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.

 

Younger Dryas impact = Biblical Flood

page: 6
25
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

The cosmic event was 12,800 years ago and there was massive massive flooding happening all around. The world was shaking and vibrating. Wait while I find you a good video...




posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
youtu.be...





I can't add it in as a youtube video because ATS isn't format for mobile devices.

It's Randal Carlson and Graham Hancock visiting global catastrophe sites and explaining what happened.

Leaders in archaeology on my opinion.

edit on 8/8/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/8/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/8/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

That would be pretty interesting if true. Perhaps the end of the glacial period was actually triggered by that event. I tend to think there have been numerous impact level events on earth during human history. Many civilizations talk about various "ends of the end". I'll check out the video.



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Excellent response, and I see you received he typical comeback of "that isn't a valid site". They can't refute that the dates are frequently wrong, but they will pretend there isn't an issue.



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You're kidding, right? You actually believe anything that site says is valid?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

The Noah tale could very well be based on a true story, just heavily exaggerated.


Only poorly translated. The story says Noah who was a king in the line of Adam had his land ruined by floods, but that he was warned somehow and built a huge ship and he would take a few of every kind of animal he kept in his land as well as his family and sail off when the rains and the waves would come. The story doesn't say much more. It is modern Christian theology and doctrination that insists on translating eretz into earth and not land here. And the error probably originated with the Septuagint. Same with the references to the Red Sea in Exodus in the Septuagint.

If you replace every instance of «Earth» in parasha Noach with «Land» the story is quite another than the one taught in Sunday school. In the NASB text Eretz is translated earth 655 times, ground 119 times, and finally land 1581 times— and the latter number should be much higher and the first a lot lower.

If you then also reference with the documentary hypothesis posed by Richard Elliott Friedman (please refer to my thread Who wrote the Bible? if you burn to disagree), which shows two (J and P) stories here belonging to two distinct and separate traditions within Judah-Israel. One source will tell the basic story, the other will supply with juicy details. This goes on throughout the Torah.


I pretty much agree with everything you said, except for the fact that it was never the entire world flooded at once.


My only reference to anything being world-wide it was the effects of the receding ice caps, the effects were global, but there was not one huge global flood, but on a global scale for quite a few millennia there were continually local floodings all over the world and the stories they kept were about safe havens and people surviving floods. There was a very much wet climate for millennia due to more liquid water being poured in from the melting ice. Noah's flood was local in the sense that the story probably describes the «creation» of the Black Sea. But all these stories are telltales about global climate change. But you are most correct, no global flood like the story you were taught at Sunday school. No.


The glacial period ended. There were tons of isolated floods, and I do think there was a cosmic event 7000-8000 years ago, leading to even more flooding events. It just wasn't the entire world covered by water to the extent the story describes.


Amen! I'm getting a beer!

ETA: Found this one here. You can almost imagine what Noah could have meant by the waters reaching up fifteen cubits above the mountains and covered the land under the whole visible heavens, or dome of perception if you like, IF you imagine the Black Sea before Boasphoros bgave in at some point in relatively recent prehistory
Anyway, here's the (external) pic, apparently it is from some book:



And below you can see a map showing the few different "gates" if you like that could open and bring about flood scenarios like the ones in Parasha Noach. I drew in little arrows to show what would be the likely direction of the water in such hypothetical scenarios.


edit on 9-8-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Here's what a 200 meter tall flood wave would do to Europe and ME according to www.floodmap.net...:



Now compare that with the stories of massive floods and think that perhaps there are reasons why the ancients built their surviving structures huge and solid. Maybe there is a reason behind the fact earliest recorded modern civilisation came about a few millennia ago? And who knows there may be reasons undisclosed behind how The Pillars of Hercules broke?

