Where are the current ripples from Noah's Flood?

[KevinT]

My education can be unferred by what I say,
and how I say it. That can’t be faked.

Catch me talking nonsense if you can.

Can you define "unferred"?

My point is that you seem very sure of yourself and just how 100% correct you are. And then in the middle of planting a flag in the ground about how correct you are, you make a simple spelling mistake. I think there is a lesson to be learned here.

Furthermore, earlier you seemed to be characterizing me as uneducated. When I demonstrated that I was educated and asked for your education, you suddenly fall quiet. It is rude of me to call you out on this, but if I just let you roll over others, I'm not doing anyone a favor.

KT

 

[KevinT]

Ezekiel peezy. Change all the words in the story.

I have no idea what you are saying here.

KT

 

[BCP1928]

If you read my original post on this topic, I specifically did NOT say this occurred in the past 10,000 yrs.

KT

Exactly.

 

[CoreyD]

Two reasons:

1. Adam was told to replenish the earth, and he would not have hung around the area they were expelled from. Thus Adam's progeny would have moved outward in an ever-growing circle; which leads me to my second point.

2. The U.S. showed us that we can go a distance of 3,000 miles in only 150 years. Adam's progeny had over ten times that amount of time. If you do the math, they went the equivalent of 30,000 miles, or around the earth and then some.

I can't begin to fathom Noah living in the Mesopotamian region.

You mean you'd rather speculate and hold on to that, than go with what the scriptures tell us?
Now, you know how God views that, so don't go there buddy. Please.

So, please tell me, at which point do you think the Bible got it wrong?

1. Point A - Genesis 3:23, 24 Therefore the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. So He drove out the man and stationed cherubim on the east side of the Garden of Eden, along with a whirling sword of flame to guard the way to the tree of life.
   • 
     Adam and Eve were driven East of the Garden of Eden ==>>
2. Point B - Genesis 4:1, 2 And Adam had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain. Later she gave birth to Cain’s brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, while Cain was a tiller of the soil.
   • 
     Cain cultivated the ground, and farmed the land East of the Garden of Eden ==>>
3. Point C - Genesis 4:8-16 Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. ...Now you are cursed and banished from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it will no longer yield its produce to you. You will be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.” ...So Cain went out from the presence of the LORD and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden.
   • 
     Cain was driven from his land to the land of Nod, East of the Garden of Eden ==>>
4. Point D - Genesis 4:17-22 And Cain had relations with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch. Then Cain built a city and named it after his son Enoch. Now to Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methusael, and Methusael was the father of Lamech. And Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah. Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and raise livestock. And his brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play the harp and flute. And Zillah gave birth to Tubal-cain, a forger of every implement of bronze and iron. And the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.
   • 
     Cain had a family, East of the Garden of Eden ==>>
5. Point E- Genesis 5:28, 29 When Lamech was 182 years old, he had a son. And he named him Noah, saying, “May this one comfort us in the labor and toil of our hands caused by the ground that the LORD has cursed.”
   • 
     One of Cain's great grandsons had a family of their own, which included Noah, East of the Garden of Eden ==>>
   Hopefully, you don't think any one of them wandered over 4,767 miles in wilderness land What would they eat? Why, they'd die from hunger.

If we stick to the Bible, and put aside our extreme speculations, we have to admit that Noah lived more than 4,767 miles from New Jersey, during the time of the flood. Much closer to India.

Do I hear "Objection your Honor!"
Overruled.

 

[Astrid]

Can you define "unferred"?

My point is that you seem very sure of yourself and just how 100% correct you are. And then in the middle of planting a flag in the ground about how correct you are, you make a simple spelling mistake. I think there is a lesson to be learned here.

Furthermore, earlier you seemed to be characterizing me as uneducated. When I demonstrated that I was educated and asked for your education, you suddenly fall quiet. It is rude of me to call you out on this, but if I just let you roll over others, I'm not doing anyone a favor.

KT

Your comments on asteroid and evolution dont
reveal much educated content.


I am confident because I don’t pretend anything.

You won’t catch me talking blather.
Challenge what I know if you ever do.

 

[Astrid]

I have no idea what you are saying here.

KT

Of course you do. The flood story is true if you just change all the words.


As for “Eze- peezy” spell- corrected on the MTR to
“Ezekiel” w/o me noticing, well, ya got me.

 

[KevinT]

Of course you do. The flood story is true if you just change all the words.

As for “Eze- peezy” spell- corrected on the MTR to
“Ezekiel” w/o me noticing, well, ya got me.

Whew! I’m glad this was just an autocorrect issue. I couldn’t figure how Ezekial had anything to do with this.

Regarding changing all the words, can you point out the words from the account of Noah that you assert I have changed? I just went back and read it again in Genesis 7-8, and other than the assumed timeline based on genealogy listings, I don’t see what has to be changed.

