Impreccable proof for the Biblical Flood

[Nathan Poe]

Gettting back on topic, has anyone yet provided "impeccable proof [of any kind] for the Biblical flood"?

 

[rjc34]

Gettting back on topic, has anyone yet provided "impeccable proof [of any kind] for the Biblical flood"?

OP was a poe

 

[rjc34]

I'll pass.

I'll take that as a 'No' and a 'I'm right because I'm right because I'm right'.

 

[Nathan Poe]

OP was a poe

Yes, but you'd think after 400+ posts, one of our local flood-worshippers would be on the case.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'll take that as a 'No' and a 'I'm right because I'm right because I'm right'.

Suit yourself -- but if you read the question, and don't even get a hint as to why I'm not answering it, then you deserve to take my answer wrong.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Suit yourself -- but if you read the question, and don't even get a hint as to why I'm not answering it, then you deserve to take my answer wrong.

You just indicated -- quite clearly -- that you have no intention of providing an answer.

And even if you did, it would bear no relevance to the topic at hand -- is anyone able to provide "impeccable proof [of any kind] for the Biblical flood"?

 

[rjc34]

You just indicated -- quite clearly -- that you have no intention of providing an answer.

And even if you did, it would bear no relevance to the topic at hand -- is anyone able to provide "impeccable proof [of any kind] for the Biblical flood"?

"Many Christians today think the Flood of Noah’s time was only a local flood, confined to somewhere around Mesopotamia. This idea comes not from Scripture, but from the notion of ‘billions of years’ of Earth history.
But look at the problems this concept involves:

If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.

If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.

If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin. If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of ‘all’ men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

Belief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself."

SOURCE

See, impreccable proof!

 

[DrkSdBls]

"Many Christians today think the Flood of Noah’s time was only a local flood, confined to somewhere around Mesopotamia. This idea comes not from Scripture, but from the notion of ‘billions of years’ of Earth history.
But look at the problems this concept involves:

If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.

If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.

If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin. If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of ‘all’ men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

Belief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself."

SOURCE

See, impreccable proof!

You're forgetting, though about the Babylonian Version of the Story. In that Story the Man in Question was a Fairly Wealthy Merchant who had a Premonition of sorts that his country was going to Flood so he built a Barge and stockpile everything he had (including various Livestock that he bought for this purpose) to outlast the Flood. Afterwards, his country was devastated but he came out probably one of the Wealthiest men in Mesopotamia.

Just because the bible made it Mythical doesn't mean it's that Fantastical.

The question here is, what would you do if you had the same or equal ..... Lets say "Opportunity" to know that something Really Big is going to happen and you alone can do something about it....

Would you choose to try to convince others that you know somethings coming, despite everyone thinking you're Crazy (even thinking yourself Crazy) for maybe such a Claim.....

Or would see it as an opportunity for personal gain?

Or would you stand there, demanding Evidence of the fact?

Hmm... Interesting thought, IMO.

 

[Hespera]

You're forgetting, though about the Babylonian Version of the Story. In that Story the Man in Question was a Fairly Wealthy Merchant who had a Premonition of sorts that his country was going to Flood so he built a Barge and stockpile everything he had (including various Livestock that he bought for this purpose) to outlast the Flood. Afterwards, his country was devastated but he came out probably one of the Wealthiest men in Mesopotamia.

Just because the bible made it Mythical doesn't mean it's that Fantastical.

The question here is, what would you do if you had the same or equal ..... Lets say "Opportunity" to know that something Really Big is going to happen and you alone can do something about it....

Would you choose to try to convince others that you know somethings coming, despite everyone thinking you're Crazy (even thinking yourself Crazy) for maybe such a Claim.....

Or would see it as an opportunity for personal gain?

Or would you stand there, demanding Evidence of the fact?

Hmm... Interesting thought, IMO.

Just because the bible made it Mythical doesn't mean it's that Fantastical

.

The story is fantastical in the extreme.
The reason for the flood, the author of the flood, and the lesson of the flood are all completely disconnected from the Babylonian version, or anything else that could have actually happened.

Other than that there may have been a flood, no detail is true, and few are even possible.

 

[DrkSdBls]

.

The story is fantastical in the extreme.
The reason for the flood, the author of the flood, and the lesson of the flood are all completely disconnected from the Babylonian version, or anything else that could have actually happened.

Other than that there may have been a flood, no detail is true, and few are even possible.

Indeed though you forget the human Penchant for Telling tale tales that get taller each time it's told.

If you could turn the Biblical account of the Flood in to a Mathematical Sum, try to divide it's Total sum by the Amount of time it's been retold of the years, you'll end up with a more reasonable (yet less compelling) story of normal historical flood.

It other words, assuming the Babylonian account is talking about the same flood, one can deduce that the Babylonian version is more "Historical Preserved" (though, maybe a little biased.)

 

[SkyWriting]

Hi, this is my first post here, and I joined because I believe I have some impeccable proof for the Biblical Flood as described in Genesis 7.