As for the Atacama desert card, Wikipedia says it «averages 3,000 m (10,000 ft) in elevation» so maybe not so funny you don't find much trace of sea water there. We are safe to assume any global flood scenario did not reach 3000 meters up. Neither does the floodmap.net thingy.
edit on 9-8-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: c


ETA: Ooops forgot the updated pic...

edit on 9-8-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: ETA pic



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim



Only poorly translated. The story says Noah who was a king in the line of Adam had his land ruined by floods, but that he was warned somehow and built a huge ship and he would take a few of every kind of animal he kept in his land as well as his family and sail off when the rains and the waves would come. The story doesn't say much more. It is modern Christian theology and doctrination that insists on translating eretz into earth and not land here. And the error probably originated with the Septuagint. Same with the references to the Red Sea in Exodus in the Septuagint.

I don't buy into your perspective at all. Examining the Eth Cepher and the 1985 JPS Tanakh I cannot agree upon your belief that they are poorly translated. The 1985 (JPS) Tanakh was begun in 1955 and translated in three stages. Torah completed in 1962, The Prophets in 1978, and the writings in 1982.

This JPS edition took 30 years to put to the public and is a word for word translation of the available Hebrew texts with all three branches of Conservative, Reform, and Orthodox represented among the scholars. Any word that is in doubt or not understood is footnoted as such. I believe this to be the most complete Hebrew to English rendition available and not poorly translated as you have stated.

Another disagreement is the lighthearted approach you have taken in saying that Noah was somehow warned before the flood as though to deny the text clearly states that his God warned him of the ensuing flood. I realize most all here on ATS have no belief in the God of Abram but honest rendering of text is supposed to be truthful debate.

I do respect your threads but have noted your constant bias in the Christian posts.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

So they are right because, what? They are Jews? That's like saying I am right about anything Norse, because I am Norwegian. As far as I'm concerned the JPS translation is poor compared to translations like the ESV or any modern critical study bible. That said they are all wrong of course. Jewish or not. In the story of Noah, haEretz should be translated the Land or at least include a note about how though they look and sound similar Eretz and Earth are not related words and do not have the same lexical meaning.

BTW here's an updated version of the maps above where I included another scenario including the Nordics. And come to think of it all the rain that accompanied the waves could perhaps indicate lots of vaporised water in the athmosphere? Impact in the Atlantic?


edit on 9-8-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim


So they are right because, what? They are Jews? That's like saying I am right about anything Norse, because I am Norwegian. As far as I'm concerned the JPS translation is poor compared to translations like the ESV or any modern critical study bible. That said they are all wrong of course. Jewish or not. In the story of Noah, haEretz should be translated the Land or at least include a note about how though they look and sound similar Eretz and Earth are not related words and do not have the same lexical meaning.

I respectfully disagree with your premise. The Hebrew word "Eretz" translated to English is "Land" but the English word "Land" means "earth" not covered by water. The earth not covered by water is understood as "Land" but "Land is also earth covered by water. The same could be understood by most English people that Land is earth and earth is land. Under the water is earth and when the water recedes it is called land but both are the same to the English speaking world. In fact most all will associate the word ground as dirt or earth. Once we die we are buried in the ground or dirt not the land.

Most generally speaking, in English, the word land is a geographical location such as the land of America or the land of Norway while earth is a local reference such as my farm has good black dirt or earth. In light of that I do respect your opinions and your posts. Remember that the reason for re translation of any bible is foremost to make money. The target is copyright and copyright means big bucks. A good concordance is really all that is needed and not tamper with other peoples literature. LOL

edit on 9-8-2015 by Seede because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
If this interest you. you should look up Randall Carlson.
Also this couldnt be the same impact the earth is only 6k years old



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

In Hebrew Eretz can mean a few things, but basically it means Land as in nation or property. In a broader abstract sense, the Earth can be seen as God's nation, and as you say, God called the dry land Eretz when he created, or rather, conquered the world, but when the story is about a king and his family, his life stock and a destructive flood ruining his world— we are talking about Eretz as Noah's land, or his conquered land property, his nation. Noah didn't rule over the whole world, he ruled over his land. Noah didn't go to South America to get Llamas or to Himalaya to gather Yaks, he went to the corners of his land. There is no evidence of a world wide flood event when this is supposed to have happened, but there is quite a lot of evidence of lesser floods, like the one that left the Black and Caspian Seas in its wakes and which destroyed the very place (with every one and thing in it) where Noah is supposed to have lived in the first place. Why does everything HAVE to be bloody impossible with you guys?
edit on 10-8-2015 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Seede

Excellent response, and I see you received he typical comeback of "that isn't a valid site". They can't refute that the dates are frequently wrong, but they will pretend there isn't an issue.


