Summations Only

the technical reasons to dispute this claim have already been covered so I will just add some advise. That does not even sound remotely plausible.Mammoths last existed in Siberia around 8000 BCE (Mammoth - Wikipedia). I know that terms like 'fresh' and 'perfect' are subjective but any meat that has been frozen for 10 000 years is not going to be good. 12 months is the longest you should keep meat in a deep freeze. It wont kill you to eat it, it will just be bad to eat. A 10 000 year froaen steak is going to be very, very bad. This also does not sound plausible. If an animal dies in any sub zero temperature, decomopsition will be very, very slow. That is why you put food in your fridge and freezer. If it was a few degrees below zero, the temperature of an animal no longer producing its own body heat will decrease quite rapidly. This is particularly true in very dry air environments like Siberia.Plain old common sense should ring alarm bells when reading information like what you have posted.My advise to you before posting -1. Consider your source. If the source you are about to quote has obvious reason for bias, find a second source. Just to double check the information for accuracy.2. Have a think about what you are about to post. If you think about it critically and it sounds a little implausible or too good to be true, then it probably is. Double check your information.Many of the regular posters here are degree or higher qualified and are used to critical reasoning so when you post on the science side make sure your work has had a polish.

This website is a gathering point for a great many individuals who research, analyse and critically evaluate information on a daily basis. For many of us it is what we do in our careers.Instead of asking questions that will likely never get a straight answer, how about we try to find evidence of some of these claims.Its the Mythbusters approach (no joke intended here).Take a claim, then try to see if we can get it to work.If it wont work, try to establish what would be required to get it to work.In this case, we have two ideas, a recent global flood and a recent regional flood.Can someone from the creationist side of the fence supply an estimated date that this flood occured? If you have a date, please supply a source.If the flood was regional, is there any estimate on what region it occurred in?If we have this estimated date, we can look for evidence of this flood
whether it was global or regional.If we have a region, we can examine this region to see if a regional flood would be plausible for that area.I am willing to put my research skills into this activity.Creationists, give us a place to start and we will use our combined scientific knowledge in an attempt to test your proposed hypothoses.It would be good if you actually worded it as a hypothosis. e.g The flood of Noah was a global flood that occurred in 1500 BCE.Can we start with time and location ideas first, then we could move onto hypothoses related to how it occured and the aftermath etc.What do you reckon?Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

Genesis is more than one sentence.Just because you can take one part of sentence and make it sound scientific does not mean the rest of the document is scientific. Genesis is 50 chapters of text. Do you really think quoting one word from one sentence makes the entire book scientific?The information you have provided is also quote mined. The full quote is -Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.This loses any scientific credibility as soon as a supernatural being is introduced.I dealt with your claim here Message 17. In that thread I supplied several earlier texts from other religions that mention the beginning. Using your logic, they are also science. And so are the following -"a long time ago in a galaxy far far away"Star Wars is science because there are some galaxies far away."Flintstones. Meet the Flintstones.
They're the modern stone age family.
From the town of Bedrock,
They're a page right out of history."The Flintstones is science because it correctly buts these people into the stone age."Space... is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is..."The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is science because this statement is scientifically accurate."garedle san bipple gron kijefrrepp quark yoble yoble row slek trigno sheppled"That sentence is pure gibberish. But it is also science because it has the word ''quark" in it.You should try thinking before you post things.

How about you try to answer the questions. I see how you have supplied some words there. I also see that they do not actually answer the question. Notice the distict lack of a date in your answer. You seem to believe that you work from the one correct version of the Old Testament (although you wont mention which one in order to avoid any scrutiny) and you seem to believe that you alone are the only one who can correctly interpret the scripture. You claim that the Old Testament contains a complete diarised calendar of events. Given this information, you (in your mind at least) are likley the only person who has ever lived who can actually supply the correct date.So supply the date of Noahs flood. When did the rain start and how long was the region inundated? Can you provide the scripture to support this? Also, 'around Mount Ararat' is a bit unspecific. Giving the highest point in the area as the central location of a flood is a bit illogical. You do know that water runs downhill dont you? Was the flood 100 km around this area? 1000 km maybe? How big was this regional flood? Did it reach as far north east as Sevan Lake or as far South East as Lake Van?With this information we can examine the claim.Try as hard as you can to actually answer those two questions.Before you post your reply, read what you have written and see if it actually answers the questions.The first answer will contain some dates. They will be numbers.The second answer will contain some scripture advising of the location of the flood. It will also contain a description of the region that was flooded. Latitude and longitude coordinates would be great. Landmarks that were the borders of the flooded region will suffice.