My informal idea of a meteor strike would probably cause more Tsunami waves instead of 40 days of rain. But I can imagine a scenario where a catastrophic event would cause prolonged rain.

As I have said repeatedly, my initial post was intended to point out that trying to categorically state that there has never been a world wide flood during the entire history of the world just because we don’t see ripples is unreasonable. The initial post said that the timing that is assumed from the Bible would have to be adjusted to fit.

So rather than this being a theory that I will vigorously defend, it was intended to be a possible counter example.

KT

 

[Astrid]

Whew! I’m glad this was just an autocorrect issue. I couldn’t figure how Ezekial had anything to do with this.

Regarding changing all the words, can you point out the words from the account of Noah that you assert I have changed? I just went back and read it again in Genesis 7-8, and other than the assumed timeline based on genealogy listings, I don’t see what has to be changed.

My informal idea of a meteor strike would probably cause more Tsunami waves instead of 40 days of rain. But I can imagine a scenario where a catastrophic event would cause prolonged rain.

As I have said repeatedly, my initial post was intended to point out that trying to categorically state that there has never been a world wide flood during the entire history of the world just because we don’t see ripples is unreasonable. The initial post said that the timing that is assumed from the Bible would adjusted to fit.

So rather than this being a theory that I will vigorously defend, it was intended to be a possible counter example.

KT

Keeping it simple-

There is no sane way to connect a 65,000,000 yr ago asteroid to the flood story.

Esp since it’s not true.

ETA You Did not change flood story.

A radical rewrite couldnat least make it credible, though still fictitious.

 

[CoreyD]

Here...I'll help you with that. Here's the response I received when asking ChatGPT "How were the ice age floods determined to be 10000 years ago"


The timing of the Ice Age floods, particularly the Missoula Floods in the Pacific Northwest, has been determined through a combination of geological evidence and radiocarbon dating. Here’s how scientists have established that these floods occurred around 10,000 years ago:

1. Geological Evidence: The landscape features left by the floods, such as scoured canyons, gravel bars, and sediment deposits, were studied. The scale and distribution of these features provided clues about the timing and frequency of the floods.

Can you please elaborate on what clues about the timing and frequency, gave a timing of 10,000 years ago?

1. Stratigraphy: Layers of sediment were analyzed, with certain layers containing distinct characteristics associated with flood events. By studying the sequence of these layers, scientists could establish a timeline.

How can studying layers lead to the conclusion it fits 10,000 years ago and not 5,000 years ago?
Seems like a small difference, to me.

1. Radiocarbon Dating: Organic materials found within the sediment layers were radiocarbon dated. This helped pinpoint when certain materials were deposited, correlating them with the flooding events.

I have been reading that studies show radiocarbon dating is inaccurate, and can be out by 1,000 years and more.
Climate change also adds to inaccuracies.

1. Ice Core Data: Ice cores from glaciers and polar regions provide information about climate changes over time. These cores indicate when ice began to melt and how that contributed to rising water levels.

I was doing some research on Ice Core Data, and read that...
The weight above layers of ice, can make deeper layers of ice thin and these layers then flow outwards. This distortion of layers, would result is inaccurate data.

I also read for the results of these tests to be useful in the reconstruction of palaeoenvironments, there has to be a way to determine the relationship between depth and age of the ice. The simplest approach is to count layers of ice that correspond to the original annual layers of snow, but this is not always possible. An alternative is to model the ice accumulation and flow to predict how long it takes a given snowfall to reach a particular depth. Another method is to correlate radionuclides or trace atmospheric gases with other timescales such as periodicities in the earth's orbital parameters.

A difficulty in ice core dating is that gases can diffuse through firn, so the ice at a given depth may be substantially older than the gases trapped in it. As a result, there are two chronologies for a given ice core: one for the ice, and one for the trapped gases. To determine the relationship between the two, models have been developed for the depth at which gases are trapped for a given location, but their predictions have not always proved reliable. At locations with very low snowfall, such as Vostok, the uncertainty in the difference between ages of ice and gas can be over 1,000 years.

Radiocarbon dating is also used.
So, there is the possibility for the dating to be inaccurate.

1. Comparison with Other Events: The timing of the floods was also correlated with other known climatic events, such as the end of the last glacial period.

If the last glacial period was about 5,000 years ago, how would you know that by comparison with other events?

Together, these methods provided a robust timeline that suggests the Ice Age floods occurred approximately 10,000 to 15,000 years ago, marking a significant period in Earth's geological history.

Would you consider, or approximately 4,500 years ago considering the above?

 

[AV1611VET]

If we stick to the Bible, and put aside our extreme speculations, we have to admit that Noah lived more than 4,767 miles from New Jersey, during the time of the flood.

