posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 01:28 PM
Originally posted by pai mei
The flood myth is universal, it can be found everywhere on Earth.
Actually, it can't. There's quite a few ancient cultures that never had a flood myth, including the Eskimos, ancient Egyptians, Polyneisians, Hopi,
Navajo, Shoshone, Inuit, Inupiat, and ancient Chinese cultures including the Miao, Yao, and Li.
Now... AFTER the arrival of the Christian missionaries, many of them developed their own tale of the Biblical flood, but it wasn't an original legend
I heard somewhere about the ancient planet Phaeton which was destroyed and caused the flood on Earth, because it was mostly made up of water.
That would surely cause the unninterupted rains and floods all the myths talk about.
The only point in Earth's history during which that could have occurred was before life emerged on the planet. It's believed that the water on our
planet comes from meteors made mostly of ice (and comets) that formed as the planets were cooling into shape.
Also it could explain why scientist say that sometime in the past Earth was much hotter, and there were no ice caps, Antarctica had a tropical
climate. A lot of water coming in would cool the planet and then freeze and form the ice caps.
Actually, the model about the ice ages and warming periods is pretty complex and has to do with known variations in the orbit of Earth and the
But the Earth is also affected by the composition of the atmosphere and the currents in the ocean. The different shape of the land throughout the
history of Earth caused many climate changes.
Do you think there was such a planet ?
No... but the points raised on that site are interesting. The writer does appear to be someone who has actually studied astronomy and is familiar
with the basic calculations, but his claim of being an astronomer turned out to be untrue (you can see his reworked biography here which appears to be
the result of people challenging him on this... and his lectures on astronomy are told from the view of someone who is a Biblical literalist:
His arguments sound plausible because he's basing them on old data... not on more recent measurements. However, unlike many out there, he's
knowledgeable about the science and he carefully picks his evidence to support his cause.