Does that make sense on your planet? Your quote may be scientific. Genesis is not. Now you claim to know when the first thought about something occured??? Your claims reach further into fantasy every time you post. Not only have I shown that your claim is not true, I have shown it with 9 examples from various regions and periods in the Great Debate here - Message 17.Your claims are off topic bullshit. If you want to defend your claim, try doing it in the thread specifically created for your to do so.This thread is 'Evidence for a recent flood'. Unless you find a topic titled 'thread for IamJoseph to make random bullshit claims and generally rave about any lunacy he wants' please make an attempt to further the topic.

repeating the same claim without supporting evidence does not make it any more true. It just makes you look like a parrot.here is a chunk from wiki discussing Mount Ararat -

quote:

---

Ararat - The Bible says that Noah's ark landed on the mountains of Ararat. This does not refer to any specific mountain or peak, but rather a mountain range within the region of Ararat, which was the name of an ancient proto-Armenian kingdom also known as Urartu.[6] Nonetheless, one particular tradition identifies the mountain as Mount Masis, the highest peak in the Armenian Highland, which is therefore called Mount Ararat.[6] (As opposed to the Armenian and European tradition, Semitic tradition identifies the mountain as Judi Dagh located in Turkey near Cizre.)[note 1] According to the medieval Armenian historian Moses of Khoren in his History of Armenia, the plain of Ayrarat (directly north of the mountain) got its name after King Ara the Handsome[7] (the great grandson of Amasya). Here the Assyrian Queen Semiramis is said to have lingered for a few days after the death of Ara.[7] According to Thomson, the mountain is called Ararat (Armenian: Արարատ) corresponding to Ayrarat, the name of the province.[note 2][note 3]

​

Ağrı Dağı (Mountain of Ağrı) - The Ottoman Turkish name was Aghur Dagh اغـر طﺎﻍ [note 4] means heavy mountain. Since Ağrı literally means "pain" in Turkic languages such as Azeri and Turkish, the toponym has been popularly rendered as "Painful Mountain". It is almost certainly, however, a borrowing of the Kurdish toponym. Ağrı is also a province in the Eastern Anatolian Region of Turkey, which derived its name from the mountain in 1949.[8] During the Ottoman Empire era the Ağrı village was originally called Karakilise (black church).[9]

​

Masis (Armenian: Մասիս) - is the Armenian name for the peak of Ararat, the plural Masikʿ (Armenian: Մասիք) may refer to both peaks.[7] The History of Armenia derives the name from a king Amasya, the great-grandson of the Armenian patriarch Hayk, who is said to have called the mountain Masis after his own name.[7]

​

iyay Agir (Fiery Mountain), iyay Alavhat and Grdax (Kurdish): This entire tree name referred a volcanic characteristic of Mount Ararat. It is the only name to have a clear, descriptive etymology while also indicating the preservation of folk memory.[9]

​

Kuh-e-Nuh (Noah's Mountain): (Persian: کوه نوح, IPA: [ˈkuːhe ˈnuːx], Kuh-e Nuh) , also influenced by the flood story, this time via the Islamic view of Noah.[9]

---

Mount Ararat - WikipediaAnother wiki chunk -

quote:

---

In Syrian tradition, as well as in Quranic tradition, the specific summit of the "Mountains of Ararat" where Noah's ark landed is identified as Mount Judi in what is today Nakhchivan or northwestern Iran. In the Armenian tradition and Western Christianity, based on Jerome's reading of Josephus, the mountain became associated with Mount Masis (now known as Mount Ararat) the highest peak of the Armenian Highland, located in present day Turkey. During the Middle Ages, this tradition has eclipsed the earlier association with Mount Judi even in Eastern Christianity, and the Mount Judi tradition is now mostly confined to the Islamic view of Noah.

​

The "Mountains of Ararat" in Genesis clearly refer to a general region, not a specific mountain. Biblical Ararat corresponds to Assyrian Urartu (and Persian Arminya) the name of the kingdom which at the time controlled the Lake Van region, which in later centuries, beginning with Herodotus, came to be known as Armenia.[dubious — discuss]

​

The Book of Jubilees (7:1) specifies that the Ark came to rest on one of the peaks of the "Mountains of Ararat" called "Lubar".

