Noah's Ark?

[Turner]

Originally posted by Xen


IIRC, just about all of these groupes are of a direct descent, or had close contact to the indo Europeans, the people who, in a sea of marma/ Anatolian/balck sea flood would have been affected- consider the fact that the name of the greeks in the Illiad (or a rather a name for them) is also the same name the ancient british called the first setlers of the of the british isles- this shows a common cultural heritage- its likelly that they(the flood myths) are descended from the same flood event/ myth (BTW, that Homeric greek, and ancient british name would be "Danaan", or a spelling similer to, its been a while since I last looked at a spelling)

I'm pretty sure I've read tribal legends that deal with a flood. Also, part of our creation myth is centered around life coming out of the ocean, and land being created. While this wouldn't be a flood myth, it would suggest a flood. This would be from the pacific northwest, Alaskan panhandle and into BC.

[Oda Nobunaga]

Counter-point : we are talking about a group of people whose ancestors came to America over the then-surfaced Bering strait, which were later submerged. And we're especially talking about the members of that group who stayed closest to the straits, pretty much.

This may not be THE explanation, but it's one relatively plausible explanation.

[carlosMM]

Originally posted by Vrylakas
I should have read the full thread before responding:

Marla: last I read (I can look that up tonight) this theory was sunk by new research, finding the delta of the water rush the OTHER way....

Carlos, can you post a link to a credible source for this? I have to say, that makes no sense. Do you think that the Black Sea, an isolated sea, filld up the Mediterranean or the Mediterranean Sea filled the Atlantic Ocean? That would be the implication of "the water flowing the other way".

if you want, I can rifle through the 12 or so magazines I scanned, find the article, look whom they quote, then search for these articles......... takes me a few hours though. But I will do it if you want....

They said, to paraphrase, that the Black Sea mostly filled with glacial run-off, then spilled via a river into the mediterranean basin, which had a lower water level (possibly because Gibraltar was at that time shut? It has been open/shut on and off quite a few times, thus the huge salt deposits on the floor of todays sea). They found a delta of that river south of the Turkish east-west stretching coast part, IIRC. Only later, with the land barrier cut down and the water level in the med p did a salty undercurrent flow inot the Balck Sea - carrying in the salt-adapted organisms.



want me to look it up? It will most probably NOT be an internet site, but actual scientific paper, as the research was one in Germany IIRC (we are still a bit slow abotu the net)

[FearlessLeader2]

#'s are mine

thestonesfan
1)There is nothing to indicate that a global flood ever happened. It would be obvious if it had. Do you really need a link?

2)For starters, there isn't enough water on earth to cover all the land. 3)Secondly, you quite obviously can't build a boat the size of the Titanic out of wood. 4)Thirdly, there are millions of species of animals. How could you even load two of each, let alone give them places to sit?

5)And if Noah landed in Asia Minor and let all the animals out, how the heck did any get to Australia?

1) What about the tropical sediment towers, formations that geologists had ascribed to glaciation previously?

2) If all the land was level or nearly so, and the canopy of water vapor described in Genesis existed, there would be plenty of water to do the job. After 40 days of the Flood water weighing down on the tectonic plates, mountains could be expected to be upthrust, and the runoff of water from them would cause erosion that would seem to take millions of years in scant days.

3) You can't build the Pyramids using modern methods in less time than the Pharoahs did it in, and they had blocks and tackles, and logs to roll the blocks of stone into position on. Whose to say what the ancients could and couldn't do?

4) Species? That's a hoot. Which definition are you using? The Bible says Noah took one of each KIND.

5) If God could part the Red Sea for Moses, I don't see any problem with parting the Indian Ocean for the kangaroos and such.

Got anything else?

[thestonesfan]

Er, no, I guess you've disproved everything. That explanation for the kangaroos getting to Australia is especially brilliant.

[IceBlaZe]

GREAT FLOOD EVIDENCE FOUND
Current Science, Nov 17, 2000

SINOP, Turkey--A team of National Geographic explorers trolling the Black Sea, which is located between Europe and Asia, has found signs that people once lived in an area that is now deep under water. The discovery is the latest evidence supporting the idea that a huge flood swamped the area 7,500 years ago and created the Black Sea. The story of that great flood is thought to be the same one recounted in The Epic of Gilgamesh, the oldest known work of literature, and, later, in the Bible's tale of Noah.

