Glenn Morton hypothesis: The Flood could ONLY have happened 5 million+ years ago

I don't know of any that would dispute it, but lots that would push it back much further than only 5 million years. It is absolutely certain that if there ever was a Global Flood, it could only have happened in the very far distant past.As a Christian, and fellow Texan, I so far have never found any evidence that supports there ever having been a global flood. For one thing, floods do leave distinctive geological signs, we can point to specific geographic areas and say, "Yes, that was caused by a flood." But unfortunately for floodists, they are all from very different periods.The genetic information also seems to support the fact that there has not been a world-wide flood. One thing that can be seen looking a genetics are bottlenecks, period when a population crashes and so all future generations are directly related to the few critters that survived the bottleneck event. Well you don't get much more of a bottleneck event than only seven of each species surviving. If the flood had happened, there would be genetic markers in every critter all pointing to the same point of time in the past, the time of the supposed flood.We can see bottle neck events in the genetic record, just as we can see flood events in the geological record, but again, they do not all point to the same point in time.The problem for floodists is that there really is NO evidence anywhere of any world-wide flood, not recently, not in the last 6000 years, not in the last 600,000 years and not in the last many millions of years.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

If it is simply a regional flood, then it has NO relationship to origins. Biblical Creationism is simply wrong. That much is a non-starter.There have been many, many floods during the life of the Earth but none that have had any major impact on living creatures in general. We know for a fact, for example, that there is almost no differences between the creatures living at the supposed time of Adam, and those living today.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

First, Glen sometimes posts here as well and is very much aware of EvC. In addition, many of us are also members over at TWEB.Reading what you posted of Glen's messages he is saying that there could not have been a world-wide flood in at least five million years.There are, as he admits, no known examples of modern man anywhere near back that far.Glen seems to be trying to keep some literal Adam in the game by saying maybe it was not a modern Home species but rather one of the predecessor species.That's fine but it really seems to be much ado over nothing, little more than mental masturbation.The Bible contains several creation stories. There is the later one found in Genesis 1 and the much earlier (and a composite of several different stories) tale found in Genesis 2. They are entirely different and mutually exclusive. If one is literally true, then the other is literally false. They even describe two entirely different Gods.There are some things we can be pretty sure of. There are no signs anywhere of a world-wide flood at ANY time in the past.There are signs of regional floods, the breaking of the damn flooding the Mediterranean Sea, a smaller event that flooded the Black Sea, the great flood plains of the US North West, a major flood event that happened between the Tigris and Euphrates and laid down a bed of nearly 10 feet of sediment, but none of these were within the period of recorded history and all of them would have had minimal effect on world-wide populations of critters.It simply seems to me to make more sense to look at the Bible and ask some basic questions.Why did the editors and redactors include conflicting tales of creation?They were not dumb. They could certainly read and reason as well as anyone living today, so why include accounts that are not simply contradictory, they are mutually exclusive?One possible reason might be that they were trying, in poetic language and allegory, to explain the world as they saw it, explain GOD's relationships with man, man's relationships with God and her fellow man, and some "Just So" stories to explain why childbirth seems more difficult and painful for humans, why we fear snakes, why we must work the fields for our living instead of simply browsing like the animals, why we should take time off.They also included the two tales (actually more than two tales but the story in Genesis 2 is a compilation of several tales) because they describe two very different and very important aspects of GOD.The God of Genesis 1 is very much aloof from creation, creation is done by an act of will alone, God "speaks" it into existence. That God is very sure of Herself, Transcendent. That God creates by will, without error, and step by step until She stops, looks on it and "Finds it GOOD".But there is no interaction with what is created.The God we find in Genesis 2 is entirely different. This is a personal God, one that walks with people, creates things by hand from the earth itself. It is unlike the sure and transcendent God of Genesis 1.Why not simply accept the stories as the authors, editors and redactors did? Why try to pretend that they were meant to be taken literally?The Flood story is the same. It's not one story but rather a compilation of several flood myths. And it is ABSOLUTELY not something that happened at least at any time that Homo sapiens sapiens lived.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Except that most of the evidence points to the story in Genesis 1 being the younger more recent one and the story that begins around Genesis 2:5 being a compilation of older tales from far different cultures. In addition there is NOTHING in either Genesis tale to indicate that one is pre-planning and the other implementation. In fact the story in Genesis 1 is quite clear that a job is performed, finished, inspected, approved and that then God took a break. The Bible is not GOD, the Map is not the Territory, the Treasure Map is not the Treasure.The Bible is a creation of Man. I believe it is inspired, but it is also written to speak directly to a people of an era and milieu. It was written by people just like you, just like me, limited and ignorant. But it is still just a Map.I believe in GOD for more reasons than the Bible. I believe in GOD, GOD the creator and I look at the record that GOD left, and when the record GOD left refutes a literal reading of the Bible, then I believe GOD's record, not the work of Man.Over the years I have enjoyed reading your website, and I hope that you continue with your quest.I see no reason though to even wonder about many of the stories of the Bible. A good example is the subject of this thread, the story of the Flood.First, there is simply NO evidence of a world-wide flood.But we can go further.Genetic evidence shows us that there is no common bottleneck marker across all species.Shipbuilding and maritime expertise may go back as much as 40,000 years, but so far there are no indications of shipbuilding or maritime expertise back beyond the somewhat indirect evidence of the Polynesian, Australian, South Pacific expansions. And none of those were on a scale such as the Noah tales; the livestock on board was more likely a few pigs, chickens and perhaps rats.If there is a basis, a kernel of truth to the story of the flood it is that there was likely some local flood and the tale or tales were glorified and exaggerated. We should then look to see what lessons were taught by the story and are those lessons valid?The explanation for the Creation tales is IMHO far more likely as I explained in Message 16. The two tales were included because they served NOT a historical purpose but rather a social and theological purpose.I see science as simply another way that we can learn "How GOD did it."

