It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Did the Deluge ever happen?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 09:50 PM
Hope this hasnt already been covered.
This link details a possible massive tsunami around 8000 yrs ago in the mediterranean.


A massive tsunami smashed Mediterranean shores some 8,000 years ago when a giant chunk of volcano fell into the sea, researchers say.
Waves up to 165 feet (50 meters) high swept the eastern Mediterranean, triggered by a landslide on Mount Etna on the island of Sicily, according to the new study

Could be the basis for Flood myths from that area?

posted on Apr, 25 2007 @ 12:11 AM

Originally posted by pdaviesoz
Which bones. The masses of Flood deposited skeletons of predators and prey together which are commonly found near the tops of high places where they were washed into crevices?

Okay, I see that you're not actually familiar with the material, then. No, you're talking about cave deposits. I'm talking about intercontinental beds of rock (geologic columns) and the different animals deposited in different layers. So, here in Texas, we have small dinosauria in the Woodbine formation and Tenontosaurus in the PawPaw formation... etc, etc. And lots and lots of oysters and clams from the Cretaceous oceans covering the older dinosaur skeletons (followed by fossil horse teeth, mammoth bones, etc from the Quaterary.)

They're not stacked by predator/prey, by size, etc, and some are buried as far as 2,000 feet below others.

The human remains found regularly that average about 15 ft tall (Shhh - you can't tell)?

You mean THIS bone?

Right. What the article doesn't mention is that it's also a bad sculpting job done by an artist who didn't know their anatomy (condyles are too flattened (I taught anat & phys at the university last fall, so I know something about what they should look like.))

Here's the artist's letter stating that it's a sculpture done by doubling the size of another femur:

The human relics found embedded in coal that supposedly takes 250 million years to form?

Which ones? Links?

Or the Science? The total lack of "favourable mutations", "transitional forms" etc. The total impossibility of DNA structure and replication mechanisms forming by chance.

Sort of a straw man argument, there. Very few creatures turn into fossils, but I think the response to this one is that it doesn't matter how many fossils we find, some folks won't believe that one species can turn into different subspecies or different species or families or orders given a billion years or more and geographic isolation. I think they'd doubt it even if we found every single body of every single offspring of that distant ancestor.

However, we do have a test: If evolution isn't true, then if you have a very ancient organism (say, something from 500,000,000 years ago) and a more recent version (say, something from 100,000,000 years ago) that when we find fossils in that group from an intermediate time period (200,000,000 years) that they will have traits of both groups, and very predictable sets of traits.

We've found that confirming evidence many times.

The presence of polystrate fossils that cross several strata supposedly formed over millions of years? The mounting evidence that all of the geological processes believed to take millions of years can happen within a decade or even weeks in catastrophic circumstances?

I'd like to see the mechanism by which you get a series of limestone beds that are 20-80 feet thick (South Texas, near Del Rio) layered by mudstone and later (Big Bend area) covered by volcanic ash 1,000 feet thick in a few weeks or a decade.

With different types of fossils in the limestone. And there's a good transition... the lower forms are the same species but different than the higher forms.

Besides, Creationists actually admit that evolution exists (they say microevolution ...and of course, evolution is simply a series of microevolutions that take place over a very long timescale.)

The basic truth is that the Turks have more archaeological sites than anywhere else on earth. It is, after all, the cradle of civilisation ('cause that's where the Ark landed???). They KNOW their stuff and they have signed off on this site.

In fact, Turkish geologists say it's not an archaeological site, but a natural formation. So do many others. The site's there because of political and economic maneuvering:

posted on May, 29 2007 @ 06:35 PM

What happened to Marduk? Whose feet did he step so bad this time

Much as I dislike Marduk's manner, I have a huge respect for his overall knowledge and resilience. If he has been banned for stepping on the toes of others, I have no doubt he only gave as good as he got so in the interests of fairness and balanced debate I hope he comes back soon.

Coming to this thread for the first time, I have to accept the logic that there is simply insufficient water around the globe for The story of Noah's flood to be true. I also have to accept the evidence of Greenland's Glaciers that there have not been any floods in human times big enough to explain the mytholgy.

On the other hand there are widespread myths about a great flood from different cultures. The Maya for example have a mythology about the great flood. The striking similarities have to be explained somehow.

If one accepts that the great flood actually relates to the flooding of the Black Sea through the Bosphorous and that this tale spread to different cultures then fine, but how did it reach the Americas ?

One answer which Marduk wouldn't appreciate is the possibility that the middle east ancients traded with the Americas, relating to the discoveries of coc aine and tobacco inside mummies.

It could be that if one explains the spread of myths about the great flood of the Black sea as the origin of global flood myths then it might act as corroboration for ancient global trade.

Otherwise Marduk and others still need to explain the similarities of widely divergent cultures in recalling a great flood.

As for sunmatrix, the Bible's tale about Noah is clearly based on the epic of Gilgamesh and therefore we can safely assume that the Bible itself had it's origins in Babylon.

We all know how much sunmatrix denounces the heresy of Babylon.

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in