Noah's Flood

[Michali]

If you would think about it maybe you would understand. The point of being at christianforums is because you told me it was wrong for me to try and understand what other people think. You yourself are at a christian website just to stumble up faithfull people. Or maybe you like making yourself feel like a rational thinker. About evidence: you are right in saying I have provided you none. We cannot. One must come to God through faith. I have provided you with atleast a reasoning behind our views. You may put away many miracles, but there is one miracle a person cannot deny. The fact that he exists. About evolution: it is true I misunderstood the process, but does that truly make me devoid of reasoning. I'll let you go from there. One day we all know the truth.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

I studied the elevation map and it looks to me like the only place that could have been flooded is Turkey and Armenia. There is a mountain pass toward the East, if it were blocked up, then a 2000+ foot deep lake would be real easy to create in this area.

I see what you are talking about (the flooding of the border between Turkey, Armenia and parts of Iraq).

I assume that also the water would have eventually drained in the Caspian Sea.

But my questions are:

a) Is there any evidence that the area suffered a flood?

b) Is there any evidence of a land bridge existing at one time in the area you describe?

 

[Philosoft]

About the flood, we have to consider how much water is stored up in the clouds and iceburgs *is that how you spell icebergs*. As well as the geology of the ocean floor. We see that now it has been cut away by under surface currents. It may have been at a raised state in comparison to now.

All this has been considered, multiple times, and has always been found lacking, multiple times. Hyper-massive underground reservoirs, extreme short-time changes in land distribution, and vapor canopies are amongst the worst apologetic devices ever devised. The Noachian Flood is undeniably an empirical dead-end. Abandon it. Please.

 

[Siliconaut]

If there's one thing I like about you athiest, it is your ability to stay unified.

Unified only in regards to our perception that the world revolves without a deity's interference. Other than that, there's infinite shades of us, just like with christians, muslims, etc...

Another thing I have seen is your ability to laugh your heads off at smart alek remarks thrown against the religion that has set down the basis for maintaining good and order in the world. Which you reap the benefits from today.

I'm sorry, but that's a common misperception. Christianity has certainly added some of its quaint morals to our society, but in other terms has failed miserably as a moral guidance. Christians have killed each other over laughable matters, but they've been even quicker to kill others who had the unbearable nastiness of resisting their preaching.
This goes for nearly all major religions out there - you've all been found wanting, and this is IMO the main reason for our atheism.

We may be full of misunderstandable scripture, but cut us some slack. It is very anger swelling to hear blasphemous remarks against our -get this- Father.

Well, it is very "anger swelling" to hear moronic remarks about how people should conform their sex lives to the repressed ideas of a few, just to name an example. When people try to back up their homophobia with scripture, they just have to swallow the riposte. Plus, he who is without sin, throweth the first stone...

If you do not like the rude christians who rebuke you in your theories constantly, do not do the same to the whole group.

If people respond intelligently and actually read and understand the posts they answer, I have seldom seen them be-ruded by anyone. It's when ignorance pairs with spitefulness that things go hot...

About the flood, we have to consider how much water is stored up in the clouds and iceburgs *is that how you spell icebergs*.

Huh? A deliberate attempt at being unfriendly (to whoever you adressed that remark)?

As well as the geology of the ocean floor. We see that now it has been cut away by under surface currents. It may have been at a raised state in comparison to now.

What? No, I don't think I remember reading anything about this in any science news source. Please post a link or explain.

 

[Michali]

Ok. I seem to be constantly quoted in all of my posts and I just find it funny. Anyway... I made no funny remark about anyone there silo. I could not remember at the time how to spell iceburg *iceberg*-and still do not. I agree with all of your stuff accept for the judgment on Christianity. You see, it was Judaism that set the standard for what we see as right and wrong. Even though hypocritical christians unjustly slew thousands, atleast through that faith we can view that as wrong. All laws in Judaism are actually for the good of the people hear on Earth.

The oceanfloor is covered with a rocky face that has been wore away by thousands of years of rushing water currents. That is just an obvious fact. If you've ever looked at it, you'll see ridges and crevaces carved away and possibly carried onto dry land. We should atleast consider this if it has never been considered before.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

The oceanfloor is covered with a rocky face that has been wore away by thousands of years of rushing water currents. That is just an obvious fact. If you've ever looked at it, you'll see ridges and crevaces carved away and possibly carried onto dry land. We should atleast consider this if it has never been considered before.

The only obvious fact here is your lack of knowledge with respect to marine geology.

Ridges are sites where new oceanic crust is being formed by the upwelling of molten material from the mantle, and the trenches are places where old oceanic crust is being recycled back into the mantle due to its higher density.

