Another Flood Question

[inquiring mind]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

 

[PsychoSarah]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

No, and it isn't a theory. In fact, it was disproven before I was even born. No one would be talking about worldwide floods were it not for the fact that it is brought up in Genesis.

 

[inquiring mind]

I didn't say it was a theory, I said it was an account. I asked if it would be a scientific theory today, if it wasn't an account?

 

[christianforumsuser]

The Bible says it happened. What does the Bible say that people talk about?

 

[Subduction Zone]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

No.

To be a theory there must be scientific evidence for an idea. To even begin to have scientific evidence one needs a testable hypothesis or theory. If you can't answer the question: What would prove the flood hypothesis to be wrong? You don't have even a hypothesis and you surly don't have a theory.

 

[christianforumsuser]

Carnal people are carnal. They like sin and money, they like idolatry, boasting of flesh in the Law even if they're religious or atheist. Who says he isn't good...or smart...or if he doesn't say he's smart he says he's humble...if he doesn't say he's clean he boasts of being filthy
Do you know why sinners don't read the Bible properly and can't?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't say it was a theory, I said it was an account. I asked if it would be a scientific theory today, if it wasn't an account?

Nope.

Again, what test would disprove it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Carnal people are carnal. They like sin and money, they like idolatry, boasting of flesh in the Law even if they're religious or atheist. Who says he isn't good...or smart...or if he doesn't say he's smart he says he's humble...if he doesn't say he's clean he boasts of being filthy
Do you know why sinners don't read the Bible properly and can't?

Atheists can read the Bible just as well as Christians can. In fact if you claim that they can't then you are actually insulting your own God and going against what the Bible says itself.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

No; a conventional scientific theory is a well-tested, well-supported explanatory framework. If a worldwide flood wasn't in Genesis, it's hard to see why anyone would even suggest it as a hypothesis, since there's no evidence indicating a global flood, and so nothing to require such an explanation...

 

[christianforumsuser]

If you read the Bible you'd find it to be right. Lots of people hold a Bible and only tell you their own thoughts but point to verses and say "Look! The holy God said it!!!"
Bowing to these idols won't end well...will anyone really repent

If you haven't come across someone who understood the Bible, it just means that.
You might think you've met every type of Christian claiming to be something righteous.

 

[JackRT]

There may be several grains of truth to the flood mythology of Noah and similar mythologies from elsewhere in the ancient Middle East. About 25 years ago it was discovered (" Noah's Flood" by Ryan and Pitman) that in antiquity the Black Sea was a freshwater lake with a water level at least 155 meters (510 feet) below its present level. It was cut off from the Mediterranean Sea by a silt plug in the Straits of Bosporus. This plug broke through about 5600 BC due primarily to the dramatic rise in sea levels caused by the melting that ended the last ice age.. It created an immense waterfall whose sound was most likely audible for 100 or more miles. The Black Sea basin filled to its present level over a period of several weeks. It is estimated that the shore line advanced at the rate of a mile or more per day. For the people living around the lake it was a catastrophe of immense magnitude. It was likely the single most memorable flood in all of human history. The racial memory of this event probably inspired the Gilgamesh epic which in turn inspired the Noah narrative in the Bible. The evidence for this flood is scientifically solid. This prompted the National Geographic Society to finance an underwater search along the ancient shoreline for evidence of pre-flood human habitation. This search has been successful! A settlement has been found at a depth of 90 meters approximately 12 miles off the coast of Turkey. It is in a remarkable state of preservation because it is located in an area of the Black Sea where the water is completely devoid of oxygen with the effect that biological decomposition does not take place. This means that wooden artifacts such as tools, planks, housing beams etc are preserved intact. What is also quite amazing is that while there is solid scientific evidence for this local flood some 7600 YBP, there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood just 4300 YBP. One would think that a more recent, more catastrophic event would have wiped out evidence of the earlier Black Sea event. There is also evidence for a similar event causing the flooding of the Gulf of Arabia about 10,000 YBP.

 

[inquiring mind]

No; a conventional scientific theory is a well-tested, well-supported explanatory framework. If a worldwide flood wasn't in Genesis, it's hard to see why anyone would even suggest it as a hypothesis, since there's no evidence indicating a global flood, and so nothing to require such an explanation...

I see all kinds of documentaries and scientific articles where scientists support the idea of a global flood.

 

[christianforumsuser]

People have a bias
Some want to prove something true and might use nasty unfair methods
Some want to disprove it

Are people really spending so much time on this topic
I might as well turn on the animal documentary on tv and grab some popcorn

Line upon line
Do you know about the science and language you're basing this on...and why you have that bias? This is some shallow stuff seems to me

 

[Job 33:6]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

It would not.

There is evidence for the presence of water in high altitudes. There are also drop stones, massive stones displaced from their original environment. And people used to propose that these evidences, such as ripple marks, in mountains, and fish in mountains, were evidence that the world was submerged. And it was historically proposed that water from the floods lifted drop stones and moved them to distant lands.

It is also believed by some that the mid oceanic ridge is a location in which flood waters protruded from the earth.

But, upon closer examination, we find that the mid oceanic ridge is a rift basin. Fish are in the mountains because of uplift and place tectonics, and drop stones are dropped by glaciers in northern latitudes.

What once was proposed as a scientific hypothesis, never made it beyond a hypothesis.

See below for how what was once by the sea, is lifted into the atmosphere.

 

[JackRT]

I see all kinds of documentaries and scientific articles where scientists support the idea of a global flood.

Discovery channel? History channel? AIG?

I know of no credible science that supports a global flood.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I see all kinds of documentaries and scientific articles where scientists support the idea of a global flood.

For example? (just a sample of examples will be sufficient).

However, you can find someone to support almost any exotic claim; if they're said to be, or call themselves, scientists, it's worth double-checking their credentials and remembering the being a scientist is only significant if the field they're commenting on is their field of speciality.

 

[christianforumsuser]

The evidence is the Bible.
Science can run around and find details that indicate things...but as the trail goes along even if someone reads the data as if it disproves the Bible....wait and see some more evidence

Do you know how dumb most doctors and weathermen and all sorts of PhD people are
Of course if all you've ever seen is that bar/level we call it "smart" in context of that realm
Researchers, college professors, presidents....seem like monkeys hitting tools around trying to get a piece right (and they claim evolution is true at that)

 

[inquiring mind]

Discovery channel? History channel? AIG?

I know of no credible science that supports a global flood.

You don't think one credible scientist would have stepped forward and suggested this possibility, in the absence of the biblical account.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see all kinds of documentaries and scientific articles where scientists support the idea of a global flood.

No, you see all sorts of frauds pretending to be scientists. In the world of science one publicizes one's works in a well respected scientific journal if that person believes in himself. Flood advocates don't do this. Anyone can claim to be a scientist. Real scientists can refer to the work that they have published. When one publishes a new idea others will try to refute it. Flood advocates only have old failed arguments, they are not even able to cross the relatively low bar in science of getting their ideas published

 

[christianforumsuser]

You think you know where to find a smart one? Do you know where those thoughts of yours come from?
You just haven't seen it nor have these people with fancy-looking credentials