You could not be more wrong in that assertion. It's not that we can't refute the dates are frequently wrong, it's that you are incapable of demonstrating that they are. This is because you don't actually understand the science behind it and therefore are forced to rely on sources that feed into your own confirmation biases because they count on that. They know you aren't going to do your own research because they are telling you what you want to hear. The end result is they print up something that sounds pretty darned sciency and you buy it hook line and sinker because you have no idea of whether or not it's good science or even remotely accurate. You see Dr. so and so's name associated with it, it looks like they've got legit credentials and wet your lips because...god. It's got nothing to do with the site per se, it's got everything to do with the shoddy and deceptive work involved. It's a joke and people like you are the punch line and don't even know it.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Seede

Excellent response, and I see you received he typical comeback of "that isn't a valid site". They can't refute that the dates are frequently wrong, but they will pretend there isn't an issue.


You could not be more wrong in that assertion. It's not that we can't refute the dates are frequently wrong, it's that you are incapable of demonstrating that they are. This is because you don't actually understand the science behind it and therefore are forced to rely on sources that feed into your own confirmation biases because they count on that. They know you aren't going to do your own research because they are telling you what you want to hear. The end result is they print up something that sounds pretty darned sciency and you buy it hook line and sinker because you have no idea of whether or not it's good science or even remotely accurate. You see Dr. so and so's name associated with it, it looks like they've got legit credentials and wet your lips because...god. It's got nothing to do with the site per se, it's got everything to do with the shoddy and deceptive work involved. It's a joke and people like you are the punch line and don't even know it.


You make a lot of assumptions. They are not valid, or accurate. I don't have any bias in this issue, and yes, I do understand the science. I simply don't agree with your point of view. Neither, it seems, do others.

Stunner! Whistleblower claims feds hiding vaccine-autism link



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

What does vaccines being linked to autism have to do with the geological time scale? Maybe you copied and pasted the wrong link? You can't just say that the dating methods are invalid without showing us how. For some reason you always make claims but never back them up. Sorry, but you have to do more than just state something if you wish folks to take it seriously. Thus far you have not posted your alleged evidence for a global flood nor have you shown why the various dating methods are wrong.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs




This isn't the case, however, regardless of how badly folks want it to be true.


Never see much enthusiasm from you do we. Instead you use division.
Pretty clever.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
Never see much enthusiasm from you do we. Instead you use division.
Pretty clever.


Division? I was trying to understand Lady's position because her claims did not seem to hold weight. Most people that believe in a global flood believe it simply because of the biblical story, not because of physical evidence, so I was looking for her to back up her claims about evidence. If she really has evidence, it should be simple right? It's not division, it's scrutiny and critical thinking when being presented with false claims. Denying ignorance aka the purpose of the site.

edit on 21-8-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
its been pretty obvious from satellite images from google-maps that global flooding might have happened in the past maybe not just the one time written about in the Bible



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: blacktie
its been pretty obvious from satellite images from google-maps that global flooding might have happened in the past maybe not just the one time written about in the Bible


Can you please break down your reasoning and show us all how satellite images could possibly indicate a global flood? I just don't follow your logic. You say it's obvious and then say it MIGHT have happened. Which one is it?
edit on 21-8-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

No problem with you and the way everyone else handles false claims Brother.
My concern comes from seeing the way you and others DIVIDE/DISSECT
what could actually be a global flood. And make it look like a bunch of
####ed up localized floods that if you employ logic. Are exactly more
impossible than the global flood you claim is impossible.




top topics



 
25
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join