What Would Falsify the Flood?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic
If someone is going to claim that the evidence supports a recent global flood then they must also be prepared to show how a recent global flood is falsifiable. IOW, if any possible observation supports the flood, then no observation supports the flood. The flood needs to be falsifiable in order for people to claim that they have evidence that supports it.

Therefore, the question is simple and mainly aimed at YEC's who claim that a recent global flood is supported by the evidence. What features would a geologic feature need in order to falsify a recent global flood?
 

Jamin4422

Member
Jul 5, 2012
2,957
17
✟3,349.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
In Relationship
If someone is going to claim that the evidence supports a recent global flood then they must also be prepared to show how a recent global flood is falsifiable.
There was global flooding and mass extinction 12,000 years ago. (holocene extinction) But not 6,000 years ago. Noah was a historical person that lived 6,000 years ago.

ice+age+map.gif
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,478
51,371
Guam
✟4,891,571.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What features would a geologic feature need in order to falsify a recent global flood?
I don't know about geologic features, but I certainly can tell you what biological features would: Nephilim families.*

* Fallen angels = fathers; humans = mothers; giants = children.
 
Upvote 0

RickG

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Oct 1, 2011
10,092
1,430
Georgia
✟83,873.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
There was global flooding and mass extinction 12,000 years ago. (holocene extinction) But not 6,000 years ago.

Sea level rise is not global flooding in the sense you are suggesting, and extinction events generally do accompany climate change.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jamin4422

Member
Jul 5, 2012
2,957
17
✟3,349.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
In Relationship
This is 100% wrong, there is no evidence for a global flood in any point in time.
That depends on what you mean by "global flood". Clearly there was a LOT of flooding when all that ice melted. Just like there is a lot of flooding today from all the ice that is melting.
 
Upvote 0

Jamin4422

Member
Jul 5, 2012
2,957
17
✟3,349.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
In Relationship
Sea level rise is not global flooding
It is to the degree that so many people depend on the water and tend to live very close to the water. Clearly when the Bible talks about the world, the reference is more to people than real estate.
[FONT=arial,sans-serif] Ohalo II for example was a camp site that they found underwater in the [/FONT]Sea of Galilee.[FONT=arial,sans-serif] This has been a VERY significant archeology find because of all the different grains they found. So now we know exactly what modern humans were eating 20,000 years ago. [/FONT]So a rise is sea level of 300 feet can be very significant when most everyone lives in an area that gets flooded and they have to move to higher ground. Perhaps that is why we find Göbekli Tepe this is a building on higher ground that would have survived the flooding of the whatever buildings there may have been at sea level at the time.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,882
6,552
71
✟317,648.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
If someone is going to claim that the evidence supports a recent global flood then they must also be prepared to show how a recent global flood is falsifiable. IOW, if any possible observation supports the flood, then no observation supports the flood. The flood needs to be falsifiable in order for people to claim that they have evidence that supports it.

Therefore, the question is simple and mainly aimed at YEC's who claim that a recent global flood is supported by the evidence. What features would a geologic feature need in order to falsify a recent global flood?

To falsify a recent global flood all that is needed is a nice sedimentary deposit where there is a fairly consistent deposition on an annual cycle. Something that would be seen in a shallow sea and a large lake.

If there was a global flood it should result in a disruption in that pattern.

And such disruptions should be seen on a global basis if there was a global flood.

Now for me the lack of such does not disprove Noah's flood as I do not think that is what Scripture describes. (It also happens I do not believe in such a flood even on a regional or local basis. I think Scripture makes a very different claim and I think that claim is more likely not true either).

The claim I think is made is far more difficult to disprove and I also disagree with the methods used to create a Biblical timeline and also the location is not given. (Ararat means sacred or high land, hardly useful. It would describe the high point anywhere).

The above alos makes it clear just how foolish many of the searches for the ark are.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,478
51,371
Guam
✟4,891,571.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The above alos makes it clear just how foolish many of the searches for the ark are.
Which is something scientists have done, correct?

Do you happen to know when the next scientific expedition to find the Ark is scheduled?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RickG

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Oct 1, 2011
10,092
1,430
Georgia
✟83,873.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
It is to the degree that so many people depend on the water and tend to live very close to the water. Clearly when the Bible talks about the world, the reference is more to people than real estate.[FONT=arial,sans-serif] Ohalo II for example was a camp site that they found underwater in the [/FONT]Sea of Galilee.[FONT=arial,sans-serif] This has been a VERY significant archeology find because of all the different grains they found. So now we know exactly what modern humans were eating 20,000 years ago. [/FONT]So a rise is sea level of 300 feet can be very significant when most everyone lives in an area that gets flooded and they have to move to higher ground. Perhaps that is why we find Göbekli Tepe this is a building on higher ground that would have survived the flooding of the whatever buildings there may have been at sea level at the time.

Jamin, that sea level rise took place over many many generations. It would not be perceived as a flood by any of the inhabitants of the time. If you want to cite a catostrophic flood that resulted from continental glacial melt, source "Missoula Floods" or "Scablands". Or,you may be interested in the "Black Sea Deluge".
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
There was global flooding and mass extinction 12,000 years ago. (holocene extinction) But not 6,000 years ago. Noah was a historical person that lived 6,000 years ago.

ice+age+map.gif

No, there was not global flooding at that time. Sea levels slowly rose at the end of the Ice Age, but all that would be required is for any camps near the sea to be moved away from the sea on a regular basis. This was not a flood by any definition of the word.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Back to the original question: what would debunk a world wide flood?

800,000 thousands of years of ice found in ice cores. Ice floats. If the whole world flooded the ice caps would have floated too, and it would not have been a pretty sight. If you ever sea what happens when a glacier runs into the sea you never see it continuing as a sheet over the water. It breaks up as it meets the sea and it would have been even worse with miles of ice underneath miles of water. It would have broken up into a jumble of pieces that would be apparent even if the ice did not float away from its original location.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.