By summing geneaologies we know almost exactly when the flood happened:
We also know that at this point all the various species were wiped out except the aquatic ones and those that were on the ark. But can we prove it? Of course! The flood story makes a very specific, and very unlikely prediction: 4,300 years ago, there was a global genetic bottleneck in all species with the following specific criteria:

for aquatic species, no bottleneck.
for clean animals and birds, a bottleneck of population down to 7 males and 7 females
for the rest of the animals, a bottleneck down to 1 male and 1 female.

Furthermore, we know that the mitochondrial DNA is almost exclusively passed on only from mother to child, and the Y chromosome almost exclusively from father to son -- so there is one per pair. (the almost because I'm not completely sure of that). Finally, for diploid species we know the number of alleles is 2 alleles per individual, for each of the thousands of genes there are.

Per the biblical account, this limits the number of different alleles to at most the numbers in the above paragraph. Next, why this should be considered impeccable proof. Consider now the amount of species there are: estimates range from about 2-100 million species (less if we limit this to Kinds, but I don't know the numbers for that). Earlier I said the predictions described would be extremely unlikely. Now to put a number to this: consider the number of species, and the number of genes each species has on average. Multiply those two numbers together and you get the number of individual predictions made by the account of the biblical flood. That number would be at least 2 million species * 1,000 genes per species = 2 billion predictions. Each of those genes has to follow the pattern as described above.

Furthermore, by using a genetic clock (we count the corruption rate of DNA, and the total number of corruptions in the DNA), we can calculate a timeline for the genetic bottleneck. Each of the timelines should give the same number: the bottleneck occurred 4,300 years ago. That, then, is about 2 billion additional predictions. And these few billion predictions are even more specific than the previous ones.

Now about what I said about the predictions being extremely unlikely. Per the above, we can make billions of very specific predictions. The odds that billions of specific predictions just happen to be true (ie, were they random predictions) is pretty much impossible. Therefore, when such predictions are verified we can say with absolute certainty that it was not just a "lucky guess", no more than anyone could credibly say that guessing a billion digit number was just a "lucky guess". (This of course is how certainty in a scientific theory is calculated; the odds that your prediction was a "lucky guess" is the odds that the data does not support your theory). Given the impossibility of the predictions being explained by a "lucky guess", this translates to impeccable proof -- if the predictions can be verified.

OK, now is my question: Has anyone actually gathered the data to verify these predictions? If so, could you give a link to it? I'd dearly love to have something that directly supports a biblical creation to show my evolutionist friends, instead of arguing incessantly about holes in the evolutionary theory. Or, if no one has gathered this data, why not?

You said YOU had proof.
I claim a Chris4243 is a POE.

 

[SkyWriting]

You rang?

Oh, wait -- sorry -- you said Poe or Troll.

My bad.

lol

 

[SkyWriting]

How come creationists don't believe in reading comprehension and/or honesty?

Global flood -- natural?

Think "Tsunami," but on a larger scale.

 

[rjc34]

You said YOU had proof.
I claim a Chris4243 is a POE.

Welcome to the party... you're only a few weeks late.

He's already come out and started debating creationists.

 

[rjc34]

Think "Tsunami," but on a larger scale.

Now THAT would leave a lot of evidence. Too bad we can't see any.

 

[Hespera]

Indeed though you forget the human Penchant for Telling tale tales that get taller each time it's told.

If you could turn the Biblical account of the Flood in to a Mathematical Sum, try to divide it's Total sum by the Amount of time it's been retold of the years, you'll end up with a more reasonable (yet less compelling) story of normal historical flood.

It other words, assuming the Babylonian account is talking about the same flood, one can deduce that the Babylonian version is more "Historical Preserved" (though, maybe a little biased.)

No, Im not forgetting, and you surely dont know that about me!

What I said is correct, IF something ever actually happened, every detail has changed, and could hardly be more fantastical. (Unless you include av's version, with all the extra water going to neptune to serve as a warning beacon against incoming wayward angels)

 

[DrkSdBls]

No, Im not forgetting, and you surely dont know that about me!

It's a human trait. It exists in greater or lesser degree from person to person.

What I said is correct, IF something ever actually happened, every detail has changed, and could hardly be more fantastical. (Unless you include av's version, with all the extra water going to neptune to serve as a warning beacon against incoming wayward angels)

Thank god I don’t accept anything AV says.

But it's Only so fantastical BECAUSE it's mythical. The same could be said of the revolutionary war. Give it 2000 years and our descendants will be telling the story of George Washington lending an army of 300 fighting alone against an invading army of two millon British.

 

[AV1611VET]

Too bad we can't see any.

Too bad for whom? we get a special blessing for not seeing evidence, yet believing.

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thank god I don’t accept anything AV says.

Hmmm -- the earth isn't 4.5 billion years old? microevolution doesn't happen? creationism is science? ID can't take a hike?

Oh, let me guess ... you're going to come back and say I don't really believe this, right?

Nathan Poe, for example, has 29,798 posts -- would it be right to say you don't accept anything he says? or everything?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Too bad for whom? we get a special blessing for not seeing evidence, yet believing.

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Barnum 3:16 There's a sucker born every minute.