Potential Evidence for a Global Flood

This is, of course, not true. That's what's required for soft-tissue preservation. Which is extremely rare. That's an interesting use of the phrase "of course", but back in the real world we can see rapid sedimentary deposition without floods. And we invariably see it without global floods. If you are trying to say that under normal conditions burrowing animals never burrow up or down, then you are wrong.If you are saying that there's a greater proportion of such burrows than there should be, then we need a couple of figures from you:(a) What proportion of burrows in the fossil record have a vertical component?
(b) What should the proportion be, if geologists were right about geology?Please give references for (a) and show your working for (b). If you are trying to say that there are too few paleosol deposits, I should like you to present your figures for:(a) How many there are.
(b) How many there should be if geologists were right about geology.Please give references for (a) and show your working for (b). Perhaps in Opposite World the tracks of land animals with, y'know, feet, are only deposited underwater. In the real world, not so much. Your point is obscure, can you clarify it? It contains terms not to be found in geology textbooks, or at least not the ones I've read. But not to have taken several million years to form, a distinction which creationists seem unable to grasp, because they are idiots. Or several days, depending on the circumstances under which they were laid down.By the way, weren't you pretending it was "millions of years" in the last paragraph? Yes, yes you were. So now you're complaining that there aren't enough polystrate fossils?Seriously?Well, again, we need a couple of figures:(a) How many are there?
(b) How many should there be if geologists were right about geology?Please give references for (a) and show your working for (b).Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

To avoid massive posts, I'll pick one point at a time... These surface imprints are common? Well, so are floods.
You have provided an argument that areas of land are often flooded.
I doubt anyone would argue against that.Please explain why these features were not preserved by the normal localised flooding that we still see happening today.

The date of the "global flood" is widely placed at about 4,350 years ago by biblical scholars.At that time period you are dealing with soils, not geological formations (rocks).Also, you are dealing with bones, not fossils. All of your examples dealing with fossils and geological strata are rendered moot by this fact alone.We have an excellent record of that time period produced by archaeologists (not geologists). I have excavated perhaps a hundred sites that cross-cut that time period and provide evidence of what occurred back then.Neither I nor my thousands of colleagues around the world have found evidence supporting a global flood at that time.Another bit of evidence: we now have well-dated mtDNA from both before and after that time period. If the global flood idea were correct, we would have a massive discontinuity at about 4,350 years ago. All previous mtDNA haplotypes would be eliminated, to replaced by those from Noah's female kin. This is not the case.A skeleton from On Your Knees Cave in southern Alaska produced a rare mtDNA haplotype. That skeleton was radiocarbon dated to 10,300 years ago. That mtDNA haplotype has been found in a number of living individuals. If there had been a global flood that mtDNA haplotype would have been eliminated, to be replaced by a near-eastern type. Another example from my own archaeological research: a skeleton from the western US dated to 5,350 years ago was found to be a mtDNA match for living individuals in the same area. Again, a global flood would have eliminated that haplotype in favor of one coming from the near east.This evidence strongly suggests that there was no global flood at that time.If you disagree, you need to deal with two very specific issues:1) The date of the "global flood" is recent, during human history, not back in the Cambrian or some such. You need to deal with soils, not geological strata. You need to deal with bones, not fossils. You need to deal with human history, not 500 million years before humans evolved.2) There are examples of continuity across the 4,350 date in all areas of the world. Contrarily, there is no evidence for a global flood at that time. The evidence for continuity comes from human cultures, fauna and flora, sediments, DNA, and so on. There is no evidence for a global flood (discontinuity of the above items) at that time period. Nor is there positive evidence such as flood strata, massive erosion, etc.However, if you disagree, then please pick the precise time period when you believe the global flood occurred. It does you no good to pick-and-choose from various events spanning 500 or more million years. You have to pick one specific date, and provide your reasoning for that date.This is the science forum, you know. {In my judgement, this is rather a Coyote boilerplate rant and is in little or no way a reply to the content of the message it is a reply to. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Note in red.

quote:

---

It really doesn't matter how much (even false) evidence you present in support of the Biblical Flood, it has been totally refuted; there is absolute evidence that it never happened.
The Biblical Flood is simply myth and fantasy.

​

In the version of the myth found in Genesis 6 God instructs Noah to:

​

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

In the version of the myth found in Genesis 7 we see similar (close but not the same) instructions:

​

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

We also find similar explanations of what will be destroyed in Genesis 6 it says:

​

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

and in Genesis 7:

​

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Funny how the only impacting verse is left out here! The flood was a regional flood; the animals mentioned are limited to Noah's domestic household:

quote:

---

9/1 And the LORD said unto Noah: 'Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before Me in this generation.