Furthermore there is no mechanism showing that material eroded specifically from the ocean floor has been deposited onto the continents.

 

[JohnR7]

a) Is there any evidence that the area suffered a flood?

The geology would suggest the lakes in this area are very young, and they are drying up. Also the archeology and anthropology is rather an embarrassment to evolutionary theory, because they consider this to be a part of the cradle of civilization. Yet what they find there seems to be moving into the area and not out of the area as they would expect. So it is just the reverse of what they would expect to find.

This is an area where a lot of animals were domesticated, and where crops were first cultivated. Yet everything seems to have moved into this area from the outside fairly recently in man's history.

Outside of the lowlands of Armenia you will find a much richer heritage of archeology, anthropology and more ancient geology.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Ok. I seem to be constantly quoted in all of my posts and I just find it funny. Anyway... I made no funny remark about anyone there silo. I could not remember at the time how to spell iceburg *iceberg*-and still do not. I agree with all of your stuff accept for the judgment on Christianity.

We find it funny too, which is why we continue to quote it.

You see, it was Judaism that set the standard for what we see as right and wrong.

I believe the Buddists, Hindus, Taoists, Shintos, Native Americans, and just about every member of every non-Abrahamic religion on Earth would like to respectfully disagree with you.

Even though hypocritical christians unjustly slew thousands, atleast through that faith we can view that as wrong. All laws in Judaism are actually for the good of the people hear on Earth.

Actually, one does not have to be a Christian to view a history of Christian atrocities as wrong.

The oceanfloor is covered with a rocky face that has been wore away by thousands of years of rushing water currents. That is just an obvious fact. If you've ever looked at it, you'll see ridges and crevaces carved away and possibly carried onto dry land. We should atleast consider this if it has never been considered before.

As has already been explained in this thread, this has been considered, and falsified.

 

[Doctrine1st]

I'm not preaching- I'm serious. Some things cannot be explained or need not be explained.

Do you think that God could create enough water and wind to float the ark onto mount Aratat?

The irony of this whole thing about killing with the deluge is I read somewhere that some 25,000 people a day (mostly children) die everyday from malnutrition. The root cause of their problem.....no rain.

 

[Siliconaut]

I could not remember at the time how to spell iceburg *iceberg*-and still do not.

OK - then I mistook your post in this regard.

You see, it was Judaism that set the standard for what we see as right and wrong.

No, the standard was set much earlier, its codified form dating back to the codex hammurabi. Judaism/Christiantiy borrowed heavily from cultures around it - not necessarily a bad thing, but to have set the "standard" appears a bit too far-fetched. Then, there are the many other cultures with little or no exposure to christianity - these seemed to have done just as well (and badly) in their own way, with often wildly different forms of morality. How are these different then?

Even though hypocritical christians unjustly slew thousands, atleast through that faith we can view that as wrong.

Only partially. If it hadn't been for the European Enlightenment that ended the secular rule of christianity, we'd probably still think burning "witches" was a good idea.

All laws in Judaism are actually for the good of the people hear on Earth.

+++ Error. Does not compute. Out of cheese error. Redo from start. +++
The stoning of adulterating women? Umm... nope, thank you.

The oceanfloor is covered with a rocky face that has been wore away by thousands of years of rushing water currents. That is just an obvious fact. If you've ever looked at it, you'll see ridges and crevaces carved away and possibly carried onto dry land. We should atleast consider this if it has never been considered before.

Ouch. Heed the other posters' advice and get undistorted info on basic geology. It's not a difficult subject to grasp, and lack of knowledge in this area will only make you vulnerable to bamboozlers like Hovind...

 

[Philosoft]

The geology would suggest the lakes in this area are very young, and they are drying up. Also the archeology and anthropology is rather an embarrassment to evolutionary theory, because they consider this to be a part of the cradle of civilization. Yet what they find there seems to be moving into the area and not out of the area as they would expect. So it is just the reverse of what they would expect to find.

What? You'll have to explain this, because right now I don't have any idea what the relatively recent development of human civilization has to do with the whole of evolutionary theory.

 

[lucaspa]

How is it possible for the Red Sea to part?
How is it possible for a bush to burn but not be consumed?
How is it possible for the blind to see?
How is it possible for the dead to be called from their tomb?
How is it possible for Jesus to be ressurrected and save us from our sin???
It's all by the power of God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, Pat, but there is no link between these and the Flood. The Flood story doesn't invoke miracle to have a flood. Just open the "waters above" and "waters below" to get them.

In the Babylonian cosmology, there was a crystal dome in the sky with water above and caverns of water below the earth. However, today we know there is no crystal canopy and no caverns full of water. So the source of water is very relevant. There is no source.

