The Flood Controversy

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite

Nowhere do we find Angel DNA, or reptilian DNA, or Giant DNA, or the barest speck of Alien/God DNA.

If I pretended that I wasn't a shaman, we'd agree nearly
100% of the time.

Of course 50 years before Einstein, Heisenberg and the
rest, the scientific community would have hauled those
guys off in I love me jackets.

So I'll always posit possibilities beyond just those of pure
science. Maxwell's demon may have been hypothetical,
but many things I've encountered have knocked my
quite thoroughly rational self on my behind.

You, lacking that experience presumably, cannot draw
upon these other vectors of information gathering.

I wouldn't have this any other way however.. we need
a mixture of differing neurologies in this world, or we'd
all be Sheldon and Amy Farra Fowler.

KPB

arpgme
reply to post by undo

 

The story of Noah's Ark was stolen from The Epic of Gilgamesh, why not start by looking at the original story of the flood.

Also The 10 Commands were taken from egyptian boom of dead principles of Ma'at

well since i think the bible is mostly an egyptian book in disguise, that originated from the same general location (i.e. sumer and akkad) you'll be hard pressed to prove that it isn't from the same groups of people who wrote the epics of gilgamesh and atrahasis. the book of the dead is a bit more complicated, but not much.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


you're erecting strawmen atm, particularly if you pay close attention to my previous response to you. nowhere in it, did i say anything about reptilians or aliens. although that's a possibility (just not a wide spread one). in fact, if you read my premise, when i said they weren't homo sapiens, i meant simply they weren't homo sapiens. were they neans or cros or erectus, i dunno. but my theory is they weren't homo sapiens.

reply to post by undo


Please note, the last post was in reply, and majority agreement to/with KellyPrettyBear who DID mention Reptilians.

Further, these replies, though a bit tangental from the main topic, underscore a section of the OP (last paragraph), that invites discussion of creation/created.

As far as floods and flood myths go, I find it a little conspicuous that only the Abrahamic line of inquiry is addressed where a greater degree of comprehensive interrogation on the subject would include the Sumerian flood/creation myth involving Ziusudra, and after that, we've the Gilgamesh Flood, as well as many other Flood Myths; some of which are the product of influence and cultural contamination/inheritance coming from nearby civilizations.
There's even a Great Flood myth out of China

We also have the matter of Historicity, some of which is touched on HERE.
As it stands, there's still no concrete smoking gun event of significance such where even a majority agreement on one speculation or any other has more weight.
The Thera event, for instance, caused a significant tsunami that flooded coastal areas.
There's speculation for a meteor impact event in the Indian Ocean that could also cause a tsunami.
While there's physical evidence of flooding in ancient Mesopotamia, where the excavated cities of Shuruppak, Ur, Kish, Uruk, Lagash, and Ninevah all present evidence of flooding, all the evidence comes from a variety of different times. In Israel, there is zero evidence of any great flood, ever.

Some academics even propose the flood myths are simply derivative of mythologies entirely made up to explain observation of (fossil) seashells found in areas far removed from any water.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


in my op it says

"So why is the global flood concept hinted at in the biblical passages about noah, not to mention the flood passages of other ancient texts? "

i have studied the ancient world at length, particularly the near and middle east, so i have read atrahasis, gilgamesh (in fact the video linked is also about the epic of gilgamesh), and so on. i can even tell you what tablet the story of the flood is on in gilgamesh epic. i'm not trying to make this difficult, i just don't want the theory to get trashed by countless strawmen effigies being erected.

i'm guessing you didn't read the op very well and this is causing confusion in your responses

It more than likely that worldwide cross cultural stories about floods have one source. That source is the ice age. When an ice age advances the sea levels would have dropped 50metres exposing lots of fertile land. When the ice age retreated it would cause mass flooding worldwide especially since people tend to settle next to rivers and coastlines.

Want to know if there was civilisation before/during the last age, simple, do some underwater archeology.

Here are a couple of videos that might make you think. They're both a little kooky until you look at them one after the other. If you debate these with your Geology professor you won't get an A. LOL

This one is from Walt Brown. His credentials (if you take stock in such things) include a PhD.