An underwater robot found several submerged artifacts, including stone tools and wood-and-clay buildings. The artifacts lay about 90 meters (300 feet) below the surface of the sea and 19 kilometers (12 miles) north of the Turkish coast.

The notion that an ancient flood created the Black Sea was hatched several years ago by two geologists, Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman, of Columbia University. They speculated that the Mediterranean Sea began to rise at the end of the last ice age, 15,000 years ago. The big ice sheets that covered large parts of the Northern Hemisphere started to melt, and the meltwater drained into the Mediterranean. Water from the rising sea pressed against a large wall of rock that existed on the sea's western shore. Behind that wall of rock lay a large freshwater lake.

Over the centuries, the pressure of the water became more and more intense. Finally, in one giant push, the water broke the wall of rock and gushed into the inland lake. In a matter of days, the lake doubled in size. The salt in the incoming water turned the lake into a full-fledged sea--the Black Sea. The rushing water probably drowned any lakeshore inhabitants.

The explorers are continuing to search for more signs of ancient habitations beneath the Black Sea.

COPYRIGHT 2000 Weekly Reader Corp.
COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group

[thestonesfan]

That's entirely plausible.

Hardly global, though.

[Vrylakas]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Vrylakas
Carlos, can you post a link to a credible source for this? I have to say, that makes no sense. Do you think that the Black Sea, an isolated sea, filld up the Mediterranean or the Mediterranean Sea filled the Atlantic Ocean? That would be the implication of "the water flowing the other way".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

if you want, I can rifle through the 12 or so magazines I scanned, find the article, look whom they quote, then search for these articles......... takes me a few hours though. But I will do it if you want....

They said, to paraphrase, that the Black Sea mostly filled with glacial run-off, then spilled via a river into the mediterranean basin, which had a lower water level (possibly because Gibraltar was at that time shut? It has been open/shut on and off quite a few times, thus the huge salt deposits on the floor of todays sea). They found a delta of that river south of the Turkish east-west stretching coast part, IIRC. Only later, with the land barrier cut down and the water level in the med p did a salty undercurrent flow inot the Balck Sea - carrying in the salt-adapted organisms.

want me to look it up? It will most probably NOT be an internet site, but actual scientific paper, as the research was one in Germany IIRC (we are still a bit slow abotu the net)

That would be helpful. I can't discount it, but it sounds very unlikely. I can read German BTW, so feel free to post directly from those sources if available. Your explanation above makes it seem more plausible, but it'd be helpful to see their evidence. If it's a killer long paper then please don't waste much time on it; I entirely trust your editing. Thanks -

FearlessLeader2 wrote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thestonesfan
1)There is nothing to indicate that a global flood ever happened. It would be obvious if it had. Do you really need a link?

2)For starters, there isn't enough water on earth to cover all the land. 3)Secondly, you quite obviously can't build a boat the size of the Titanic out of wood. 4)Thirdly, there are millions of species of animals. How could you even load two of each, let alone give them places to sit?

5)And if Noah landed in Asia Minor and let all the animals out, how the heck did any get to Australia?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) What about the tropical sediment towers, formations that geologists had ascribed to glaciation previously?

There are such things as local floods - in fact they're far more likely. Where are these towers located? There are tropical deposits all over the world, remnants of a time when the Earth's climate was much warmer. As a child while on excursions in the Carpathian Mountains I would find so many seashell or mollusk fossils on the tops of mountains; it's a sign of the changes the Earth has undergone in its long past.

To date - and I emphasize to date - geologists and paleo-archaeologists agree that there is no evidence of a single, global flooding event. If such an event did take place, it should be clearly visible just about everywhere in the world and located in the same layers (very much like dendrochronology) as a debris layer in geologic formations, very distinguishable with clear signs of water movement - and yet no such universal imprint exists on the geological record around the world.

2) If all the land was level or nearly so, and the canopy of water vapor described in Genesis existed, there would be plenty of water to do the job. After 40 days of the Flood water weighing down on the tectonic plates, mountains could be expected to be upthrust, and the runoff of water from them would cause erosion that would seem to take millions of years in scant days.

There was never a time since Earth's formation - at least since it solidified - that "the land was level". Remember that early planet formation (at least Earth-like planets) involves lots and lots of volcanos - that means lots and lots of mountains, islands and valleys. No flat Earth. In fact, in earlier Earth history there were often far greater extremes of mountainous heights and valley depths due to dramatically more volcanic and tectonic activity.

