Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-26-2019 9:42 AM
26 online now:
JonF, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Stile, Theodoric, vimesey (6 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,250 Year: 5,287/19,786 Month: 1,409/873 Week: 305/460 Day: 5/52 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
13NextFF
Author Topic:   The Flood
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 1 of 188 (383523)
02-08-2007 1:57 PM


I've recently been reading a book about the Flood that is unlike any other. Its been my experience that there are two general beliefs concerning the Flood that are expressed in modern literature. One group comes from a die hard creationist viewpoint that seem to invent any corollary or parallel, real or imagined, that might somehow make a literal interpretation of Genesis all the more literal. The second group is the very antithesis of the first, where the mere mention of such a veritable flood of biblical proportions is automatically considered patently absurd only the basis of personal incredulity. In either case, from a scientific standpoint, both are heresy in my opinion as bias is introduced from the get-go.

This book is different. This book is a breath of fresh air because it simply relays the facts without interjecting personal beliefs that might compromise the integrity of the experiments. The author, Ian Wilson, does not believe in a young earth model due to what he believes is a stark lack of evidence. In fact, I don't even think he's a theist, or even at the least, someone who believes in the Abrahamic faiths. If he is, he doesn't make any mention of it. However, he noticed a great paradox. The paradox was that there was, before the inquiry was taken, no real evidence of a massive Flood that could be seen. Indeed he scorns the likes of Ron Wyatt and his work on an archeological expedition that Wyatt claims to have uncovered the actual Ark in the mountains of Ararat. But at the same time, he couldn't neglect the widespread folklore from civilization after civilization, recorded by the Sumerians, Assyrians, Akkadians, Hittites, Hebrews, Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Celts, Hindus, Mayans, Toltecs, Incans, Maoris, Yoruba, Algonquin, et al, et al, etc, etc.

This prompted him to examine some of the ancient chronicles and their chroniclers from antiquity, such as the Bible and the Epic of Gilgamesh, to Berossus the Chaldean, Alexander Polyhistor, Eusibius of Caesarea, Syncellus the Byzantine, etc. Though the protagonists differed in name, the stories were virtually identical. It was then the job of a certain oceanographers, archaeologists, and marine biologists to go off the leads of the writers of antiquity.

This lead them to the Black Sea, which is in close proximity to the mountains of Ararat which most ancient writers place the large vessel, known biblically as the Ark, as the point where the waters receded and civilization began to repopulate the earth. Analysis of core samples taken from the seabed showed that some 40 inches of the sea floor is richly gorged with sapropel, which is a black, jelly-like mud that is comprised of decayed organic material (such as putrefied plants and animals). They were initially perplexed as to how and why it was so well preserved and came to the conclusion that undersea vents spewed hydrogen sulphide (H2S) in the lower depths which depleted the oxygen. The anoxic environment aids in the preservation of the sapropel. The other things found undersea sand dunes and ancient shorelines that could not have existed if slow erosion was the cause. They also discovered sun bleached Mytilus mussles, and thousands of them that showed that they once were on land long enough for the sun to bleach the shell. It also showed that they died because of the introduction of saline in to the water. These were a freshwater species of mollusks. That means that the Black Sea used to be a freshwater lake.

Next was the task to date the mollusks. Every one of them was dated using Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS). The date for each mollusk was 5,600 BC, which is the exact timeframe given by Moses for the great Deluge. That means that every one of those clams died at the same time, meaning a terrible catastrophe had killed them rapidly. Given the evidence, it was clear that the inundation of salt water introduced in to the enviorns of the freshwater lake killed off the mollusks in one catastrophic event.

So how did it happen and why it so sudden?

A review of NASA satellite photos revealed that the Bosporous straight and the entire Anatolian region, which lies at a major collision point of several tectonic plates, allowed the Mediterranean to burst through the Bosporous dyke and began to flood an extremely large region-- namely, the Mesopotamian valley. The inrush of briny Mediterranean sea water at high speeds decimated the fertile and tranquil environment. The calculated approximation was that 97,000 kilometres (60,000 miles) was definitely affected by this flood where the Mesopotamian valley makes a natural basin that collected the huge volume of water.

