Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
26 online now:
AZPaul3, kjsimons, Tanypteryx (3 members, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Happy Birthday: Anish
Post Volume: Total: 863,466 Year: 18,502/19,786 Month: 922/1,705 Week: 174/518 Day: 48/52 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does The Flood Add up?
Teggy
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 298 (230876)
08-08-2005 6:18 AM


This is not a question based on scientific research of the flood,
mostly just common sense.

1) Since Hinduism is the oldest organized religion in the world, Mustn't have Noah taken two Hindus with him as well? (I'm sure there were many more religions than just 2 at this time in history as well.
Such as perhaps the actual oldest: Keltic, and the burial practices of Neanderthal). And wouldnt it also follow that if the world was flooded for 40 days and 40 nights that these Hindu's were about the most ignorant people that have ever lived seeing as though they continued with their religion in the aftermath of of a completely different Doctrinal Diety Flooding of the world? If the flood actually happened it would be insane to keep following your own personal faith if were just faced with the wrath of a completely different God of your own worship.

2)How would you explain the Native American existence in the western Hemisphere? Given Noah and his fellow human surivors restarted mankinds journey in the middle east 4,000 years ago, and Native Americans came over the landbridge into America about 10,000 years ago, do these numbers even add up? These next numbers even weaken my previous challenge seeing as the dates are younger: There are remnants of civilization s in south America over 3,000 years old! So The only "Flood happened" explanation to this would be, immediately after the flood, human populations rose extremely quick, and somehow in 20 generations, one branch successfuly migrated to South America from the Middle East, in about 600 years, and another group fully populated China, India, Africa, and Europe through many splits. The timeframe for this expansion (considering the size of the S.A. Cities and Cultures of that age) just don't fit. Needless to mention the Migration to SA has alot of evidence of occuring about 10,000 years ago, even before Mankind was supposed to exist by creation terms.

http://archeonet.nl/engels.php?itemid=4717&catid=25 <- SA civil.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/firstnations/theories.html
^ Migration to Americas


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nwr, posted 08-08-2005 10:48 PM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 8 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 10:10 AM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 9 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-16-2006 7:31 PM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 22 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 4:07 AM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 78 by inkorrekt, posted 05-04-2006 10:30 PM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 102 by Crue Knight, posted 06-07-2006 8:44 PM Teggy has not yet responded
 Message 215 by Faith, posted 07-03-2006 3:57 AM Teggy has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12630
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 2 of 298 (230925)
08-08-2005 10:02 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 3 of 298 (231202)
08-08-2005 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Teggy
08-08-2005 6:18 AM


I have a few common sense questions of my own to add.
1: How did the two koalas and kangaroos get back to Australia after the flood, and why were they not noticed in the middle east?
2: How did the pair of echidnas survive when there was only one pair of termites for them to eat, and how did the termites survive if they were eaten?
3: Koalas are very fussy eaters. How much eucalyptus leaves did they have to store on the ark, and where did they find the refrigerator to keep those leaves fresh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Teggy, posted 08-08-2005 6:18 AM Teggy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Randy, posted 08-21-2005 3:46 PM nwr has responded
 Message 10 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-16-2006 7:34 PM nwr has not yet responded
 Message 216 by Faith, posted 07-03-2006 4:08 AM nwr has responded

nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 4 of 298 (235241)
08-21-2005 12:13 PM


BUMP
This thread was started almost 2 weeks ago. As yet, no flood proponent has responded to the questions raised.

Or should we assume all are in agreement, that it does not add up?


Randy
Member (Idle past 4531 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 5 of 298 (235282)
08-21-2005 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by nwr
08-08-2005 10:48 PM


Biogeography
I have a few common sense questions of my own to add.
1: How did the two koalas and kangaroos get back to Australia after the flood, and why were they not noticed in the middle east?
2: How did the pair of echidnas survive when there was only one pair of termites for them to eat, and how did the termites survive if they were eaten?
3: Koalas are very fussy eaters. How much eucalyptus leaves did they have to store on the ark, and where did they find the refrigerator to keep those leaves fresh?

These questions are a subset of the biogeography problem in the thread I started that is below. Biogeography is an unsolvable dilema for YECs but so are the questions raised in the OP of this thread. A virtually endless list of geological and other problems exists for the flood myth as well. Clearly the answer to the question in the title of this thread is that the global flood dosen't "add up".

