The Flood = many coincidences

No, not correct. I don't know that any of your statements concerning bones are correct.Human bones are generally found intact, rather than pulverized, as part of a burial, and are most often in a demineralized condition.I was just out with a local coroner looking at some bones and the ones we saw were 1) associated with one another in anatomical position, 2) in a normal burial posture for this area, and 3) demineralized, as will be the case with most soils.And we didn't see any dinosaur bones on this find or any of the others I have been associated with in forty years of archaeological and osteological research.Give it up. Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago. They were not cavorting about with humans in the western US in recent times.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Perhaps you should take this as a hint.

The flood was total fiction.The early geologists, pretty much all creationists, gave up trying to document the flood just about 200 years ago. They searched for evidence of the flood and instead they found evidence that it never happened.Things have just gotten worse for flood advocates since then.I've found evidence myself that disproves the biblical flood story. Want to hear about it?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

At an archaeological site I tested a few years back we encountered a skeleton which radiocarbon dating shows is over 5,300 years of age (i.e., pre-"flood").The mtDNA from that individual matched living individuals in the same area, showing at minimum they were from the same lineage.This shows that there was no break in the mtDNA haplotype at about 4,350 years ago, the time ascribed to the flood by most biblical scholars.Other researchers have found the same thing in other areas, including one such lineage connection spanning about 10,300 years.This evidence alone shows there was no global flood at the time suggested by most biblical scholars.Of course there are hundreds of other lines of evidence showing the same thing, but this one is one from my own research.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Native American mtDNA lineages are distinct from those in the Middle East. Geneticists have worked out the divisions and subdivisions of the different haplogroups and haplotypes since modern man left Africa.These Native American haplogroups developed from Asian groups in Beringia about 15,000 years ago, and subsequently spread to the rest of North and South America.They are thus only distantly related to Middle Eastern types, and the split can be shown to have occurred many thousands of years ago.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Why are you clinging to these falsehoods?Is this a part of your religious belief, necessary because you believe in a young earth and a recent global flood?I can't imagine how or why, otherwise, you would be denying what is obvious to scientists all over the world.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

An event which the ancient Egyptians failed to notice or record.They recorded the annual floods of the Nile, but missed a global flood. Hmmmm.The purported global flood occurred at the end of the 5th Dynasty or at the beginning of the 6th Dynasty, but was not recorded!(And they didn't go extinct either.)

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

One problem: the sedimentary layers you are describing are not all the same age. They span some billions of years.Another problem: the flood is generally described as being about 4,350 years ago by biblical scholars. At that time period you have soils, not rocks. And soils of that age are very easy to find. You probably have some in your back yard. As an archaeologists I have excavated probably over a hundred sites containing soils of that age. Soils of that age are just ordinary dirt, not layerss of sedimentary rock. In fact, we have fine continuity of soils, human cultures, fauna and flora, mtDNA lineages, etc. from before that date to after that date for thousands of years. There is no evidence of interruption by a flood.Still another problem: we can find evidence from the end of the last ice age of floods in a number of places. Google "channeled scablands" to see some nice ones in southwestern Washington. Ice dams at the end of the ice age held back meltwater, then let loose periodically. That caused floods which scoured large areas. We can track those floods, determine their areal extent, date them, and even tell one from another. If there was a much larger flood much more recently one would expect it to wipe out the evidence of these earlier floods and leave similar evidence behind. Didn't happen.Face it, the global flood is a myth contradicted by scientific evidence.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

{Low quality non-topic snark hidden - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Low quality non-topic snark hidden. Change subtitle to "Bleh content hidden".

You seem to be trying to force reality to fit within your religious beliefs. Problem is, it doesn't fit. Your religious beliefs are flatly contradicted by reality.The earth is old, giving the small annual movement of the plates plenty of time to do all sorts of things. You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Is this why archaeologists and geologists can't find any evidence of a global flood ca. 4,350 years ago when it was supposed to have occurred?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

If that's the case, we can do a test. You can actually do this yourself.The global flood is most often placed at about 4,350 years ago. At that time period we are dealing with soils, not geology. Soils of that age are extremely common, and occur almost everywhere--probably in your back yard.You could learn a little bit about soil science and do a small excavation in your back yard. If there was a flood of that magnitude there should be evidence in the soil layers at about 4,350 years ago. This could take the form of a significant water-deposited layer of some kind or a discontinuity due to erosion. Either way, it should show up in your back yard and most everywhere else.Or you could visit an archaeological excavation that cross-cuts that time period. Archaeological sites are easier to date than soil layers as there are a lot more materials which can be used for dating.You don't have to take our word for this--you can perform this test yourself.Get back to me with the results, eh?(By the way, I have tested somewhere over a hundred archaeological sites that cross-cut that time period. No evidence of a flood in any of them.)

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

In case you missed the above post.I would hate to think that you are trying to ignore the wonderful test I described in that post.

Much of what creationists post concerning the "global flood" is contradicted by empirical evidence. Perhaps if they were to follow this flow chart things would proceed more smoothly:

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

How do you explain the dating?The K-T is about 65.5 million years ago and biblical scholars place the flood ca. 4,350 years ago. That's a pretty large boo-boo to explain away.Second, where is your evidence for modern fossils in those pre K-T deposits? We find a lot of dinosaurs and such, but we don't find all the species that have existed during the past several thousand (or even million) years.Until you can explain the progression of fossils, both fauna and flora, in the geological strata since the K-T event, and reconcile that with the dating, you have a disproved hypothesis.Add: Here is a reference to an article detailing the geologic column. The Geologic Column and its Implications for the Flood, by Glenn Morton.This will help with the dating as well.Edited by Coyote, : Add link

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.