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.
To many people the Bible is just a book of mythology; a nice collection of stories useful for moral teaching. In a world where science is revered as the arbiter of truth the Bible’s claims can seem unbelievable. How could someone believe in a book that claims the world was created in seven days? Or that all living creatures were destroyed by forty days of rain? Or that a sea could be parted to allow one million people to walk through on dry land, before returning to wash away a pursuing army of Egyptians? To those who have learned about the history of the world from scientists and statisticians, the Bible’s stories may appear more like myth than reality
But what happens when we take these seemingly fantastic stories and claims made by the Bible and analyze them by the very science they appear to contradict? We will consider the scenario the Bible describes before, during and after the alleged Flood event, and examine from a scientific perspective the credibility of the details of the Biblical account
And this is how thou shalt make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered
The cubit is a traditional unit of length, based on the length of the forearm. Cubits of various lengths were employed in many parts of the world in Antiquity, in the Middle Ages and into Early Modern Times.
Originally posted by isyeye
All that you need to show that the biblical flood isn't correct scientifically is common sense.
www.mechon-mamre.org...
And this is how thou shalt make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered
en.wikipedia.org...
The cubit is a traditional unit of length, based on the length of the forearm. Cubits of various lengths were employed in many parts of the world in Antiquity, in the Middle Ages and into Early Modern Times.
Fifteen cubits is hardly enough to cover the earth. It probably wouldn't even be enough water to cause the ARK to float, much less end up on a mountain.
I can continue with more evidence, but people will believe what they want to believe.
Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I'm personally well aware that there's plenty of pseudo-science to support the bible. Creation science, Flood Science, Intelligent Design. They come, not from true scientific research, but from a publics willingness to grasp at them even if true scientists see past them. There's an 'explanation' or 'prove' for everything.
I'm not going to tackle everything in this specific article, I'm just going to recommend any readers. Can easily Google and see why any of the claims are dismissed. Why the bible is far from considered scientifically proven.
A link to get started
And another
No time tonight, but otherwise I'd go through and check all the claims I wasn't already familiar with(If any). Post my findings. Instead, just gonna drop this bit of advice; don't be too trusting, research claims, and understand that even by the posted opening paragraph, it already has made itself out to be very biased.
Native global flood stories are documented as history or legend in almost every region on earth. Old world missionaries reported their amazement at finding remote tribes already possessing legends with tremendous similarities to the Bible's accounts of the worldwide flood. H.S. Bellamy in Moons, Myths and Men estimates that altogether there are over 500 Flood legends worldwide. Ancient civilizations such as (China, Babylonia, Wales, Russia, India, America, Hawaii, Scandinavia, Sumatra, Peru, and Polynesia) all have their own versions of a giant flood.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I'm personally well aware that there's plenty of pseudo-science to support the bible. Creation science, Flood Science, Intelligent Design. They come, not from true scientific research, but from a publics willingness to grasp at them even if true scientists see past them. There's an 'explanation' or 'prove' for everything.
I'm not going to tackle everything in this specific article, I'm just going to recommend any readers. Can easily Google and see why any of the claims are dismissed. Why the bible is far from considered scientifically proven.
A link to get started
And another
No time tonight, but otherwise I'd go through and check all the claims I wasn't already familiar with(If any). Post my findings. Instead, just gonna drop this bit of advice; don't be too trusting, research claims, and understand that even by the posted opening paragraph, it already has made itself out to be very biased.
I hate to burst your bubble of self delusion but it must be done. Archeaology has already proved the "great flood" in fact has happened. Archeaology has also proved Jericho did exist and in the spot the bible said it did and that it was also razed and burnt to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Troy actually did exist and that it too was razed to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Herodium in fact did exist and many ancient cities in Israel that are in the bible actually did exist like Caesaria and even the Temple of Herod and jewish coins from the first century A.D. were in fact discovered at the base of the Mt. Moriah with maccabee inscriptions on them.
Archeaology is a well established and well respected science by the world scientific community world wide, it is hardly "psuedo-science".
[edit] Continuity of ancient civilizations
In the 24th century BCE, several ancient civilizations - notably Ancient Egypt and the Indus Valley - had existed, and continued to exist, without any sign of total extinction from a global flood. Egypt has a continuous written history going back to about 3100 BCE, (plus archaeological evidence of continuous habitation going back to 9000 BCE ) and the only floods they talked about were the annual flood of the Nile River which irrigated their crops.
Originally posted by britelite1971
reply to post by CherubBaby
Very interesting article! I also understand that there is also a Syrian account of a global flood during approximately the same time period as the biblical account is to have taken place. Do you think that it is possible that other people on earth could have survived the flood other than Noah and his family? I haven't done the math, but it is hard to see how Noah and his family could repopulate the earth as quickly as they did.
As you know, the Earth is a watery place. But just how much water exists on, in, and above our planet? The picture to the left shows the size of a sphere that would contain all of Earth's water in comparison to the size of the Earth. You're probably thinking I missed a decimal point when running my calculator since surely all the water on, in, and above the Earth would fill a ball a lot larger than that "tiny" blue sphere sitting on the United States, reaching from about Salt Lake City, Utah to Topeka, Kansas. But, no, this diagram is indeed correct.
About 70 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered, and the oceans hold about 96.5 percent of all Earth's water. But water also exists in the air as water vapor, in rivers and lakes, in icecaps and glaciers, in the ground as soil moisture and aquifers, and even in you and your dog. Still, all that water would fit into that tiny ball. The ball is actually much larger than it looks like on your computer monitor or printed page because we're talking about volume, a 3-dimensional shape, but trying to show it on a flat, 2-dimensional screen or piece of paper. That tiny water bubble has a diameter of about 860 miles, meaning the height (towards your vision) would be 860 miles high, too! That is a lot of water.
Originally posted by miniatus
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
There's no evidence of a single "great flood" that covered the earth.. there was a "great flood" in Mesopotamia but was regional and didn't cover the earth, this is the flood that inspired the Noah story ( who was just a sumarian trader ) .. There has been plenty of flooding on the planet throughout history, so yes you'll find evidence of floods almost anywhere..edit on 12/29/2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I'm personally well aware that there's plenty of pseudo-science to support the bible. Creation science, Flood Science, Intelligent Design. They come, not from true scientific research, but from a publics willingness to grasp at them even if true scientists see past them. There's an 'explanation' or 'prove' for everything.
I'm not going to tackle everything in this specific article, I'm just going to recommend any readers. Can easily Google and see why any of the claims are dismissed. Why the bible is far from considered scientifically proven.
A link to get started
And another
No time tonight, but otherwise I'd go through and check all the claims I wasn't already familiar with(If any). Post my findings. Instead, just gonna drop this bit of advice; don't be too trusting, research claims, and understand that even by the posted opening paragraph, it already has made itself out to be very biased.
I hate to burst your bubble of self delusion but it must be done. Archeaology has already proved the "great flood" in fact has happened. Archeaology has also proved Jericho did exist and in the spot the bible said it did and that it was also razed and burnt to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Troy actually did exist and that it too was razed to the ground. Archeaology has also proved that Herodium in fact did exist and many ancient cities in Israel that are in the bible actually did exist like Caesaria and even the Temple of Herod and jewish coins from the first century A.D. were in fact discovered at the base of the Mt. Moriah with maccabee inscriptions on them.
Archeaology is a well established and well respected science by the world scientific community world wide, it is hardly "psuedo-science".
I hate to burst your bubble of self delusion too, bub. But the bible is no more Archeologically accurate than any other fantasy of the past. Older Myths and stories, many things you dismiss out of hand. The Epic of Gilgamesh comes to mind quite well.
These fictional stories often took place in, or had part of, real places at the times. Even sometimes alerting us to their existence long before we discovered them Archeologically.
Claiming that that proves any supernatural occurrences in the stories, is like saying the existence of America proves the Twilight Saga to be real events.
Archeology does prove that the bible was written roughly around the time frame it claims to of been. But nothing more. Trying to misappropriate that into a proof that the whole account is factual, is where it leaves the realm of genuine Archeology, and becomes psuedo-scientific.
~
I'll be completely honest with you though. Archeology is not my strong suit. Historical accuracies and inaccuracies, supposed predications that came true, I'm not the best versed in it. Probably the thing I know least about as far as judging religion. Mostly because I rarely come across specific claims that are relevant to anything.
So, if you wish to make a thread, discussing how Archeology proves or disproves the accuracy of the bible. I will read your thread and enjoy exposing myself to new information.
~
[edit] Continuity of ancient civilizations
In the 24th century BCE, several ancient civilizations - notably Ancient Egypt and the Indus Valley - had existed, and continued to exist, without any sign of total extinction from a global flood. Egypt has a continuous written history going back to about 3100 BCE, (plus archaeological evidence of continuous habitation going back to 9000 BCE ) and the only floods they talked about were the annual flood of the Nile River which irrigated their crops.
Here's just a tiny bit of Archeology from one of the links I've already dropped. Doesn't seem like a branch of science that completely agree's with a Global Flood to me.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
We can argue about this all day long bro, but youre [sic] going to be wrong everytime.[sic]
Originally posted by aorAki
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
We can argue about this all day long bro, but youre [sic] going to be wrong everytime.[sic]
Right back atcha, big fella.
There is absolutely no geological evidence for a global flood.
Obviously god was telling porkies when he said that he'd flood the world. It just didn't happen.
[sarcasm] Oh, I see, he meant only the world of those who were his vassals..ah, nice try at dodging and making up evidence to fit the claim.[/sarcasm]
Go on then, you show me evidence of this global flood.