​

The Latin Vulgate says "requievitque arca [...] super montes Armeniae", which means literally "and the ark rested [...] on the mountains of Armenia", which was changed to "... mountains of Ararat" (montes Ararat) in the modern Nova Vulgata.[year needed][citation needed]

​

In the book, Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus wrote:
the ark rested on the top of a certain mountain in Armenia ... However, the Armenians call this place, αποβατηριον 'The Place of Descent'; for the ark being saved in that place, its remains are shown there by the inhabitants to this day. Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berosus the Chaldean. For when he is describing the circumstances of the flood, he goes on thus: "It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs." Hieronymus the Egyptian also, who wrote the Phoenician Antiquities, and Mnaseas, and a great many more, make mention of the same. Nay, Nicolaus of Damascus, in his ninety-sixth book, hath a particular relation about them; where he speaks thus: "There is a great mountain in Armenia, over Minyas, called Baris, upon which it is reported that many who fled at the time of the Deluge were saved; and that one who was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top of it; and that the remains of the timber were a great while preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses the legislator of the Jews wrote." (I.3.5-6, trans. William Whiston)

​

Sir Walter Raleigh devoted several lengthy chapters of his History of the World (written c. 1616) to his argument that the "Mountains of Ararat" were anciently understood as including not only those of Armenia, but all the taller mountain ranges extending into Asia far to the east, and that Noah's Ark must have landed somewhere in the Orient, since Armenia is not actually east of Shinar.

---

Mount Ararat - WikipediaCould it be that you are the only person on Earth who has been able to establish the correct geographical location of Mt Ararat?Also, the mountain was renamed Ararat AFTER judaism became popular in the region. It was known as Urartu before that. It may have been the first recording of that name. But this is because the writers gave it that name. I rename Mount Ararat - Mount Coca Cola. This webpage now introduces Mount Coca Cola for the first time, in its correct Geographical location. What does this prove, fuck all and nothing. Noah's Ark Search - Mount Ararat FIne. If you believe that you know the region of the flood, please supply its location. A description that can be followed by looking at a modern day map will be fine. Lat and long coordinates of the borders of the flooded region would be great. You appear to be the only person on Earth who has this information so please be specific. So you wont be attempting to support your claims? You just want to be able to rant and rave without having to substantiate any of your claims? Do you believe that your lunacy has some special reason to be beyond contestation? When you post on a science thread, you should expect to get questioned. And we expect answers. I cant blindly 'clap my hands' because I am not a fundamentalist Jew, Christian or Muslim and I am not an idiot.Get back to the topic of start your own thread.

This has been explained to you in great detail.It is the first recording of this name because they RENAMED it Mount Ararat.Great. I will send the Jews a gold star for renaming a mountain.Also, no geographical location is given in the Old Testament. How can you claim the correct location is given when no location is given?You still have not provided the two pieces of information that you claim to posses and have been asked for repeatedly.1. The time period this flood occured in. The start date and the date the floodwaters receded.2. The boundaries of the flooded region.This is information you have said you have. Provide it.Stop deflecting and wasting everyones time.Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

Is this a request for information from me or IMJ?

Hello IMJ you crazy bastard, and you are most likely reading a copy of the Masoretic text or one of the Septuagints. Let me know shich and I will tell you why they are hardly credible sources. I refuted this here remember - Message 19

no it isn't. That is ridiculous even coming from you. It is not accurate. Your attempts to twist the text and shoe horn it into your innacurate idea of current scientific theory impresses noone. Great. I provided many exampes of earlier texts showing the same thing here Message 17. Who cares? What the fuck are you talking about? I refuted this here Message 19This is wrong also. I refuted it here - Message 18You have 50 posts so far in this thread. And not one of them contains the information you have claimed to have.The closest you can come to the location of Mount Ararat is somewhere near Egypt, or Babylon, or maybe Canaan, somewhere near there.You have not supplied a year.You have not supplied the extent of the flood.We are all asking for you to interpret the text for us.You are the only one who seems to be able to interpret the text correctly.Display this ability.And try, try to stay somewhere close to the topic.

Hey ICANT,You are illustrating one of the big problems with discussing creation with a creationist.Many creationists use different versions of the Bible in order to develop their opinion.Each creationist seems to have their own interpretation of the Bible they choose to use.Most creationists are quick to advise others to ignore people with a different interpretaion.The effect of this is that each creationist has their own version of the events discussed in the real world as well as in forums such as this.Each creationist also discusses their version as it were the truth, they discuss their version as if it were fact.I have heard a lot of different versions of the flood of Noah. Your version is a fresh one.As far as I can tell, if your version were true, there would be no physical evidence. Or the evidence would be nearly impossible to find. This is because the flood occured before the breakup of the continents. It would be difficult to find verifiable evidence of any event occuring prior to the breakup of the continents.I am interested in your version. Maybe you could start a thread to discuss it.However, this thread is about a recent flood and evidence for that recent flood.Considering your version is not recent and would also leave no verifiable evidence, I am not sure where you are trying to take a thread titled 'evidence for a recent flood'.Edited by Butterflytyrant, : reword