole I live to uncover it even if it disagrees with what I've believed all my life.


Coming from you Peter, I can have a lot of faith in that.



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Barcs

If all the cultures we're speaking of can be traced back
to this one family. The story of a deluge would certainly
be handed down and begin to vary as mankinds memory
would fade and change the truth of the matter from
culture to culture. This is exactly what we see until Moses
jots down the truth of exactly what really happened straight
from the horses mouth. You gave a good example of exaggerating
the story yourself, throwing in the need for cell phones. And of
course the cultures we know about today would've sprang up
after the flood, having only diluted stories but mostly of a
worldwide flood with variations. That's just what we have isn't it?


Straight from what horses mouth? You are blindly believing that what Moses allegedly wrote is fact with no evidence to support it whatsoever. Moses didn't witness the flood or creation. It's 100% hearsay and blind faith in one man's story as fact.

Again, where did all those cultures come from if they were all wiped out by Noah's flood? Are you claiming that several distinct races of human can evolve in a mere 4000 years? If this is true, then why are the Eskimos dark? They aren't just stories handed down, many have completely different stories and reference their own culture. Many talk about their culture before AND after the flood. I wasn't exaggerating, I was making the point that they didn't have technology or knowledge to know that the flood was spread over the entire planet, something that is impossible for them to know. Asians existed before and after the "flood". This is fact. Africans existed before and after the flood. Europeans existed before and after the flood. Native Americans existed before and after the flood.

So either the flood was indeed a local flood or Noah's story about a sole surviving family is completely wrong. Genetics and the fossil record show that these races of human have been around for a long time, they didn't just emerge in the last 4000-6000 years. No matter how you look at it, worldwide flood is completely illogical and impossible without destroying the ecosystem completely, and there's no way the entire world regenerates itself that quickly without missing a beat. Virtually all land plants would have died, meaning there is nothing for the saved animals to eat. There would also be a huge genetic bottleneck for all species on earth, but we do not see this.

Now can we please get this thread back on topic? This is about scientific evidence of a global flood, not hearsay, not legend, not myth and certainly not guesswork.


edit on 2-10-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs





Again, where did all those cultures come from if they were all wiped out by Noah's flood? Are you claiming that several distinct races of human can evolve in a mere 4000 years?


Did I say anything about 4000 years? You're just being ignorant.
i'm perfectly on topic speaking of anthropological evidence,
Unless anthropology isn't a science now. Who knows with you people?


The question I ask is this.


Somebody explain how a local flood could be responsible for worldwide
ancient knowledge of what is obviously the same event?

And no obviously they didn't have cellphones. So that's one tangle
out of your hair.


"Could we please get the topic back to a discussion I feel more
comfortable with?"

Sometimes you're somethin else!

In comparison the way another member on this very page retorts.
Should put you to shame.

Were they forewarned? 66%
edit on Ram100214v49201400000056 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

have you provided conclusive evidence that all global flood legends refer to the same exact flood? if so, please link to relevant post.
edit on 2-10-2014 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

I said it was obvious and it is. But a source was provided.
Top of the page amigo.




“Over the years, I have collected more than 200 of these stories, originally reported by various missionaries, anthropologists and ethnologists. While the differences are not always trivial, the common essence of the stories is instructive as compiled below:



edit on Ram100214v552014u37 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Have you ever seen a map showing the bronze age port cities of the world? You certainly have not, because the darwinists will tell you sea level at circa 2000 B.C. was little different than today, yet the presence of hundreds of submerged ruins’ sites from the Gulf of Chambay to Bimini, and from Cornwall to Nan Madol, certainly belie that notion, with most of the submerged ruins worldwide in the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic, right where you’d expect them to be, where Sidon, Peleg, Javan, Tarshish, and Atlas plied the waters, building their port facilities, now submerged since the end of the Ice Age. Here is a partial list of the submerged ruins worldwide, with pictures where available, to be soon updated as more photos will undoubtedly roll-in from interested “submergie” aficionados, so help out if you can, hard as it may be for a darwinist to do, but certainly not for a soon-to-be ex-darwinist, we shall see.]


Note the bold. That's exactly what I was saying about the flooding from the end of the ice age. But geologists are now "darwinists"? LMAO! It always boils down to hatred of evolution for you guys. Anybody that doesn't believe in the bible literally must be an evilutionist or darwinist.



I read that too and thought the same when I read it. What does this topic have to do with evolution?



posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: TzarChasm

I said it was obvious and it is. But a source was provided.
Top of the page amigo.




“Over the years, I have collected more than 200 of these stories, originally reported by various missionaries, anthropologists and ethnologists. While the differences are not always trivial, the common essence of the stories is instructive as compiled below:




ah, thank you. it caught my attention that there were no sources on the linked site to support these statistics. for all i know, the numbers are invented. where are the stories he used to compile that chart?
edit on 2-10-2014 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
22
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join