Are you trying to tell me that no one settled WEST of the Garden of Eden?

In 1656 years of replenishing the earth, not one person moved west?

And what's this "4767 miles" you mentioned?

Currently it is 5400 miles from New Jersey to Turkey.

Currently the Atlantic Ocean is 3000 miles wide from New Jersey to North Africa.

But remember, the Atlantic Ocean didn't exist in Noah's time.

5400 miles - 3000 miles = 1400 miles.

Noah only lived 1400 miles away from the Garden of Eden.

And getting back to that Caspian sea, and Mediterranean sea, and those other bodies of water on that map you used, I contend you're using the wrong map.

 

[AV1611VET]

You won’t catch me talking blather.

Like you did here?

Aah, the grim spectre of Last Thursdayism again raises its snout from out the vasty deep.

 

[dlamberth]

Can you please elaborate on what clues about the timing and frequency, gave a timing of 10,000 years ago?


How can studying layers lead to the conclusion it fits 10,000 years ago and not 5,000 years ago?
Seems like a small difference, to me.


I have been reading that studies show radiocarbon dating is inaccurate, and can be out by 1,000 years and more.
Climate change also adds to inaccuracies.


I was doing some research on Ice Core Data, and read that...
The weight above layers of ice, can make deeper layers of ice thin and these layers then flow outwards. This distortion of layers, would result is inaccurate data.

I also read for the results of these tests to be useful in the reconstruction of palaeoenvironments, there has to be a way to determine the relationship between depth and age of the ice. The simplest approach is to count layers of ice that correspond to the original annual layers of snow, but this is not always possible. An alternative is to model the ice accumulation and flow to predict how long it takes a given snowfall to reach a particular depth. Another method is to correlate radionuclides or trace atmospheric gases with other timescales such as periodicities in the earth's orbital parameters.

A difficulty in ice core dating is that gases can diffuse through firn, so the ice at a given depth may be substantially older than the gases trapped in it. As a result, there are two chronologies for a given ice core: one for the ice, and one for the trapped gases. To determine the relationship between the two, models have been developed for the depth at which gases are trapped for a given location, but their predictions have not always proved reliable. At locations with very low snowfall, such as Vostok, the uncertainty in the difference between ages of ice and gas can be over 1,000 years.

Radiocarbon dating is also used.
So, there is the possibility for the dating to be inaccurate.


If the last glacial period was about 5,000 years ago, how would you know that by comparison with other events?


Would you consider, or approximately 4,500 years ago considering the above?

I'll leave this video for you. It will give you a full education on the Ice Age Floods.
Nick Zentner talks are always interesting.

 

[KevinT]

Keeping it simple-

There is no sane way to connect a 65,000,000 yr ago asteroid to the flood story.

Perhaps not. Perhaps another meteor struck in a location we have not found yet. I recall a time before Chicxulum was discovered. My point I have made over and over is that it is almost impossible to say what did NOT happen. You weren't there. How can you say what did not happen?

Esp since it’s not true.

You are asserting that the Biblical Noah's flood is not true. I understand that is what you believe, but simply asserting it doesn't add additional information to the discussion.

ETA You Did not change flood story.

I'm not following you. Is this another autocorrect hiccup? ETA = Estimated Time to Arrival in my book.
And did you mean to say "You Did change flood story"? If so, I asked you to point out details.

A radical rewrite couldnat least make it credible, though still fictitious.

I'm having a hard time understanding which way you intended this sentence.

"A radical rewrite couldn't make it credible, though still fictitious." ?
"A radical rewrite could at least make it credible, though still fictitious." ?

I suspect it is the later. I don't think any rewrite would have to be that radical. But it is OK that we disagree.

I understand that you come from an atheist position, so there is no reason to believe writings from the Bible. I don't believe in Hindu scriptures for the same reason. I also did not believe there was anything special about the Bible when I was younger. But for various reasons, I now do feel that there is something special there. And as result I am trying to see if there is any way possible to fit what is written there into what I seen in the physical world. If I were in your shoes, I would see this as needless fact stretching. But nevertheless, this is where I am and perhaps you can at least see (though likely not understand) my motivation.

Best wishes,

KT

 

[common prophets]

Yes, but not many people know, nor care, about the original Hebrew. They see the English text as it and take it at face value.

Heck, there's a guy on here who says the Bible was originally written in Jacobean English and that the Hebrew came after. That's the sort of people you're working with.

We cannot ignore the Hebrew text because the Bible, as available to us, is in Hebrew. Let us not confuse Jacobean English with Hebrew, we should focus on the Hebrew text and take English translations later.

 

[common prophets]

This is about “flood”.

If it’s read with all new words, sure, then it’s accurate
Any story can be made true that way.


Of what use is a story like that?

what if anything does all your “ science and theology”
lead you to think really happened.