Randy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nwr, posted 08-08-2005 10:48 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by nwr, posted 08-21-2005 4:10 PM Randy has not yet responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 6 of 298 (235284)
08-21-2005 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Randy
08-21-2005 3:46 PM


Re: Biogeography
Thanks for that link to an older thread. I'll be browsing through that. I haven't found any good flood proponent arguments in the first 40 posts.

It always seemed obvious to me that the flood story was a fable. Perhaps that's because I'm Australian by birth, and the flood story did not seem consistent with our unique fauna. But one would think it should be just as obvious to Americans, and for similar reasons.

Added in edit:

I have now finished reading that biogeography thread. It was hilarious, particularly after Robert Byers joined in. I had to keep checking my browser to see if I had been redirected to the Onion.

This message has been edited by nwr, 08-21-2005 06:23 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Randy, posted 08-21-2005 3:46 PM Randy has not yet responded

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2212 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 7 of 298 (235338)
08-21-2005 10:41 PM


the flood, as a local event, is no less well supported than the myriad other flood stories (almost if not every culture has one). however, outside of recalling the 'waters' upon the earth and exampling the threat of returning the world to how it began (hmm possibly a collapsed then re-expanded universe *ponders*) which was then one again established, a global flood as a recent phenomena is utter daydream. but then this requires the acceptance of modern science, which tends to be a problem.

AlgolagniaVolcae
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 298 (293222)
03-08-2006 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Teggy
08-08-2005 6:18 AM


1) I've always been under the impression that the Aborigine Dreamtime is the oldest religion.

2) Once again I reference the Aborigines whose culture is estimated to be sixty thousand years old, how can they be explained away to make room for the biblical flood? If memory serves me correctly though, they have a local flood story.

In their creationism story a diety known as the Rainbow Serpent is responsible for life.

They have no written language unless of course you count the pictographs on Aryes Rock, all of their history is passed down verbally from generation to generation.

This message has been edited by AlgolagniaVolcae, 03-08-2006 10:19 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Teggy, posted 08-08-2005 6:18 AM Teggy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-16-2006 7:37 PM AlgolagniaVolcae has not yet responded

LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3368 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 9 of 298 (296077)
03-16-2006 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Teggy
08-08-2005 6:18 AM


Good questions :)

1: If Noah's flood was local (ie black sea, somewhere in mesopotamia or Africa) then he really didnt have to take hindus on board. Or their gods. And you cant go by a strict chronology of the Genesis account. There are numerous, nemerous gaps within them. Plus hinduism may not have been around when Noah was in his Ark.

2: If the flood was local, and happened the far distant past, then there is no conflict here.

This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 03-16-2006 07:38 PM


"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Teggy, posted 08-08-2005 6:18 AM Teggy has not yet responded

LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3368 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 10 of 298 (296079)
03-16-2006 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by nwr
08-08-2005 10:48 PM


For your 3 questions...

If the flood was located in the Middle East or the Black sea, then they definitely were not on board.

And since we are dealing with a supernatural account, you cant inspect it all and explain it all scientifically. Therefore you cant debink it scientifically.


"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nwr, posted 08-08-2005 10:48 PM nwr has not yet responded

LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 3368 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 11 of 298 (296082)
03-16-2006 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by AlgolagniaVolcae
03-08-2006 10:10 AM


You right dude
Youre right dude: Aborigine religion is far older than Hinduism. The oldest religion we know about is Shamanism, which no doubt includes Australian Aboriginal religion. Hinduism doesn't even come close to the age of Shamanistic religions, though it is the oldest major religion today (see pages 40-41 of "Norris McWhirter's Book of Historical Records")


"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 10:10 AM AlgolagniaVolcae has not yet responded

boolean
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 298 (296977)
03-21-2006 12:15 AM


quote:
:AlgolagniaVolcae

1) I've always been under the impression that the Aborigine Dreamtime is the oldest religion.

2) Once again I reference the Aborigines whose culture is estimated to be sixty thousand years old, how can they be explained away to make room for the biblical flood? If memory serves me correctly though, they have a local flood story.