And in any event this really doesn't make sense; if water covered the entire planet's surface, where would it go afterwards? There would be nowhere to drain the water, no where for the levels to decrease to. And the water's weight is only a factor locally, but the planet's water as a whole weighs the same no matter how it's distributed. Currently only 3% (slightly less, actually) of the world's water is locked up in the polar ice caps, which means that slightly more than 97% is in the oceans. Why isn't there enough to cover the world now, despite many coastal areas actually being below sea level? Clearly if there was a massive global flood there would need to be much, much more water than Earth has today and the question of course would be, what happened to it all afterwards? Evaporation? That's not an option; evaporation here on Earth means rain over there - it only re-distributes.

3) You can't build the Pyramids using modern methods in less time than the Pharoahs did it in, and they had blocks and tackles, and logs to roll the blocks of stone into position on. Whose to say what the ancients could and couldn't do?

We have a fairly sophisticated understanding of the technologies, engineering and mathematics used by many ancient peoples and we can match that knowledge up with our knowledge of physics. A ship of the dimensions quoted in the Bible was out of humanity's capabilities until the 19th century, A.D. It requires a plethora of highly processed and /or synthetic materials because the weight distribution for a craft that large would not be sustainable with simple wood, bronze, skin, bone and reed construction - the materials available for seacraft in pre-Classic times. We can indeed say much about what ancient peoples could and couldn't do.

4) Species? That's a hoot. Which definition are you using? The Bible says Noah took one of each KIND.

Moot point.

5) If God could part the Red Sea for Moses, I don't see any problem with parting the Indian Ocean for the kangaroos and such.

Actually, as I understand it the Bible doesn't really say God parted the Red Sea; this common (mis)perception is the result of a mis-translation from the original, which said "sea of reeds", which could refer to any numbr of smaller alluvial lakes and bogs around the Nile's outlet into the Mediterranean. Why would the ancient Hebrews flee towards the sea anyway, rather than to Sinai to flee the Pharoah's army? They were not a sea-faring people, and they hardly could expect to find a flotilla of empty boats awaiting them. They more likely headed for the quickest route across the Nile towards the Sinai and the Levante.

[FearlessLeader2]

I see no reason to take any more steps back from my assumptions if you're not straying from yours.

[Oda Nobunaga]

He's not straying from his assumption, he's demolishing - and quite rightly - your claims. You are free to have faith in whatever you chose to, but the FACTS remain that science-wise, there is absolutely nothing to back your faith's claim, and a lot to disprove them.

And since there are so many faiths, it is entirely pointless to claim "but my faith is the truth!" - all faith make that claim and none of them whatsoever could bring forth even the slightest shred of proof that THEY are better than their neighbors. Since each of these has its own interpretation of primitive history - including quite a few who do NOT have flood myths - the logical conclusion is that we CANNOT rely on faiths and religions to write up the world's early history, because at that point we have no choice but to show bias toward one faith over the other, when in fact there's absolutely no objective reason to assume the Genesis is any more right than the Japanesse creation account or the other way around.

[privatehudson]

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
He's not straying from his assumption, he's demolishing - and quite rightly - your claims. You are free to have faith in whatever you chose to, but the FACTS remain that science-wise, there is absolutely nothing to back your faith's claim, and a lot to disprove them.

And since there are so many faiths, it is entirely pointless to claim "but my faith is the truth!" - all faith make that claim and none of them whatsoever could bring forth even the slightest shred of proof that THEY are better than their neighbors. Since each of these has its own interpretation of primitive history - including quite a few who do NOT have flood myths - the logical conclusion is that we CANNOT rely on faiths and religions to write up the world's early history, because at that point we have no choice but to show bias toward one faith over the other, when in fact there's absolutely no objective reason to assume the Genesis is any more right than the Japanesse creation account or the other way around.

Exactly what I wanted to say, but better worded

[Margim]

Just something interesting I thought you people may want to note. This is from the New Revised Standard Version of the bible.

Gen 7:2 Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate;

This from the New International Version

Gen 7:2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate,

And, for you traditionalists, the Kig James.