Yes, it is possible that there was a global flood as well as there was a local flood. Of the two, we have to choose one that is consistent with science, which is the local flood. So, what happens in my assessment is that there was a local flood, but this particular local flood brought forth a magnificent response by the affected people, who spread all over the land after the flood. Hence, they glorified or even magnified the flood and hence it has now become standard to call it a global flood while the Bible can be interpreted in both ways.

 

[Astrid]

Yes, it is possible that there was a global flood as well as there was a local flood. Of the two, we have to choose one that is consistent with science, which is the local flood. So, what happens in my assessment is that there was a local flood, but this particular local flood brought forth a magnificent response by the affected people, who spread all over the land after the flood. Hence, they glorified or even magnified the flood and hence it has now become standard to call it a global flood while the Bible can be interpreted in both ways.

Global, mot possible.

You assume the story is based in actual events., where Id say
its possible that some local,flood was “glorified”.

But thatv loops back to what I said, that nothing in the story
is true.

So then, of what use is such a story?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

We cannot ignore the Hebrew text because the Bible, as available to us, is in Hebrew. Let us not confuse Jacobean English with Hebrew, we should focus on the Hebrew text and take English translations later.

As I said though: many people who espouse a global flood story don't care for the original historical Hebrew. They see the English text as it and take it at face value

 

[BCP1928]

Global, mot possible.

You assume the story is based in actual events., where Id say
its possible that some local,flood was “glorified”.

But thatv loops back to what I said, that nothing in the story
is true.

So then, of what use is such a story?

What is the use of any story? I have been reading some intriguing stories by a man named Chuang Tzu. I gather that they have a respected place in Chinese culture. Are any of them accurate literal history? Do they have to be in order to be useful?

 

[Astrid]

Perhaps not. Perhaps another meteor struck in a location we have not found yet. I recall a time before Chicxulum was discovered. My point I have made over and over is that it is almost impossible to say what did NOT happen. You weren't there. How can you say what did not happen?


You are asserting that the Biblical Noah's flood is not true. I understand that is what you believe, but simply asserting it doesn't add additional information to the discussion.


I'm not following you. Is this another autocorrect hiccup? ETA = Estimated Time to Arrival in my book.
And did you mean to say "You Did change flood story"? If so, I asked you to point out details.


I'm having a hard time understanding which way you intended this sentence.

"A radical rewrite couldn't make it credible, though still fictitious." ?
"A radical rewrite could at least make it credible, though still fictitious." ?

I suspect it is the later. I don't think any rewrite would have to be that radical. But it is OK that we disagree.

I understand that you come from an atheist position, so there is no reason to believe writings from the Bible. I don't believe in Hindu scriptures for the same reason. I also did not believe there was anything special about the Bible when I was younger. But for various reasons, I now do feel that there is something special there. And as result I am trying to see if there is any way possible to fit what is written there into what I seen in the physical world. If I were in your shoes, I would see this as needless fact stretching. But nevertheless, this is where I am and perhaps you can at least see (though likely not understand) my motivation.

Best wishes,

KT

“Perhaps” the events of 65,000,000 years ago did not involve “Noah”
building a big boat? Seriously?

That something dramatic happened then was obvious before the crater was found.

Not only is there no indication of world wide flood, there’s ten thousand ways to
prove it did not happen.
Your contention about proving what did not happen sometimes applies, esp
with things that cannot leave evidence.

A wotldvwide flood would leave so much sign that it would be inescapably
obvious.

if that isn’t obvious to you, I hardly know what to say
other than maybe think harder, and that your education involved
no geology.

it’s no mere assertion that the Noah story is not true.*

Insistent claims that it is argues against “ wisdom with age”
and contributes zero to any discussion of what if anything
is the origin and meaning of the story, rather, it assures a pointless dialog
about nonsense.

* one can get into what the meaning of “is” is, or what
” true” means.

To me a story is not true If no detail of the story actually happened.

in litigation, a processI am often involved in, a non factual account
is considered perjury.

And it never wins.

 

[Astrid]

What is the use of any story? I have been reading some intriguing stories by a man named Chuang Tzu. I gather that they have a respected place in Chinese culture. Are any of them accurate literal history? Do they have to be in order to be useful?

Regarding flood, the Bible is presented as the ( inerrant) word of
God, and given unto mankind for specified purposes.

That being the case, it’s quite legitimate to as about the role of the floods story.

Some say literal other Christian’s say allegory, others that it’s true in that it’s loosely
based on actual events.

The Bible is presumed to inform and instruct on matters
of importance to the creator of everything. Like, not merely literature.

Im asking what the takeaway is supposed to be.


Re China, various beliefs / traditions / superstitions are
widespread. I’m not necessarily a fan, though Ive always
loved our dragon.s

Our annual dragon boat races are great fun.

Check YouTube!