---

Hm. I wonder what 'all thy house' refers to - any clues anyone? I wonder why no wild animals are listed - how about lions, snakes, elephants? Even when many animals are specifically referred to ['Take with you seven of every kind']. I wonder how come those wild animals are still around - can it be this is a regional flood, in an area infamous for such floods - you think?Well, we still have the big issue of ALL THE EARTH BEING COVERED ['I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."
']. How does one get around that one!?Can it be that there was no Tasmania, London or Krakow at this time? Can it be that had those cities been listed it would imply a fake? Can it be the people of that time never left their villagers all their lives? Can it be that the flood, seeing it covered their town, would look like the whole earth was indeed submerged - why not?Can it be a book mentioning Mount Ararat for the first time, in its correct geographical location, and listing pages of geneologies in a biological thread and using 100% authentic names hailed by every Paleontologist as 100% authentic - can still be guilty of making such a foolish error which today's brilliant minds have so easily negated as myth?Hey - show us another item in this book which is not authentic! Wrong names, wrong dob's, wrong cities, wrong populations, wrong historical items, wrong grammar, wrong alphabeticals, wrong groups, wrong - anything? Anything whatsoeverwhich is incorrect? {In my judgement, this is a reply to a message that itself was a very bad reply to a message. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner and note in red.

quote:

---

This evidence strongly suggests that there was no global flood at that time.

---

We've heard of such balony passed ff as credible science. Its not forgotten:1. For a 100 years the neo archeologists claimed King David was a myth. Then the Tel Dan discovery happened - those archeologists have never recovered from their shame.2. We've heard how the migration of the Israelites under Joshua never happened in Jerico. The archeologist [a woman; forgot her name], made very authentic sounding claims, even forgetting that the Israelites had indeed established themselves in Canaan and held that land as sovereign for 1000 years. Then she was negated by further archeologists who opened better layers of earth.3. We heard all the parades of scientists dismissing the entire exodus as myth and that the Israelites were never in Egypt. Then popped up a 3,500 year Egyptian stelle mentioning a war with 'ISRAEL' by name!4. We saw how both the first and seond Temples of Jerusalem were called Zionist Plots. Then the ground itself spat out a host of relics, coins and scrolls, affirming more than 70% of the Hebrew bible.5. We heard how the prophetic writings were later written, centuries after the dating of their authors, well after 500 BCE. Then popped up the bits of Scrolls whch predated 600 BCE.Fact: There is no ancient writings on the planet with near equivalent or better evidence than that of the Hebrew bible. Name one? Take your time - no hurry. {In my judgement, this is a reply to a message that itself was a very bad reply to a message. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner and note in red.

The topic is the Biblical Flood.The Biblical Flood has been totally refuted.It really is that simple. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

You have not even attempted to refute a single point I made.Perhaps you should give it a try and provide some evidence to refute my points.(And yes, I saw you try to change the subject.) Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

I clearly showed you quoted the text wrong. What's there to prove - aside from your comprehension!?

quote:

---

whatsoeverwhich is incorrect?

​

The topic is the Biblical Flood.

​

The Biblical Flood has been totally refuted.

​

It really is that simple.

---

The only stuff proven is the authenticity of that writings, in 100's of examples spread across its verses. It is clear you omitted the only pivotal verse which I pointed out - take responsibility for your errors. Its that simple. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

I quoted no texts.I cited the consensus of biblical scholars for the date of the "global flood" and archaeological evidence beyond that.And you still have not refuted a single point I made.Your dodging and weaving is noted. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

You are trying to have an honest debate with a dishonest debater.
It is a waste of your time. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

Yes, I agree. It's futile to even try and have an honest conversation with creos. Found that out some time ago, after having to debate very dishonest users of word salads. Still have no idea what they said.That's why the debates around scientific subjects are done in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Real scientific journals, not religious tracts who pretend to do science. Not in oral debates, but on paper, where experts can evaluate every word written. Untrue statements are quickly picked up that way. That's an effective way of weeding dishonest debaters out.Once they are weeded out, real honest debate can begin. That's also why word salads don't do too well in scientific journals. They're weeded out. Technical terms work, because the experts all know exactly what every word means. They don't have to guess about the meaning of words. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

Hi IamJoseph,The topic is evidence for a global flood. If you're not going to contribute constructively to discussion of the thread's topic then please stop participating.

quote:

---

I cited the consensus of biblical scholars for the date of the "global flood" and archaeological evidence beyond that.

---

You never cited anything. The fulcrum verse was left out and not confronted, which was pointed out - and you have not retracted. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

The topic is of a global flood. The Noah story ends in Mount Ararat - which shows only a regional scenario; coupled with the term 'YOUR POSSESSIONS' - this seems conclusive.Who is being dishonest when cherry picking and avoiding everything relevant and impacting?