Genesis 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female

Interesting, isn't it, how the two by two has become the standard number - the Bible talks about a lot more than that though. I doubt the ark could have held every animal in the world - where are the skeletons of the dead middle-eastern kangaroos that noah didn't pull onto the ark?

[carlosMM]

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
#'s are mine

1) What about the tropical sediment towers, formations that geologists had ascribed to glaciation previously?

made by glaciers

[b]2) If all the land was level or nearly so, and the canopy of water vapor described in Genesis existed, there would be plenty of water to do the job. After 40 days of the Flood water weighing down on the tectonic plates, mountains could be expected to be upthrust, and the runoff of water from them would cause erosion that would seem to take millions of years in scant days.

[b]no, your water is not heavy enough for the downpush, and there is not enough water. or, will, just while you are at it, demand the ocean basins were shallow like continental shelfs?????

3) You can't build the Pyramids using modern methods in less time than the Pharoahs did it in, and they had blocks and tackles, and logs to roll the blocks of stone into position on. Whose to say what the ancients could and couldn't do?

You can't build them faster?
I remembr watchig a documentation showing how 2 archeologists and a team of 40(?) local workers used ANCIENT methods to construct a 4 meter high pyramid - just to show how the big ones were built. They would have been a LOT faster using trucks and modern-day cranes

anotehr claim of yours that is totally, uttlery unsubstanciated,

4) Species? That's a hoot. Which definition are you using? The Bible says Noah took one of each KIND.

been through this with you, you withdrew from that thread and never came back - why? I have asked you to continue that discussion instead of brining the ridiculous KIND nonsense we had ripped apart in that old thread again before

5) If God could part the Red Sea for Moses, I don't see any problem with parting the Indian Ocean for the kangaroos and such.

[song]earth is a sandbox and I want my money back! (I..... want my money back!!!!)[/song]

[carlosMM]

Originally posted by Vrylakas


That would be helpful. I can't discount it, but it sounds very unlikely. I can read German BTW, so feel free to post directly from those sources if available. Your explanation above makes it seem more plausible, but it'd be helpful to see their evidence. If it's a killer long paper then please don't waste much time on it; I entirely trust your editing. Thanks -

np. I jsut found it is in the stack of mags I deposited at my parents home Monday - out of my reach atm - but that narrows it don to about 5

I will search doirectly for the original paper online now.

[carlosMM]

got it:

Title
Persistent Holocene outflow from the Black Sea to the eastern Mediterranean contradicts Noah's flood hypothesis
AU: Aksu, Ali E; Hiscott, Richard N; Mudie, Peta J; Rochon, Andre; Kaminski, Michael A; Abrajano, Teofilo; Yasar, Dogan
AF: Memorial University of Newfoundland, Department of Earth Sciences, St. John's, NF, Canada (CAN); Geological Survey of Canada-Atlantic, Canada (CAN); University College London, United Kingdom (GBR); Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, United States (USA); Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey (TUR)
SO: GSA Today, vol.12, no.5, pp.4-10, May 2002
IS: ISSN 1052-5173
PB: Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO, United States (USA)
LA: English
FE: References: 24; illus. incl. sect., sketch maps
PY: 2002

I cna get it from the library later and scan it

[carlosMM]

Turner_727 found it online:


http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/gsato...atoday2002.htm

thanx, Turner!!!


edit: the pdf doesn't work and it is only the abstract that is free. I'll get it later

[Turner]

np, carlos.

[carlosMM]

OK, here it is (warning, large files):

page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7

[Vrylakas]

CarlosMM: Thanks for taking the time to round this stuff up. I will spend some time reading it and get back to you.

[Xen]

Originally posted by Turner_727


I'm pretty sure I've read tribal legends that deal with a flood. Also, part of our creation myth is centered around life coming out of the ocean, and land being created. While this wouldn't be a flood myth, it would suggest a flood. This would be from the pacific northwest, Alaskan panhandle and into BC.

actually, when you look in that area, there was a HUGE flood, or at least gradual waterleval rise there as well- look up a term called "beringia land bridge" and youll see what I mean- occuring at the seat of migrations into the new world, its easy to see how such an event could be transplanted into most native american societies (also, severla thousand years ago, there was a huge glacier melt, and huge flash flood in the pacific north west about where washington state is today- and by this I mean BIG- somting like 5-10 times what would happen if the Hoover dam were to suddenlly collapse IIRC)