Now, since none of this means that the causation of the flood was divinely inspired, nor does the book even address it. The author only pursues the academic endeavor. So what does it mean for people living in that area? Were people living in this region in the 6th millenium BC? The answer was, yes. All along the once lakeshore was found a treasure trove of human artifacts and tools showing a surprising craftsmanship by the inhabitants of that region.

In closing, I have a two part question geared towards theists and atheists alike. To the atheists, I ask, what does this information say to you about the validity of a considerable flood? Note that we do not, as of yet, know with certainty that this was a "global" flood. We know empirically that this was considered global to the inhabitants. Does this mean that such a Flood really did exist? If so, is this inconsequential to you?

The second question is geared towards biblicists. This study, conducted in 1993, has had virtually no coverage. And of that which is mentioned, it is routinely dumbed down in an apparent view of it being inconsequential. Do you find it disheartening that some people have divorced themselves from this discovery, and if so, do you attribute it to them denying it over its greater implications-- such as, the denial of the Bible's historicity?

(Admin: I don't have a preference as to which forum this goes, so long as it is applicable to the topic of the forum)


"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 02-08-2007 4:21 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 6 by RickJB, posted 02-08-2007 4:23 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 7 by PaulK, posted 02-08-2007 4:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 8 by Coragyps, posted 02-08-2007 4:49 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 9 by Jazzns, posted 02-08-2007 4:54 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 10 by jar, posted 02-08-2007 5:15 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 20 by macaroniandcheese, posted 02-08-2007 8:50 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 21 by RAZD, posted 02-08-2007 9:12 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 22 by Lithodid-Man, posted 02-09-2007 2:58 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 24 by Archer Opteryx, posted 02-09-2007 5:29 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 25 by Tusko, posted 02-09-2007 5:44 AM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 33 by anastasia, posted 02-09-2007 2:21 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 34 by Mespo, posted 02-09-2007 4:11 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 2 of 188 (383576)
02-08-2007 3:46 PM


Bump
Any Admins home today?
    
AdminQuetzal
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 188 (383581)
02-08-2007 4:02 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Sorry about the delay. Looks like a good topic. If you have another preference for forum, let me know.

Edited by AdminQuetzal, : No reason given.


"Here come da Judge" - Flip Wilson

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics

    New Members: Important threads to make your stay more enjoyable:
    Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


    Replies to this message:
     Message 4 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 4:07 PM AdminQuetzal has not yet responded

      
  • Hyroglyphx
    Member
    Posts: 5622
    From: Austin, TX
    Joined: 05-03-2006


    Message 4 of 188 (383585)
    02-08-2007 4:07 PM
    Reply to: Message 3 by AdminQuetzal
    02-08-2007 4:02 PM


    Sorry about the delay.

    No worries. It actually wasn't that long, its just that I saw other requests being dealt with before mine.

    If you have another preference for forum, let me know.

    No, this is the perfect thread. Thank you for asking though.


    "A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by AdminQuetzal, posted 02-08-2007 4:02 PM AdminQuetzal has not yet responded

        
    NosyNed
    Member
    Posts: 8842
    From: Canada
    Joined: 04-04-2003
    Member Rating: 6.7


    Message 5 of 188 (383590)
    02-08-2007 4:21 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    Coverage and meaning
    This study, conducted in 1993, has had virtually no coverage.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "virtually no coverage" but I remember it being all over the regualar newspapers at the time and certainly all the popsci mags.

    As for my view of it:

    Does this mean that such a Flood really did exist? If so, is this inconsequential to you?

    I've grown up my whole life reading suggestions that the flood story grew from large, rare local floods occuring and being enhanced with story telling.

    This is another candidate for a really large (a new sea born) and very rare(happened once) local flood so it doesn't really change much except give a very good candidate for such an idea.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 5:44 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

      
    RickJB
    Member (Idle past 3102 days)
    Posts: 917
    From: London, UK
    Joined: 04-14-2006


    Message 6 of 188 (383591)
    02-08-2007 4:23 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    I saw a documentary about this hypothesis a few years ago.

    At the time I was aware that it divided the scientific community not so much in terms of its possibility, but in terms of the time at which it might have happened.

    Furthermore, there is also some consensus that the entire mediterranean underwent a similar type of flood (though the straights of Gibraltar) at some point after the last ice age.

    The idea of such floods doesn't trouble scienitsts - they are physically plausible. There is no cover up! What does trouble them is the idea of a physically impossible global flood 6000 years ago.

    As for of the "historicity" of the Bible. Any text, no matter how mythical, can provide a certain amount of historical information. In that sense the Bible can be considered to be no different from the Epic of Gilgamesh.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 6:02 PM RickJB has responded

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 14826
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 7 of 188 (383595)
    02-08-2007 4:33 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    quote:

    Its been my experience that there are two general beliefs concerning the Flood that are expressed in modern literature. One group comes from a die hard creationist viewpoint that seem to invent any corollary or parallel, real or imagined, that might somehow make a literal interpretation of Genesis all the more literal. The second group is the very antithesis of the first, where the mere mention of such a veritable flood of biblical proportions is automatically considered patently absurd only the basis of personal incredulity. In either case, from a scientific standpoint, both are heresy in my opinion as bias is introduced from the get-go.

    A global Flood is rejected BECAUSE that's what the scientific evidence shows. A global flood simply isn't a credible possibility.

    quote:

    The author, Ian Wilson, does not believe in a young earth model due to what he believes is a stark lack of evidence. In fact, I don't even think he's a theist, or even at the least, someone who believes in the Abrahamic faiths. If he is, he doesn't make any mention of it. However, he noticed a great paradox. The paradox was that there was, before the inquiry was taken, no real evidence of a massive Flood that could be seen. Indeed he scorns the likes of Ron Wyatt and his work on an archeological expedition that Wyatt claims to have uncovered the actual Ark in the mountains of Ararat.

    As has been shown in the discussions of Wyatt many YECs also reject Ron Wyatt's claims. John Baumgardner, for instance. Wilson's rejection of Wyatt is not significant evidence of his religious beliefs.

    On the other hand Wilson has written a number of other books - subjects including the Turin Shroud, Nostradamus, Stigmata. He seems to be something of a lover of the "paranormal".

    You also give the impression that Wilson was in some way behind the expedition, although I have seen no evidence that that is the case and I do not find it credible.

    quote:

    In closing, I have a two part question geared towards theists and atheists alike. To the atheists, I ask, what does this information say to you about the validity of a considerable flood? Note that we do not, as of yet, know with certainty that this was a "global" flood. We know empirically that this was considered global to the inhabitants. Does this mean that such a Flood really did exist? If so, is this inconsequential to you?

    We know - with certainty - that it is NOT a global flood because it was confined to the area of the Black Sea. Unless you are seriously suggesting that the rest of the planet did not exist. And it is certainly of no great consequence to me. Maybe the Noah story is a distorted memory of the Black Sea Flood - if so it makes a good argument against conservative Christians who insist that the flood story is largely accurate.

    See what these Christians have to say
    http://www.christiananswers.net/q-crs/crs-blacksea.html

    And Glen Morton's report here points out that the rate of infilling is not quite a sudden catastrophe -
    http://home.entouch.net/dmd/bseaflod.htm

    The highest rate reported is 400 feet in a year. Rapid but not quite up to Noah's Flod levels. However, since then other researchers have found evidence that the rate of infill was far slower.

    And the 1993 study recived considerable publicity at the time. For you to say that it has been downplayed is simply wrong. The 2002 study rebutting the work is less well-known. I suppose it recieves less publicity now because it is not close enough to Noah's Flood to be promoted much by the Biblical literalists and because the claims of a sudden flood have not stood up.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

        
    Coragyps
    Member
    Posts: 5381
    From: Snyder, Texas, USA
    Joined: 11-12-2002
    Member Rating: 8.4


    Message 8 of 188 (383604)
    02-08-2007 4:49 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    Hmm. This all seems to be an extension, if you will, of Ryan and Pitman's book Noah's Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries about the Event That Changed History. I read it several years ago - pretty plausible-sounding stuff. Not "hushed up" at all, either: it was a best-seller and National Geographic, I think it was, did an article and TV show on it. And the authors are oceanographer types.

    Though I have seen, somewhere, contrary opinions about the filling-up of the Black Sea.

    As to your question: I'd be astonished if big floods weren't recorded in mythology. I'd be more astonished by far if anyone could come up with a scrap of evidence for a truly global flood in the last half-billion years or so. But yes, if the Black Sea filled up like Ryan & Pittman postulate, the folks there would have thought "the whole world's drowning!"


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 36 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-09-2007 7:11 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

        
    Jazzns
    Member (Idle past 2023 days)
    Posts: 2657
    From: A Better America
    Joined: 07-23-2004


    Message 9 of 188 (383609)
    02-08-2007 4:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    In closing, I have a two part question geared towards theists and atheists alike.

    Why do you gear it just toward athesits and theists and yet segregate the idea of no global flood to the atheists. I certainly am not an atheist and I also know there was no global flood.

    A good treatment of this is also given in the book called Noah's Flood by Ryan and Pittman.

    To the atheists, I ask, what does this information say to you about the validity of a considerable flood?

    We learned about catastrophic flooding in geology 101 in college. I doubt that this is much a shocker to anyone who is mildly educated in geosciences. I doubt you could find a single statement from a modern geologist that would ever state that catastrophic flooding, especially in this circumstances of a natural dam, has not happened.

    Note that we do not, as of yet, know with certainty that this was a "global" flood.

    It most certainly was not a global flood. We are pretty sure there is not enough water in the Mediterranean to flood the world. There was enough to fill up the Black Sea basin pretty quick though.

    We know empirically that this was considered global to the inhabitants. Does this mean that such a Flood really did exist? If so, is this inconsequential to you?

    We know that the flood was probably pretty traumatic to the inhabitants. Enough to cause them to create lore about it. As it was though there was probably very little casualties due to the flooding as they estimate the flooding would only have encroached upon land at a rate of 1 mile per day. This is very catastrophic to non-nomadic people but it is not going to wipe out all things that have the breath of life. Pretty much anyone that could move about as fast as my great grandma could easily avoid drowning.

    What is traumatic about it all is that you have to leave your shelters and any food or other objects that you couldn't carry behind. It is hypothesized that these cultures where beginning to have agriculture so that would be a big blow.

    The second question is geared towards biblicists. This study, conducted in 1993, has had virtually no coverage.

    Only for people who have enough room in their brains for the 7 o'clock news and nothing else. Like I said above, we learned about the black sea flooding in geo 101. Not exactly the pinnacle of academic obscurity.

    And of that which is mentioned, it is routinely dumbed down in an apparent view of it being inconsequential.

    You mean just like any other scientific finding that makes it to popular press?

    Do you find it disheartening that some people have divorced themselves from this discovery, and if so, do you attribute it to them denying it over its greater implications-- such as, the denial of the Bible's historicity?

    You are probably going to need to provide evidence that anyone has really divorced themselves from the discovery. Geologists certainly consider the discovery of the Black Sea flooding a pretty major geological event that happen at a very interesting time; the birth of agriculture and the very advent of history itself.

    If anyone is denying the importance of this event it is YEC's. A YEC will tell you that this could not be the flood of the Noah myth because it was not global and did not kill everyone else on earth other than Noah and his family just like the Bible says. In fact, it probably didn't kill more than a small percentage of the people directly affected by it and most of them probably died from secondary effects from forced relocation. Certainly not drowning like the Bible says.

    Yet it undercuts the story from the Bible because it is a source for all the common flood myths that most Biblical literalists claim lends validity to the Bible. Moreover, the Bible is terribly innacurate about the details of the flood pointing out exactly the mythical constructs that people who are not Biblical literalists point out all the time.

    The story of Noah just very well might be a copy of a copy of a copy of an oral story that has been handed down through generations about a real flood that affected real people. The discovery of the Black Sea flood certainly lends credence to that idea.

    Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.


    Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 40 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-09-2007 8:33 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30936
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 10 of 188 (383617)
    02-08-2007 5:15 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 1:57 PM


    If you are saying what actually is in the book, the author is an idiot.
    A review of NASA satellite photos revealed that the Bosporous straight and the entire Anatolian region, which lies at a major collision point of several tectonic plates, allowed the Mediterranean to burst through the Bosporous dyke and began to flood an extremely large region-- namely, the Mesopotamian valley.

    Uhmmmm. Nonsense.

    I really doubt that the book says than and if it does, then the author is an idiot.

    The dyke, if it existed (and there is much evidence that it did) would have simply flooded the Black Sea. It is in no way related to the Mesopotamian valley.

    In addition there is no way flooding the Black Sea would be able to move some Ark up into mountains that are considerable distance away and far above the sea level in the Black Sea.

    Have you actually read the Book?

    Does the author actually make such stupid claims?


    Aslan is not a Tame Lion
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 1:57 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

      
    Hyroglyphx
    Member
    Posts: 5622
    From: Austin, TX
    Joined: 05-03-2006


    Message 11 of 188 (383635)
    02-08-2007 5:44 PM
    Reply to: Message 5 by NosyNed
    02-08-2007 4:21 PM


    Re: Coverage and meaning
    I'm not sure what you mean by "virtually no coverage" but I remember it being all over the regualar newspapers at the time and certainly all the popsci mags.

    Given the fact that its been recorded by virtually all ancient civilizations within Mesopotamia or within a relative proximity of Mesopotamia, coupled by the fact that this was an enormous catastrophic event makes the discovery, in my mind, a significant event-- easily as large, if not larger than the meteorite in the Yucatan peninsula that is alleged to have wiped out the majority of dinosaurs. And yet, as you say, its listed mostly in popsci novels and magazines only. There seems to be some disparity there.

    I've grown up my whole life reading suggestions that the flood story grew from large, rare local floods occuring and being enhanced with story telling.

    Which is certainly a legitimate possibility.

    Thanks for your input.


    "A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 02-08-2007 4:21 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 13 by PaulK, posted 02-08-2007 6:05 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
     Message 14 by Jazzns, posted 02-08-2007 6:06 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

        
    Hyroglyphx
    Member
    Posts: 5622
    From: Austin, TX
    Joined: 05-03-2006


    Message 12 of 188 (383648)
    02-08-2007 6:02 PM
    Reply to: Message 6 by RickJB
    02-08-2007 4:23 PM


    Discovery channrl
    I saw a documentary about this hypothesis a few years ago.

    I saw a documentary on this theory too, except that, it appeared to be geared towards "debunking" the Genesis version in favor of a bizarre interpretation of the Epic of Gilgamesh. It also relied heavily on speculative notions.

    Furthermore, there is also some consensus that the entire mediterranean underwent a similar type of flood (though the straights of Gibraltar) at some point after the last ice age.

    The author went into that as well, but he only commented on it briefly. He also asserted that the last ice age was over some three thousand before this occurence took place. I'm not sure if he'll go into this topic because I'm only about 90 pages in to the book, but I'm wondering if such a large Flood indeed existed, even if it was generalized in the Mesopotamian region, the water level still would have been so high that it would have effected low lying areas all over the world. I mean, growing up in Miami, which is only one foot about sea level, I used to dig up countless aquatic fossil remains as easily as if I were looking for stones. There is no question that in the neighborhoods that I once lived was certainly at one time under water. But I wonder if such a massive flood had anything to do with that.

    The idea of such floods doesn't trouble scienitsts - they are physically plausible. There is no cover up! What does trouble them is the idea of a physically impossible global flood 6000 years ago.

    The idea advanced by certain creationists is that during the antediluvian era that was not nearly as much water as there is today. They hypothesize over that because certain underwater regions appear to be like canyons formed by rushing water. And how they account for the much higher volume of water is that they believe, based on the Bible, that there was a "firmament" that acted as a vapor canopy. They have seemed to abandon this theory, however. The second is that huge resevoirs of water were underground, according to parts of the Bible and the Book of Jasher. The claim is that the water was initially fresh, however, over time salt deposits accumulate over time as rivers carry these deposits in to the sea all the time. It is true that oceans are getting saltier all the time, but so far, no serious model has been presented to corroborate the claim.

    As for of the "historicity" of the Bible. Any text, no matter how mythical, can provide a certain amount of historical information. In that sense the Bible can be considered to be no different from the Epic of Gilgamesh.

    I think most folklore contains large elements of truth. I jut a very interesting special on Greek mythology on how certain lores came about. I assume, though, that you can see a vast difference between the majority of mythology and the Bible from a textual analysis, regardless of whether or not you view the Bible to be unreliable.