This is a very important point, because when this story was first written, they would have had no idea Aborigines existed. But what difference does it make if they knew about them or not if the flood was real? Should their knowledge of the world around them have affected the stories in any way? No, it should not have, because we are told the author was writing about facts. Yet, despite the fact that the author had no idea there were Aborigines when he wrote his story, God didn't seem to either. And when talking about how many animals there were in the world, God seemed to only know about as many animals in the world as the authors at that time. If I didn't know any better, I would say someone just made it up based on what they knew of the world at the time

It reminds me of the group that believes there is a race of people at the centre of the earth, an idea that came around the early 17th century. To quote from SkepDics.com:

quote:

In the late 17th century, British astronomer Edmund Halley proposed that Earth consists of four concentric spheres and "also suggested that the interior of the Earth was populated with life and lit by a luminous atmosphere. He thought the aurora borealis, or northern lights, was caused by the escape of this gas through a thin crust at the poles."

He spent most of his life gathering believers, and one of them being John Symmes :

quote:

One of the most ardent supporters of hollow-earth was the American John Symmes. Symmes was an ex-army officer and a business man. Symmes believed that the Earth was hollow and at the north and south poles there were entrances, 4,000 and 6,000 miles wide, respectively, that led to the interior.

After all this time, follower after follower put their own spin on the tale, some changing their names and starting cults based around it (Cyrus Read Teed for example).

Finally, after all this time, after all these believers, after stories of people actually GOING to the center of the earth and confirming it was real:

quote:

United States Navy Admiral Richard Byrd flew across the North Pole in 1926 and the South Pole in 1929 without seeing any holes leading to inner-earth. Photographs taken by astronauts in space show no entrances either. Modern geology indicates the Earth is mostly a solid mass.

The myths never matched up with what we knew about the world today, and those who believe in this story have suddenly become very few. This is just another case where the story created by the original author was based purely on the fact that nobody could DISPROVE the story at the time, and when we have the technology and the evidence to show their claims are false, there are still some out there who believe the government is hiding the truth, or that they missed it (despite the entrances being 4,000 and 6,000 miles wide)

So is the power of refusing to believe you were wrong.


Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Faith, posted 07-03-2006 4:14 AM boolean has not yet responded

boolean
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 298 (296983)
03-21-2006 12:58 AM


I think part of the reason this thread is not getting much activity is because the thread title is quite broad. So far we have been focusing on the discussion of other cultures who lived at the time of the flood who should have been wiped out, and I think that the thread title should reflect that. (it might get a bit more traffic then). I propose that, should the OP or the staff have the ability to edit the thread title, that we change it to something more fitting like:

*Cultures who survived the flood

*A world wide flood that Australia never heard of?

*Underwater Aborigines? =P


Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by AdminNWR, posted 03-21-2006 9:07 AM boolean has not yet responded

anglagard
Member
Posts: 2200
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 14 of 298 (296986)
03-21-2006 2:03 AM


Somewhere I read about 30 years ago that Noah's Ark, provided it accomodated 2 of each species of the non-aquatic biosphere and provisioned the food for such life for 40 days, would according to the biblical measurements, scaled up to present reality, have to be at least 60 miles long. Anyone else familiar with this seemingly reasonable combination of current observational (number of observed species) and mathematical (engineering-wise 60 mile wooden boat) disproof of the Noah's Ark legend?

This message has been edited by anglagard, 03-21-2006 02:11 AM

This message has been edited by anglagard, 03-21-2006 02:14 AM


Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Posit, posted 03-21-2006 6:26 AM anglagard has not yet responded
 Message 218 by Faith, posted 07-03-2006 4:19 AM anglagard has not yet responded

  
Posit
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 298 (296993)
03-21-2006 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by anglagard
03-21-2006 2:03 AM


It's curious how much effort is spent by creationists attempting to explain Noah's Ark as scientifically feasible when the story is one of Divine Intervention.

If we make this, this, and this assumption -- if the Ark contained "kinds" instead of "species", if most animals hibernated and thus required no care, if migratory instinct brought them there, if the continental shelves and mountain chains were all squished down back then so the world's present water could cover all the land, etc. etc. --- why, it's possible!

It seems that in coming up with a secular explanation, they're shooting themselves in the foot. After all, if the story is feasible without resorting to the supernatural, then one need not invoke the supernatural to explain it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by anglagard, posted 03-21-2006 2:03 AM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Posit, posted 03-21-2006 6:47 AM Posit has not yet responded
 Message 43 by inkorrekt, posted 04-24-2006 9:39 PM Posit has not yet responded
 Message 85 by simple, posted 05-12-2006 8:17 PM Posit has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019