Pre Flood Artifacts?

Any maps from before God had to intervene, would be useless. He doesn't mess around.

If a flood was total, the maps would be totaled? Even "yec" researchers couldn't find'em!

quote:

---

Useless in what way? I would think any surviving maps would be of invaluable historical importance.

---

Yes they would. I was just trying to emphasize how total the flood would have been. You know, they actually have on old map, they say helped Columbus. From Turkey. Supposedly passed down from verbal records or something, before the flood. What is strange about it is that it has antartica mapped out real great! Remember, that was supposed to be iced up before man existed, I think. So how does this map match sattelite readings, looking under the ice in Antarica, to the surface below?
Could be some something to it. How else would he know? If you can't google it up, I may be able to search my old records. Mountains? Coul;d be. I think Walt Brown, of the hydroplate theory has it that there was a lot of uplift at the time. So, pre flood, if he's right, the mountains would have been a lot smaller.
Ararat may be our mt Ararat, though some say it was an older name for some forgotten mountain or range in the vicinity. One of the Moon astronauts, as I hear it found God, and actually died trying to climb it!
Why was he so convinced? Did he know something? I can't say. I sure believe in the ark, and the flood, though.

quote:

---

The map is not drawn according to modern conventions, with a latitude-longitude grid. All attempts to correlate the features on the west of the Atlantic involve a certain amount of interpretation, although many of the interpretations are slam-dunks. In general, the farther south you go on the map the more errors appear.

​

The map does show more detail in what appears to be Brazil than was apparently available to Piri Reis at the time, and there are some interesting questions about where the information came from.

​

The area which some have interpreted as the coastline of Antarctica has essentially no correspondence to Antarctica, except it's at the south end of the map. It is shown connected to South America (and the southern part of South America is not even close to what's shown on the map)

---

Yes there are two side to every issue. It was attacked with a lot of vigor, as some didn't want old ages to be questioned. Another thought, is that differences in a pre flood world might (would) be different, so could account for some 'imperfections'. Continental plate movement by some, is thought to have occured, so why would it be the very same? Enough of antartica was mapped to make it of interest. No, it's not definitive. Very well could be based on some pre flood information, passed on, though. Or even recreated by memory by Noah's family afterward, and passed down?

"How does all this silly nonsense about a flood account for the fact that the Chinese have records for the entire period before, during and after this supposed flood? Of course, they had their "great flood" too, but it was at a different period of time, with different survivors. The bible says that only Noah and his family survived."Must've been a different flood. If it was after, possibly some indirect result of the same flood, like a landslide dam breaking, and releasing water, etc.
"Most of the great cultures on earth have a flood legend of some sort. "
Yes. Amazing!

quote:

---

These were people who lived thousands of years ago. Ocean navigation as we know it didn't exist.

---

Guess it would depend on how many thousands of years. Noah had some sea experience!

quote:

---

In so many other places (Genesis 19, for example) fundies insist that the bible must be understood in the context in which it was written.

---

Really? Wow, haven't met one yet who thought sodom, and it's lesson was not true. Maybe if they were gay, they might lean that way.

quote:

---

Otherwise they would have to acknowledge Lot as the greatest coward in all history, which they steadfastly refuse to do

---

I don't quite get it. But that's fine, I agree God had a message there for the good of all mankind. The bible, unless actually believed as literal where possible, (some things are obviosly not), becomes about as valuable as toilet paper. If we can't actually believe it, I figure, why bother with it?