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'm sorry but your whole post is simply another example of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. It silly, childish, mental masturbation and an act of hubris.You seem to have absolutely no idea of how knowledge is gained. Has no one ever helped you understand how to approach a problem and reason through it? If you believe that you have either NEVER read them, are being willfully ignorant, lying or deluded. They are NOT the same story. I'm sorry but that is simply not true. In particular, Genesis 1 is specifically in chronological order. That is also true in the story that begins around Genesis 2:5. Both ARE in chronological order. Well that is part of your problem. You cannot look in the Bible for evidence of something that happened in real life. You need to look at the real world. Dead dinosaurs are pretty piss poor evidence, actually just plain silly not even sophomoric evidence unless you can explain the model that produces what we see in the real world. To use dead dinosaurs as evidence for a flood, you need to explain the model that somehow selectively killed and arranged the fossils in the order we see.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

And I have never questioned the intelligence of ancient civilizations. What is your point?You of course are free to believe anything you want, you are even free to state your beliefs. But when those beliefs are directly contradicted by the facts, you need to get used to folk point that out. That is very sad and I pity you. Because it is simply wrong. If a person believes, holds as their opinion, that they can override gravity by will and so simply step off the ledge, the Christian thing is to at the least point out to them that they are wrong. Another totally off topic post (why is it the Biblical Christians have so much trouble staying on topic?). Sorry but my GOD is not Darwin. Of course people can think and believe the opposite of what I believe. That is simply not an issue or even germane to this thread. In this thread we are talking about what is true. Specifically, the issue is whether or not there was a flood as described in the Bible.The facts are that during the period of time that man was capable of even building a vessel, there has not been a world-wide flood. Further, there are NO signs that anyone has ever found that there was EVER a world-wide flood.Now folk are of course free to believe there was a Biblical Flood just as they are free to believe that they can override gravity by will. And those that believe the former are still as wrong as those that believe the later.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

to which b b replied:

quote:

---

A fact is a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true. Jar how do you know this?

---

I know that because I have looked at the evidence.An event such as the flood myth from the Bible would leave certain specific evidences. We can look at the world and see if those indicators are present. If they are, then it supplies some support for the hypothesis that there was such an event. If the indicators are not present then it refutes the hypothesis.When we look at the world we find that NONE of the indicators are present. So the hypothesis is refuted. No, that isn't hard at all. But it is simply wrong.First off, if everything died during one event, one that lasted less than two years, then we should find samples of everything living at the time mixed up together. But that is NOT what is found when the real world is examined. Instead, what we find is that fossils are sorted by species. They are not sorted by density, or size but by species. In addition we find continuous transitions, species live, evolve, new species come about, they live, they evolve and the record continues.There are layers all over the earth where NO flowering plants are found. Then, slightly higher we find flowering plants introduced.There are layers all over the earth where the record shows that grasses did not exist. In such layers grasses are simply never found. No impressions, no pollen, nothing. Higher up we find grass has evolved.We NEVER find primates in layers where there are dinosaurs.If there had been a flood that killed off the dinosaurs we should find layers that have remains of all the critters and plants, all jumbled up together. And that should be what we find everywhere we look on earth.We don't find that.A flood such as described in the Bible would leave other evidence. For example, it would have created the genetic bottleneck of all time. Geneticists can see makers that show bottlenecks in many species. BUT, they do not all point to a single point in time. Had the flood happened, the marker for the flood event would be a big RED flag that would stand out as an anomaly in EVERY living species and even in those no longer living that we examined.The marker is simply not found.The flood, if it happened, would have left a marker in the cores of corals.It is not there.The flood, if it happened would have left a marker in the ice cores.It is not there.The flood, if it happened, would have left a marker in the geological column.It is not there. More nonsense from the Christian Cult of Ignorance.The other proof is the world we live in. We can examine things and determine past events from them. For example, the simple fact that you exist today proves that you really did have a father and mother. I do not need to know your mother or father to know they existed. You exist. At the current time we do not have the technology to clone an individual therefore I can state with a very high probability that you had a father and mother.Of course we can know about things like the Biblical Flood. Such an event would have left evidence. So far no one has been able to provide any evidence of such an event that stands up to examination.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Once again, let me try to explain.I can know with a high degree of certainty that you had parents. I do not need to know or have met your parents.We can make statements about the past with very high degree of confidence. But we do have evidence. As I pointed out in Message 33, there is absolute overwhelming evidence that there has never been a world-wide flood.We can say, with a very high degree of confidence, that based on geological, historical, biological, genetic, archaeological, physics, engineering, and astronomical evidence that there has not been a world-wide flood on earth. Sorry but there is no more evidence that Noah existed than there is for the flood myth. I have examined photographs of all, and personally hands on examined a coral core.But one of the nice things about science, unlike religion, is that findings are replicated and verified. It is NOT based on a belief but instead based on the weight of evidence as examined by a broad spectrum of individuals.As I have said, you are of course welcome to your beliefs, but trying to assert nonsense like there was a Biblical Flood is simply an act of ignorance and an attempt to pass and impose that ignorance on the next generation.It is a denial of the God given capability of critical thought, an act of hubris and to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children.AbE:I forgot to address the question of the geological column. I have been lucky enough during my life to have been able to inspect many, many of them. I have seen old mountains, roots of mountains and the young mountains. I have been able to see how mountains are worn away, and experience them being built. Edited by jar, : as usual, appalin spallinEdited by jar, : add part on geology