This one was done by a comic book artist named Neal Adams. I like his practical approach.
Make sure you get past the 7:00 mark in this one. What he says about the sea floor is quite interesting.

OP, this is always a great topic. A lot of smart people come out of lurk mode for these.

ETA: I'd like to ask this of the thread's participants: If there was a flood, don't you think most of the advanced aspects of any civilization would be pretty much wiped out? I mean, most people tend to congregate around a water source, putting them fairly close to sea level. I don't know that 'all' the land would have to be covered to make a pretty big mess of things. How much water damaged paperwork do you think the survivors of hurricane Katrina retain today ... or those of Hurricane Sandy. I can imagine I'd hate to part with photo albums with my kid's pictures in them ... but if they smelled like poop ... well, they gotta go.

S&F -Cheers

Many faiths have their own Great deluge stories including Australia, Iceland, South America and the pygmies of Africa.

And most of their stories involved either a conflict between the gods, or the wrath of god, but in most cases their stories of the deluge are described as almost instantaneous, not the 40 days scenario the bible tells.

But interestingly most stories do include an 'ark' of some kind. These stories are from the book 'The world atlas of mysteries' by Francis Hitching, so I'm sorry i can't post any links.

I did however look online for some snippets but apparently the book is rare, so I'm glad I still have my copy.

reply to post by Snarl


Love the video's and with reference to the second one, Could we be wrong about WHAT the earth is, life itself, eco systems, could the earth actually be a living being of some kind that is growing like any living being in the comfortable zone around a star and could it be part of a species of such, this would mean the earth was not what we believed and therefore not actually a planet at all and would not conflict with planetary scient except in so far as the earth itself was concerned, a far out there thought but no less valid.
If so what would the adult stage look like and would it have a fusion heart like a star but not an ordinary star, are we merely part of the bio system of a living organism and is it intelligent, how does it reproduce and what is it's life cycle.

reply to post by Snarl


well the premise of the op is, that the great flood of noah was not the great flood but a severe local flood. however, there is a great flood hidden, as it were, in the passages that seem to harken back to the replenish the earth verses, in the creation passages of genesis. read my op again. then tell me what you think ?

reply to post by LABTECH767


Well ...

Here's the hook: Nobody knows.

Here's the line: Science certainly can't disprove it.

And the sinker: People feel it.

A technologically advanced civilization may have preceded 'us' on this planet. They may have better known the answers to your questions. The remnant of that society may have fallen into decay and 'we' may have emerged and re-progressed. It's doubtful some memory of such a period would be remembered and passed along. Humans are notoriously destructive even when building.

Somebody wake me up once 'the scientists' are able to reproduce entire solar systems in repeatable experiments.

If you look around today, and consider just the things you have, what would survive untended a couple hundred million years? Probably not even your DNA would be recognizable, even if that managed to be passed along to your survivors.

Floods are real things that occur. Really big ones are awe inspiring. Flooding on a true biblical scale ... who can say? I did like Dr. Brown's take, because it was open-minded and science can be oh-so-much-so the opposite when they want control ... just like your preacher when he's trying to save your soul.

Do I think the Earth could be a living entity? I don't see why not. KPB may be able to provide quite a bit more esoteric insight and I'd be willing to read her opinion. We can't communicate with ants and we consider ourselves to be ever-oh-so smart. If we can't talk to the animals ... maybe that's why Science can't talk to the Planet.

ETA

undo
reply to post by Snarl

 

well the premise of the op is, that the great flood of noah was not the great flood but a severe local flood. however, there is a great flood hidden, as it were, in the passages that seem to harken back to the replenish the earth verses, in the creation passages of genesis. read my op again. then tell me what you think ?

I was lazily responding to LABTECH767 and your message wasn't seen until I posted.

My take on the Noah myth: Allegory ... as is most of the Bible. It doesn't have to be factual to get 'the message' across.

well i have another theory that the earth was created, as were the solar system, galaxy and the rest of the universe by super massive black holes and these became equivalent to god creating (several reasons for this theory exist. the real question is, were these phenomena creating new material, just out of natural mechanics, or were they manipulated by hyper-intelligent sentience, god as it were, to create .

undo
well i have another theory that the earth was created, as were the solar system, galaxy and the rest of the universe by super massive black holes and these became equivalent to god creating (several reasons for this theory exist. the real question is, were these phenomena creating new material, just out of natural mechanics, or were they manipulated by hyper-intelligent sentience, god as it were, to create .

edit on 8-11-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

I would invite you to join us in this thread and share your insights. We haven't really gotten around to the introduction of the universe or the physical matter present therein. In fact, as that thread is very spiritually mature, some others may find interest there as well. No one of a closed mind need apply.

Snarl

undo
well i have another theory that the earth was created, as were the solar system, galaxy and the rest of the universe by super massive black holes and these became equivalent to god creating (several reasons for this theory exist. the real question is, were these phenomena creating new material, just out of natural mechanics, or were they manipulated by hyper-intelligent sentience, god as it were, to create .

edit on 8-11-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

I would invite you to join us in this thread and share your insights. We haven't really gotten around to the introduction of the universe or the physical matter present therein. In fact, as that thread is very spiritually mature, some others may find interest there as well. No one of a closed mind need apply.

i don't think you read my op. lol it's okay, i just kinda feel like my time was wasted, when some people reply to my threads but don't really read the op, which suggests they weren't really responding out of a desire to read something new, but out of a desire to send the message that they don't really want new information of the kind you're offering.

you can tell the ones who do that because they auto judge your material before fully reading it, create unnecessary misunderstanding, general disinfo about the topic and then tend to respond solely to the title and a tiny select portion of your entire op. even if the op is several posts or paragraphs long. then, if you have the energy to deal with it, you have to go back thru every point just to get them back on track which typically results in them moving the goal post and insulting you for using your brain in a way they haven't approved of.

i'm not saying you have done all that, but you have to a degree that makes me wonder why you responded at all. only you know the answer to that, of course, but i'll venture a guess that you also auto judged it and when i asked for your appraisal i got a hand wave instead and an invite to a different topic. btw, i interviewed neal adams, years ago on my radio program. let me see if i can find it.
here it is
www.blogtalkradio.com...

undo
i don't think you read my op. lol it's okay, i just kinda feel like my time was wasted, when some people reply to my threads but don't really read the op, which suggests they weren't really responding out of a desire to read something new, but out of a desire to send the message that they don't really want new information of the kind you're offering.

Actually, I did read your OP. Several times in fact. I read it again, in its entirety, before beginning to draft this response. I also read every response and every reply you made to the participants.

undo
you can tell the ones who do that because they auto judge your material before fully reading it, create unnecessary misunderstanding, general disinfo about the topic and then tend to respond solely to the title and a tiny select portion of your entire op. even if the op is several posts or paragraphs long. then, if you have the energy to deal with it, you have to go back thru every point just to get them back on track which typically results in them moving the goal post and insulting you for using your brain in a way they haven't approved of.

I am sorry if you found insult or slight in my previous responses in your thread, I assure you that was not my intent, nor will you likely find evidence of uninvited malice in my posts anywhere on ATS (I did call a guy out for being a shill once).

undo
i'm not saying you have done all that, but you have to a degree that makes me wonder why you responded at all. only you know the answer to that, of course, but i'll venture a guess that you also auto judged it and when i asked for your appraisal i got a hand wave instead and an invite to a different topic. btw, i interviewed neal adams, years ago on my radio program. let me see if i can find it.

Sorry for the hand wave. Had it not been so, it would have been necessary to spend an inordinate amount of time deconstructing a myth ... and to your meticulous satisfaction, no doubt.

Enjoy your thread.

reply to post by Snarl


if you've read the op, did you also watch the video? why would a real flood event, in fact, 2 real flood events, be considered an allegory? this is what i don't get about the current view by some on ats, that the historical accounts of only the bible, are illegitimate. why? it's the same info as the torah and the same as the gilgamesh epic, same as atrahasis, same as sumerian texts, even same as egyptian texts.

undo
reply to post by Snarl

 

if you've read the op, did you also watch the video? why would a real flood event, in fact, 2 real flood events, be considered an allegory? this is what i don't get about the current view by some on ats, that the historical accounts of only the bible, are illegitimate. why? it's the same info as the torah and the same as the gilgamesh epic, same as atrahasis, same as sumerian texts, even same as egyptian texts.

al•le•go•ry (ˈæl əˌgɔr i, -ˌgoʊr i)
n., pl. -ries.
1. the representation of spiritual, moral, or other abstract meanings through the actions of fictional characters that serve as symbols.

**Note: fictional characters ** No one is saying a flood didn't occur. No one knows!!

Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe, just maybe, you are misunderstanding the current view on ATS?

il·le·git·i·mate (l-jt-mt)
adj.
1. Against the law; illegal.
2. Born out of wedlock.
3. Grammar Not in correct usage.
4. Incorrectly deduced; illogical.
5. Biology Unacceptable as a scientific name because of contradiction to the international rules of nomenclature.

Why are you entering into debate, with someone who has no intention of debating you? Have you actually read the Bible from cover-to-cover? Have you done this since you reached a level of maturity which allowed for critical thinking? If you have, riddle me this: What is "strange fire?" Now that's a question I would like to have an answer to ... and not some scholarly pooh-pooh. "God" wiped a dude out using "strange fire" - now what the heck was that? Was that a metaphor? If you don't come back with the answer, "I don't know." then I will clearly have an answer to all my previous questions in this post.

Noah didn't get on a boat with his family and a bunch of animals, survive a flood of Biblical proportion, and re-populate the Earth. The very thought of that happening is utterly ludicrous. Have you ever even been on a boat?

reply to post by Snarl


as i said, you didn't read the op. or, you didn't understand what the op was saying. there are 2 floods. not one. the one flood is not global. this is the one where noah is instructed to take 7 clean in pairs, 7 birds in pairs, and 2 unclean in pairs on the ark. that's not the same flood as the global flood that is also weaved into the text. that is the entire premise of my op. it's not whether god used laser beams or not. i don't mind talking about that, but you still are not addressing the content of the post. why? ? what's wrong with it? i thought it was reasonably well thought out.

i'll restate it for anyone who still thinks i'm talking about the papal interpretation of the flood event (sigh).

noah's flood was most likely the black sea flood, which was a bad flood no doubt, but not global. noah did not take 2 of every animal on the planet in the ark. he took exactly 32 animals. so why then does the text also give the impression that it was a global flood and that 2 of all the animals were taken on the ark?

because these are 2 different flood events. one of the floods was not global and didn't require rescuing more than noah's barnyard. the other was so massive, it most likely is the catastrophe that required re-terraforming of the earth in genesis 1. the authors of the text blended both events into one, and the only reason i can think of for why they did that, is they thought it was the same event. the only things that are the same, are rather similar, but not the exactly same. for example:

-both were floods-- one nasty flood but not global, the other, catastrophic and global

-animals and their overseers (?), were saved in both cases

- in one case, only 32 animals

-and in the other case, DNA for various forms of life were saved before the catastrophe and re-created after the catastrophe. this is the replenishing of the earth following the global flood characterized by the deep covering the dry land beneath it in genesis 1. this is why the adam were copied from originals. everything (that made the grade) was re-created from its original DNA.


that's what i'd like to see some discussion on. not whether reptilians were involved (although they may have been) and not whether god used strange fire. and certainly not regurgitating the papal interpretation as evidence that my theory is wrong. holey rusted metal batman. does anyone want to address the actual op?

addendum: after living in an area that was several thousand feet above sea level, and finding a high desert with a vast bed of salt but no water, i think it's safe to say that at one time, the place was part of an ocean that was several thousands of feet higher than the oceans and seas are today. it may have been an inland, elevated ocean, however, i find it rather odd that we have these isolated, land locked salt water seas, hundreds and in some cases, thousands of miles away from the nearest ocean.