Noah's Flood as a worldwide flood is not an historical event.

 

[JohnR7]

What? You'll have to explain this, because right now I don't have any idea what the relatively recent development of human civilization has to do with the whole of evolutionary theory.

I will give you the link for the web page if your interested to study more on this topic.

http://custance.org/old/flood/ch3.html

 

[Cantuar]

Thank you for a polite reply. I was becoming angry at others for making fun of my Father.

People aren't making fun of your Father. People are making fun of the logical conclusions of the literal reading of Genesis. It makes no sense to accuse atheists of making fun of God; as far as atheists are concerned, God doesn't exist.

 

[Philosoft]

I will give you the link for the web page if your interested to study more on this topic.

http://custance.org/old/flood/ch3.html

This is anthropology, not evolution.

 

[Michali]

The thing about the "Christianity brought goodness" to the world. Of course other religions had the same ethics. Forgive me for not stating the obvious while I was typing. As Americans or even Germans we are mainly affected today by our christian fathers. The closest religion we meet as we trace back our relations (in most cases) is christianity.

This poor man started the thread about the flood. I apologize that it was I who derailed from the track earlier. He seems to atleast know what he's talking about here.

I do not believe you do know for sure that the ocean floor was not carved by the moving water. If those geological formations are caused strictly from activity in the mantle, why are they not so present on dry land? Please do not tell me to look at mountain ranges because that is not any where near what I am talking about. Take a look at sand dunes. They look very much the same as the ridges and things of the sort. No, I am not saying sand dunes and ocean floor ridges are the same thing. No, I am not saying geological formations do not occur because of magma activity. No, I do not know for sure anything about this. Yes, I am trying to provide some possibilities. {Yes, I think I am going to quit posting on this forum because I am tired of having my sentences read back to me and being told I am ridiculus. No, do not tell me not to say what you think is ridiculus because I really do not understand you. No do not tell me I use double negatives way to often}- humerous and not to be taken personally.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

I do not believe you do know for sure that the ocean floor was not carved by the moving water.

Of course we do. Heat flow is highest at the ridges where new crust is formed from the upwelling of hot mantle material. Magnetic anomalies are symmetric on both sides of rifts indicating that ridges are centers where new crust forms, its magnetic minerals are magnetized by the earth's magnetic field, and the crust spreads away from the ridges. This is also confirmed by using GPS to observe movements of the earth's surface on the order of centimeters per year. The entire notion of plate tectonics relies on this model of the ocean floor that is well substantiated.

If those geological formations are caused strictly from activity in the mantle, why are they not so present on dry land?

They aren't present on dry land.

Please do not tell me to look at mountain ranges because that is not any where near what I am talking about. Take a look at sand dunes. They look very much the same as the ridges and things of the sort. No, I am not saying sand dunes and ocean floor ridges are the same thing.

If mountain ranges aren't anywhere near what you are talking about, then sand dunes are even further away from what you're talking about. Sand dunes and oceanic crust are in no way comparable. Sand dunes are a product of wind moving loose sand. Oceanic crust is solid igneous rock. Apples and oranges. They are not even remotely alike.

 

[Michali]

Why aren't they apparent on dry land? The ocean floor looks like the surface of a ruffles poatoe chip, whereas the dry land looks drastically different.

 

[bagfullofsnakes]

Attached are some elevation maps of Armenia where the Bible says that Noahs ark landed. You will notice that the lowest spot in all of Armenia is something like 2000 feet above sea level. In the Bible Arafat and Armenia are both the same word.

The question is, how much water would it take to get the Ark to even Little Mount Arafat? In order to do this, how and where could the water be held in this area.

If this were a world wide flood, then to even get the Ark into the area would require the water level to raise up at least 2000 feet.

Well, the easiest way to do it is to figure the difference between the diameter of the earth now, and the diameter plus 2000ft, and then just figure out the volume that remains.

In a sphere, V=4/3 *pi*radius^3

So, the radius of the earth is 4000 miles. Thus, the volume = 4/3 * pi * 4000^3 = 2.681159 x 10^11 cubic miles.

2000ft is (approx) .38 of a mile, so the "flood volume" would = 4/3* pi * 4000.38^3 = 2.68082 x 10^11

The difference is roughly 76.4 million cubic miles...of water.

Question: Where did all that water go?

Question #2: I never seem to get a good answer on this one... How long was Noah's flood?

Question #3: How long did it take until the waters were abated, and the ground was dry?

 

[Alessandro]

Water is there, that is why compared to land, water covers much more of the earth.

The Bible says water kept for 40 days and 40 nights.