    "A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 6 by RickJB, posted 02-08-2007 4:23 PM RickJB has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by Jazzns, posted 02-08-2007 6:10 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
     Message 18 by Coragyps, posted 02-08-2007 6:32 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
     Message 23 by RickJB, posted 02-09-2007 4:33 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
     Message 27 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2007 7:35 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

        
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 14826
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 13 of 188 (383650)
    02-08-2007 6:05 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 5:44 PM


    Re: Coverage and meaning
    There was serious sicentific coverage, too. However you won't find so much now because, as I have said, more recent studies (2002) indicate that the infill was far slower than originally thought.

    quote:

    Given the fact that its been recorded by virtually all ancient civilizations within Mesopotamia or within a relative proximity of Mesopotamia, coupled by the fact that this was an enormous catastrophic event makes the discovery, in my mind, a significant event-- easily as large, if not larger than the meteorite in the Yucatan peninsula that is alleged to have wiped out the majority of dinosaurs. And yet, as you say, its listed mostly in popsci novels and magazines only. There seems to be some disparity there.

    There are two reasons why it is not. First it is just one possible source - and more recent studies have made it muich less credible (IIRC many versions of the story are far more similar to each other than they are to the actual Black Sea flood - even if the original high rate of flooding is assumed. That suggests that the spread is more likely due to cultural influences than the event itself).

    Secondly the magnitude of the event is far smaller. The K/T extinction was a major event worldwide. The Black Sea flood affected - the Black Sea. Now there's a major disparity.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 5:44 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

        
    Jazzns
    Member (Idle past 2023 days)
    Posts: 2657
    From: A Better America
    Joined: 07-23-2004


    Message 14 of 188 (383652)
    02-08-2007 6:06 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 5:44 PM


    Re: Coverage and meaning
    The other reason it might not be as prominent as you would like it is simply that there are a number of very big open questions about the flood IIRC.

    We don't know the extent of populations that lived there yet so we can only specualte how influential the flood would have been to a pre-historical+1 society.

    There are vast areas of the ancient coastline to explore and it is still relativly expensive to do science underwater.

    There is also the question of if the flood was catasrophic enough to create lore.

    Given what we do know it certainly is a pretty good canidate for the source of the flood myths but it doesn't have to be. The problem is that regular flooding happens normally all the time with catastrophic consequences all over the world. So it is likely that some of the flood myths being attributed to the Black Sea flood may in fact be about run of the mill seasonal flooding that got out of hand one year.

    If your complaint is that this is being covered up then you need to take off your tinfoil hat and realize that science moves slowly and shouldn't jump to conclusions without evidence. The investigation of the Black Sea as it relates to pre-historic lore is cross-disciplinary and delicate.

    You really should read Noah's Flood by Ryan and Pittman. They go into depth about the kinds of evidence they would expect to find if the Black Sea flood could reasonably be called the source of the common flood myths. The basic rundown is.

    1. The flood would have to be catastrophic to the inhabitants so therefore.
    1a. They would have to be stationary societies, non-nomadic
    1b. Have an investment in the natural resources of the location, freshwater, agriculture, etc

    2. The flood would have to happen in a time period where there was a significant enough civilization to preserve lore

    3. There should be linguistic similarities between cultures that were seperated by the flood. (there is some neat evidence for this!)

    4. There should be evidence of mass migration into surrounding areas near the time of the flood. (there is some neat evidence for this too!)

    + much more in the book.


    Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 5:44 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

      
    Jazzns
    Member (Idle past 2023 days)
    Posts: 2657
    From: A Better America
    Joined: 07-23-2004


    Message 15 of 188 (383655)
    02-08-2007 6:10 PM
    Reply to: Message 12 by Hyroglyphx
    02-08-2007 6:02 PM


    Re: Discovery channrl
    In particular, the flood did not reach Mesopotamia for a number of reasons.

    1. There is no geological evidence for this yet there is uninterrupted evidence for other geologic processes at the same time. This is in direct contradiction to a mesopotamian flood.

    2. There is a lot of evidence that there was mass migration of pre-semetic people FROM the Black Sea area to mesopotamia at the same time as the flood. You can't be flooding an area at the same time you are setting up shop to build a new civilization.


    Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-08-2007 6:02 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by jar, posted 02-08-2007 6:15 PM Jazzns has responded

      
    1
    23456
    ...
    13NextFF
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019