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Maybe next time I get way up North where you live we could get together for a coffee or beer. I certainly would find it a most enjoyable experience.On the first point. Yes, there have always been some who try to make the stories fit reality. I just don't see the point.It looks like we are pretty much in agreement that there has not been a world-wide flood.The question is then on why we should even care if the story is in the Bible is a distorted version of some local flood or if we should push it back into the far distant past.Again, since we know that the story is certainly not true as told, why try to make it fit anyway?I do see very good reasons for both of the stories being included, and for purely theological reasons. Absolutely true. But I do not worship the Bible. I worship GOD.Tales do not have to be true to be important or inspired. Which God described therein? There are many.GOD is not the somewhat bumbling tinkerer seen the the second creation myth. Nor is GOD the aloof, distant, transcendent God seen in the younger tale found in Genesis 1. GOD is not IN the Bible. What the Bible shows is mens attempts over time to paint a picture, caricatures of GOD. But if you are going to do that, what is the point. Again, just because a Map doesn't show the latest changes in the highway system it is not useless. Just as with a road map you test the Theological map against reality.And about Flores, lets hold off for awhile on any assumptions based on that. We still are at the very early stages of learning there.But if we do reduce the flood to what might have been possible on flotsam we again have gutted the story. What is worth saving?IMHO the moral, the lessons are what are worth saving. Why? If the lessons are useful, if they teach us how to live this life, why would we not follow the ideas in it?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

to which b b replied:

quote:

---

I have countered that. Lack of evidence is not evidence that anything is definitely not true.

---

But what I present was not lack of evidence, it was positive evidence that the Flood is totally falsified, that is is simply not true.If there had been a world-wide flood there would be certain indicators. We can look and see if those indicators are there. I outlined those indicators in Message 33.People have looked for those indicators. Not one of them is there. Even Glen Morton, who I respect greatly has not been able to point to any evidence that there was ever a Great Biblical Flood.It is not simply a lack of evidence, it is that the evidence that MUST be there if the Biblical account were true is simply not there. The idea that there was a flood is simply wrong, refuted, disproven. I'm sorry b b but that is simply so wrong, shows such a total ignorance of history that it is embarrassing. By the time of Ezra the Scribe, when the Torah was most likely redacted into the form we know today, people knew that the earth was a sphere and by two hundred years before Christ was born the circumference and diameter had been measured.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Glen, the issues you raise in that section are really important I believe, and ones I'd love to discuss with you. However, the way EvC is set up they are really off topic for this thread.Just some background. The set up here is that there are two major divisions, the Science area and the Theological area. For example, we are in one of the Science forums in a sub forum that deals with Geology and the Great Flood.What is the possibility of you posting those items in a new message in the Proposed New Topics forum? Since responding to those questions will certainly take someone way outside the narrow focus of geology and the great flood, one of the admins could move it to another area such as Comparative Religions.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Done.See Message 1 Once the admins promote it they will provide links to whichever forum they stick it in.{The promoted version is at EvC Forum: The Quadralemma. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Because they are different stories written by different people at different times with different ideas of what happened.You are absolutely right. None of the chronologies match. The order of creations doesn't match, the methods do not match. The stories are mutually exclusive, if one is true then the others are false.The reason is that they were never meant to be taken as history or science.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'm sorry but that seems like just making stuff up. There is no reason I can see to think that there are two different events being discussed accept to try to pretend that the stories are historical and scientific.Seems totally pointless and just silly to me.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, the Biblical flood tale has been disproven. It is simply false.If God intervened miraculously then the God is Loki, the trickster.If God miraculously performed the flud, then wiped out all traces of it and even went to the trouble of creating additional fake evidence to show that there was never a flud, then it is not possible to trust anything done by that God.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion