Where are the current ripples from Noah's Flood?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I disagree entirely.

Any opinion that is based on something is worth more than an opinion that is based on nothing.

I never said that you had to do anything - not even explain your bias.

Yet - your bad logic is something you need to deal with for your own sake.

To you - what makes the story of Jacob and the goats allegory and the Resurrection literal?

I believe that you not willing to analyze this is doing yourself a disservice.

We are Latter-day Saints - not Mormons. Mormon was a man - a great man - but we follow Christ.

My asking people to use the actual title is not about preference and I appreciate you using it.

I want you to notice - if you ever look back on this conversation - that I did not try to force you to believe any which way about anything.

All I pointed out was that your logic was bad - completely arbitrary - and your lack of a standard is going to bite you.

You also miss out on learning more about God and how He operates by picking and choosing like that.

Unfortunately your opinion is worthless since you have no stake in anything I say or do. And overall, I don't care what your opinion is on my opinion.

You did ask me to explain my bias, by asking me to acknowledge my bias, which was to lead me to explain my bias.

My logic was not bad, and all you did was just say it was bad without any attempt to show it was bad. I never said that Resurrection was literal, that was you assuming, aka putting words in my mouth, so you failed on the logic front there.

But by this point, I honestly do not care, and I'm getting sick of repeating this comment again and again that you so refuse to acknowledge it.

Again: I am not required to accept miracles as factual by the Bible, by the Anglican Church of which I grew up in, nor by the wider Protestant faith or even the Christian faith in general. That a minority but vocal group of American Christians and pseudo-Christians say otherwise is not something I need to behold myself to. That is my standard, my logic, and if that's a problem for you.... I do not care.

I learn about God through the study of His creation, not accepting the arbitrary and fallible readings of the Bible by fallible men, especially not from nobodies on the internet. And this is coming from a nobody on the internet to boot.

So we're done. End of. No more. Stop it.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Unfortunately your opinion is worthless since you have no stake in anything I say or do.

You're my neighbor and I love you. My Lord and Savior has given me stake in you.

And overall, I don't care what your opinion is on my opinion.

That's obvious - but that does not mean that my opinion is wrong.

You did ask me to explain my bias, by asking me to acknowledge my bias, which was to lead me to explain my bias.

I did want you to acknowledge that your logic is based on nothing but your bias - that does not mean you have to explain what your bias is.

My logic was not bad, and all you did was just say it was bad without any attempt to show it was bad.

I did show you how it was bad. It could be used to discredit any and all beliefs in God. There is no standard at all.

I never said that Resurrection was literal, that was you assuming, aka putting words in my mouth, so you failed on the logic front there.

You claimed that you believed that the Lord Jesus Christ was your Savior and that you had faith in Him.

If He did not rise from the dead (i.e. literal Resurrection) then He has not saved anyone from anything and there is no reason to have faith in Him because He is a dead man.

But by this point, I honestly do not care, and I'm getting sick of repeating this comment again and again that you so refuse to acknowledge it.

You are free to continue your mantra - but I am not forcing you to do so - and it does not make it any more right than when you first said it.

Again: I am not required to accept miracles as factual by the Bible, by the Anglican Church of which I grew up in, nor by the wider Protestant faith or even the Christian faith in general. That a minority but vocal group of American Christians and pseudo-Christians say otherwise is not something I need to behold myself to. That is my standard, my logic, and if that's a problem for you.... I do not care.

Your standard and/or logic is that you have none. I don't even know by what metric you use to claim to be a Christian.

I learn about God through the study of His creation, not accepting the arbitrary and fallible readings of the Bible by fallible men, especially not from nobodies on the internet. And this is coming from a nobody on the internet to boot.

You will learn about God's works - but not God - through this method - because He is not found in His Creation. He is above and beyond it all.

God has revealed aspects of Himself to Man since the beginning and He always will. You will not find Him in the study of His Creation alone.

So we're done. End of. No more. Stop it.

You are and always have been free. No one is forcing you to respond. God bless.

 

[sjastro]

I've presented evidence that showed there was no global flood 10,000 years ago, another way of looking at it is the evidence one would expect to find if there was a global flood from various scientific disciplines.

 

[Astrid]

You're my neighbor and I love you. My Lord and Savior has given me stake in you.

That's obvious - but that does not mean that my opinion is wrong.

I did want you to acknowledge that your logic is based on nothing but your bias - that does not mean you have to explain what your bias is.

I did show you how it was bad. It could be used to discredit any and all beliefs in God. There is no standard at all.

You claimed that you believed that the Lord Jesus Christ was your Savior and that you had faith in Him.

If He did not rise from the dead (i.e. literal Resurrection) then He has not saved anyone from anything and there is no reason to have faith in Him because He is a dead man.

You are free to continue your mantra - but I am not forcing you to do so - and it does not make it any more right than when you first said it.

Your standard and/or logic is that you have none. I don't even know by what metric you use to claim to be a Christian.

You will learn about God's works - but not God - through this method - because He is not found in His Creation. He is above and beyond it all.

God has revealed aspects of Himself to Man since the beginning and He always will. You will not find Him in the study of His Creation alone.

You are and always have been free. No one is forcing you to respond. God bless.

So no actual data for your beliefs.

 

[stevevw]

Why would it have been the 'first such myth'?

Because it happened at a time when humans developed enough to come up with such myths with such religious complexity as evidenced by the level of religion at places like Gobekli Tepe.

And speaking of flood myths in the southern hemisphere, there are a few flood myths, but the Aborigines of Australia have the myth of Tiddalik the frog that held in all the water, leaving the other animals to perish from the lack of water before they tickled Tiddalik to release the water back to the world. Quite opposite to the myth of the Noahic flood, no? Kind of shows that myths and stories are dependent on regions in the points they make.

Ok so then the myths created in the northern by those at the time of the great flood during the Younger Dryas are also possible.

But again, as with the main point of the OP, this really does nothing to show that the OP's point that geology doesn't support the Biblical claim of a truly global flood having occurred, especially in such a short time frame as many YEC's and Biblical literalists say it does.

The geological evidence for floods is all over the world. In fact I am sure I read in this thread that the large ripples are found in places where the flood during the Younger may have occurred. From memory they mentioned North America, Greenland and the Black sea.

But are we only counting YEC ideas of Noahs flood or also localised floods.

Speaking of geological evidence what about the Grand Canyon where the Temple Butte Limestone bends or folds as though the layer was pliable and soft as the rocks faulted. This same layer goes right around the East Kaibab as though the sediment was layed down suddenly and then later folded due to faulting. But not just Grand Canyon. This folding has happened all over the world.

The Canyon was suppose to have occurred very slowly as sea sediment settled dried up and hardened into layers one by one. If this is the case then the layers cannot fold. They will crack, shatter and breakup.

PS: I was going to make a seperate post to you but can't workout how to do it. I noticed you are a Deist. HOw does this belief impact your views on the flood myth.

It seems but correct me if I am wrong that Deists do not believe in divine revelation and the religion that may reveal Gods revelations. Deist also from what I understand believe God is revealed in nature so to speak, in the natural laws. So I am not sure if this means you only accept scientific evidence or observational evidence. Or perhaps take a naturalistic view of things.

Also what role does conscious experience play. Is there some connection between conscious beings and their God. Like the universe is consciousness.

Can you elaborate so I can understand better where your coming from.

 

[stevevw]

Did I read? I’ve a bachelors in geology which does indicate interest.

Your “ to say….”bit is you making up things to argue against.

What did I say though. I said for anyone to say there was no floods during a time where glacial ice was subject to a relatively sudden rise in heat is really saying something that goes against basic science and logic. Heat plus ice melts to water.

Considering there was a l of ice even coming down into North America, the edge of Europe and parts of the Middle East and much of the extremeties melted away we can safely say without evidence using common sense that there will have been floods. But nevertheless I gave you evidence, the science as well and you still question this.

Imsaid nothing of the kind.
As for reading, you getting my words thst wrong shows well
how you spin fantasy from anything you read.

Ok I am not sure what you mean by getting your words mixed up. But I am not spinning any fantasy as far as the evidence for a big flood happening around 10,000 years ago which cultures in the northern hemisphere at least would have been around to experience. That these cultures like Gobekli Tepe has sophisticated enough religion make up a flood myth story as a result.

Like I said the only thing I am spectulating about is that this may have been the source of the original flood story. I already gave my reasoning for this.

So we have two parts. The scientific evidence for a flood around 10,000 years ago and for cultures like Gobekli Tepe being around at the same time and having complex religion. I think we can say that this part is evidenced so we can move on from that. But if you disagree then say so and provide a counter arguement and evidence.

The second part cannot really be elaborated on as we disagree on the first part it seems.

there’s been lots of floods.

”Deal with evidence” = give up pretending
something's there when there isn’t.

Deal with what evidence. You havn't provided any. Unless you think "there's been lots of floods" is evidence. Obviously theres been lots of floods. What are you saying. That because there are lots of floods there is not a single flood event that many cultures may be using. What evidence could you have for such as claim.

I am not sure what your point is.

What we are doing with this type of evidence which is more Anthroplogical and psychological and based on the experiences of the people at the time. We are trying to put ourselves in their shoes and work out whether such culture who would have experienced such a major flood event have this etched in trheir psyche.

Like we still have big events etched in our psyche, 9/11 comes to mind but also other major events like the widespread Tsunamis in 2011 as a result of a massive earthquake. So not just any flood will stick in the minds and cause people to make myths about them.

The problem with the idea that many floods caused different flood stories is that most cultures who come up with these flood stories for them to be experienced big enough for them to think it was a global flood would then mean other cultures in the region and beyond would have to have experienced the same flood event.

If it was so small and local then how can it be a global flood. Even if it is smaller say around the Middle East then most Middle Eastern cultures would have experienced the same flood. Say Babylon and the Egyptians whose Empire reached the Lavant and Jordan.

But I am open to any idea that you have for how the flood myth came about. Or the different flood myths came about.

 

[stevevw]

Uh no. You make wild claims with nothing
to back them.

Enough shriveled brain cells from seeing
such behaviour in action.

im out

Fair enough

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Because it happened at a time when humans developed enough to come up with such myths with such religious complexity as evidenced by the level of religion at places like Gobekli Tepe.

You keep bringing up Gobekli Tepe like it's the be all and end all of ancient civilization even though it's been shown to you repeatedly that you are mistaken on that front.

Ok so then the myths created in the northern by those at the time of the great flood during the Younger Dryas are also possible.

Again, that's the claim, but not with any evidence to back it up.

The geological evidence for floods is all over the world. In fact I am sure I read in this thread that the large ripples are found in places where the flood during the Younger may have occurred. From memory they mentioned North America, Greenland and the Black sea.

But are we only counting YEC ideas of Noahs flood or also localised floods.

Speaking of geological evidence what about the Grand Canyon where the Temple Butte Limestone bends or folds as though the layer was pliable and soft as the rocks faulted. This same layer goes right around the East Kaibab as though the sediment was layed down suddenly and then later folded due to faulting. But not just Grand Canyon. This folding has happened all over the world.

The Canyon was suppose to have occurred very slowly as sea sediment settled dried up and hardened into layers one by one. If this is the case then the layers cannot fold. They will crack, shatter and breakup.

Geological folding is formed under very many and various circumstances and in no way prove that they were formed by a flood. If you want to make the claim that it is, then you need evidence for it.

PS: I was going to make a seperate post to you but can't workout how to do it. I noticed you are a Deist. HOw does this belief impact your views on the flood myth.

It seems but correct me if I am wrong that Deists do not believe in divine revelation and the religion that may reveal Gods revelations. Deist also from what I understand believe God is revealed in nature so to speak, in the natural laws. So I am not sure if this means you only accept scientific evidence or observational evidence. Or perhaps take a naturalistic view of things.

Also what role does conscious experience play. Is there some connection between conscious beings and their God. Like the universe is consciousness.

Can you elaborate so I can understand better where your coming from.

First off, if you wanted to make a separate post addressing me, the easiest thing to do is @ me (so @, then my username) in a new post with the relevant question you wanted to ask. It's often the best and simplest way to do so.

Here's how it works for me as a Deist:
God created the world and everything in it. Ergo, what we see in the world is from God's creation.

Though God inspired the Bible to be written, it was written by fallible men who only knew what they knew as common knowledge at the time. Ergo, the Bible is inspired by God but created by man and thus is as fallible as anything and everything created by man.

I do not hold to anything from the Bible as 100% factual, especially not passages that are clearly allegorical or poetic in nature.

 

[stevevw]

You keep bringing up Gobekli Tepe like it's the be all and end all of ancient civilization even though it's been shown to you repeatedly that you are mistaken on that front.

What do you mean the be all and end all of all civilisation at that time. How am I mistaken that Gobekli Tepe was not represtative of culture at that time.

Heres an exmaple of how Gobekli Tepe may have been representative of similar cultures all over the world. Naupa Huaca and other cultures in Cuzco, Ollantaytambo, and Puma Punkugoes goes back to at least the same time as Gobekli Tepe. The tech and beliefs is far more advanced than archeologists claim that humans were simple primitive hunter gatherers.

The style of stonework at Naupa Huaca is consistent with that found in Cuzco, Ollantaytambo, and Puma Punku, and what these sites have in common is the myth of a traveling builder god named Viracocha who, together with seven Shining Ones, appeared at Tiwanaku after a catastrophic world flood, since dated to 9,703 BC, to help rebuild humanity.

Naupa Huaca Portal: Is This Proof That All Ancient Civilizations Were Secretly Connected?

Naupa Huaca Portal seems to have been manipulated with advanced knowledge (technology), since it has practically perfect lines, sharp corners and smooth surfaces.

mru.ink

There are Megalithic cultures all over the world with similar beliefs and tech.

Again, that's the claim, but not with any evidence to back it up.

But I have in showing that the cultures were sophisticated enough to come up with such a story. The question should be 'Why such a culture would not come up with such a story considering they witnessed or were around sonn after for such a flood.

Geological folding is formed under very many and various circumstances and in no way prove that they were formed by a flood. If you want to make the claim that it is, then you need evidence for it.

The evidence is in that video I linked. Do you even look at the evidence. The folds cannot have been created by heat as heating of rocks leaves a signatiure and that signature is not found in the rocks that are folded. That leaves us with only one explanation. They were soft when folded. Can you explain otherwise.

First off, if you wanted to make a separate post addressing me, the easiest thing to do is @ me (so @, then my username) in a new post with the relevant question you wanted to ask. It's often the best and simplest way to do so

I didn't mean a private messaging but within the thread. A new post without it being linked to an existing post. When I tried by using an existing post and then deleting the rest of the post to leave just your name it deleted everything including your name. So I had to use an existing post and tack it onto the end. Its doesn;t matter now but I was just explaining why.

Here's how it works for me as a Deist:
God created the world and everything in it. Ergo, what we see in the world is from God's creation.

Though God inspired the Bible to be written, it was written by fallible men who only knew what they knew as common knowledge at the time. Ergo, the Bible is inspired by God but created by man and thus is as fallible as anything and everything created by man.

I do not hold to anything from the Bible as 100% factual, especially not passages that are clearly allegorical or poetic in nature.

So what about Christs teachings, the miracles and his resurrection from the dead.

What about the Jews captivity in Egypt and traversing through the wilderness and into the promise land. Are these all allegorial. Not real events happened that caused them to write such stories.

 

[BCP1928]

You keep bringing up Gobekli Tepe like it's the be all and end all of ancient civilization even though it's been shown to you repeatedly that you are mistaken on that front.



Again, that's the claim, but not with any evidence to back it up.



Geological folding is formed under very many and various circumstances and in no way prove that they were formed by a flood. If you want to make the claim that it is, then you need evidence for it.



First off, if you wanted to make a separate post addressing me, the easiest thing to do is @ me (so @, then my username) in a new post with the relevant question you wanted to ask. It's often the best and simplest way to do so.

Here's how it works for me as a Deist:
God created the world and everything in it. Ergo, what we see in the world is from God's creation.

Though God inspired the Bible to be written, it was written by fallible men who only knew what they knew as common knowledge at the time. Ergo, the Bible is inspired by God but created by man and thus is as fallible as anything and everything created by man.

I do not hold to anything from the Bible as 100% factual, especially not passages that are clearly allegorical or poetic in nature.

Even those portions which are obviously historical were not written to the same standards of factual historicity as we expect from modern historians. The authors didn't expect it and neither did the audience they were writing for.

 

[sjastro]

Heres an exmaple of how Gobekli Tepe may have been representative of similar cultures all over the world. Naupa Huaca goes back to at least the same time as Gobekli Tepe. The tech and beliefs is far more advanced than archeologists claim that humans were simple primitive hunter gatherers.

The style of stonework at Naupa Huaca is consistent with that found in Cuzco, Ollantaytambo, and Puma Punku, and what these sites have in common is the myth of a traveling builder god named Viracocha who, together with seven Shining Ones, appeared at Tiwanaku after a catastrophic world flood, since dated to 9,703 BC, to help rebuild humanity.

Naupa Huaca Portal: Is This Proof That All Ancient Civilizations Were Secretly Connected?

Naupa Huaca Portal seems to have been manipulated with advanced knowledge (technology), since it has practically perfect lines, sharp corners and smooth surfaces.

mru.ink

I'm glad I'm not the only recipient of your quote mining.
Notice anything suspicious about the date, 9703 BC is surprising accurate and one would therefore have expected this to be based on a specific chronological date.
Since these Pre-Inca people did not possess writing or chronology, the dating of such sites cannot have this degree of accuracy and a figure of around 10,000 BC would be more realistic if it was true.
Regretfully it isn't, no one is exactly sure how old the site is but accordingly to archaeologists it is Pre-Incan and probably no older than other Andean civilizations - Wikipedia the oldest of which is around 3500 BC.

Your fanciful date of 9703 BC is not based on science but attempting to correlate geological with mythological data, such as interpreting ancient texts, legends, and religious stories alongside environmental events such as flooding.

 

[stevevw]

I'm glad I'm not the only recipient of your quote mining.

That's alright its for everyone not just you lol.

Notice anything suspicious about the date, 9703 BC is surprising accurate and one would therefore have expected this to be based on a specific chronological date.
Since these Pre-Inca people did not possess writing or chronology, the dating of such sites cannot have this degree of accuracy and a figure of around 10,000 BC would be more realistic if it was true.

I am not sure why the specific date. I suspect it has something to do with the symbols and astrological depictions and certain celestial events like star and planet alignments or comets ect. I think because its relatively new discoveries the evidence is scarce. So some are using the beliefs and glyphs and comparing them to known cultures that have been verified going back 10,000 years.

Regretfully it isn't, no one is exactly sure how old the site is but accordingly to archaeologists it is Pre-Incan and probably no older than other Andean civilizations - Wikipedia the oldest of which is around 3500 BC.

Hum I am not sure Wiki is the best source for scientific verification.

But what I find interesting is that there is so little evidence for anything on this matter. There is a bias within mainstream archeology against the idea of cultures being more sophisticated back 10,000 years. But there is scant information of details.

Your fanciful date of 9703 BC is not based on science but attempting to correlate geological with mythological data, such as interpreting ancient texts, legends, and religious stories alongside environmental events such as flooding.

Its not just about flooding. Its about linking knowledge and belief for cultures that may have existed back then. We already have one confirmed by science at Gobekli Tepe and there are dozens of other sites around there that have not been excavated. There are also other sites around the Middle east, norther Europe like the neolithic temple and culture at Nevalı Çori.

Why Civilization Is Older Than We Thought

Why Civilization Is Older Than We Thought

www.palladiummag.com

So it would seem logical that at the same time there were other cultures around the world that had this level of knowhow, tech and belief. We know that Amazon culture goes back at least 10,000 years with complex organisation and argriculture. So why not their temples. They were far more organised than hunter and gatherers.

Why not the same for every place around the world.

But heres the problem as far as the OP is concerned as it is specifically speaking about Noahs flood. If we apply the idea that cultures were advanced especially in religion and building great megaliths to their gods around 3,500 BC this fits even better with Noahs flood which was suppose to happen around 6,000 years ago.

That could mean that at that time there were many cultures who had developed sophisticated beliefs to a very high degree which has resulted in their amazing megaliths and formwork that even modern man marvels at. All to express their belief in gods.

That would make more sense considering the bible says the world was completely wicked and no one was rightous. What better way to be completely at that point if not by belief in the gods of nature, the stars, harvests, animals, instincts and primal desires ect. Theres a growing view that argriculture and communities didn't birth births belief but that belief births agriculture and communities.

Not saying this is the case. What I am doing is looking for a logical explanation why cultures came up with the flood myth which is so connected to Noahs flood. What sort of world would it have been like at or around the time the flood happened.

Does this make sense within the timeline of how cultures developed. Not just archeologically but religiously and anthropoloigically.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What do you mean the be all and end all of all civilisation at that time. How am I mistaken that Gobekli Tepe was not represtative of culture at that time.

Heres an exmaple of how Gobekli Tepe may have been representative of similar cultures all over the world. Naupa Huaca and other cultures in Cuzco, Ollantaytambo, and Puma Punkugoes goes back to at least the same time as Gobekli Tepe. The tech and beliefs is far more advanced than archeologists claim that humans were simple primitive hunter gatherers.

The style of stonework at Naupa Huaca is consistent with that found in Cuzco, Ollantaytambo, and Puma Punku, and what these sites have in common is the myth of a traveling builder god named Viracocha who, together with seven Shining Ones, appeared at Tiwanaku after a catastrophic world flood, since dated to 9,703 BC, to help rebuild humanity.

Naupa Huaca Portal: Is This Proof That All Ancient Civilizations Were Secretly Connected?

Naupa Huaca Portal seems to have been manipulated with advanced knowledge (technology), since it has practically perfect lines, sharp corners and smooth surfaces.

mru.ink

There are Megalithic cultures all over the world with similar beliefs and tech.

And all that shows is that megalithic cultures were the norm for that time period. It doesn't show anything at all about sophistication or anything of the like, which, is a meaningless buzzword like 'complex' since it means nothing by itself.

But I have in showing that the cultures were sophisticated enough to come up with such a story. The question should be 'Why such a culture would not come up with such a story considering they witnessed or were around sonn after for such a flood.

No, you haven't shown 'cultures were sophisticated enough to come up with such a story'. You've claimed they were but haven't shown a single thing to back up your claim that they were.

The evidence is in that video I linked. Do you even look at the evidence. The folds cannot have been created by heat as heating of rocks leaves a signatiure and that signature is not found in the rocks that are folded. That leaves us with only one explanation. They were soft when folded. Can you explain otherwise.

Geological folding doesn't just occur with heat, which was the main reason I didn't need to watch the video. Even a basic look at the Wikipedia page on geological folding show that heat is not at all singularly needed for folding rock.
Your knowledge of geology is just as poor as your knowledge of history.

I didn't mean a private messaging but within the thread. A new post without it being linked to an existing post. When I tried by using an existing post and then deleting the rest of the post to leave just your name it deleted everything including your name. So I had to use an existing post and tack it onto the end. Its doesn;t matter now but I was just explaining why.

When I said a new post I referred to going to the bottom, clicking the empty box and using that as the post for @-ing me.

So what about Christs teachings, the miracles and his resurrection from the dead.

What about the Jews captivity in Egypt and traversing through the wilderness and into the promise land. Are these all allegorial. Not real events happened that caused them to write such stories.

Since that has no bearing on the OP topic I am under no necessity to answer it.

 

[stevevw]

And all that shows is that megalithic cultures were the norm for that time period. It doesn't show anything at all about sophistication or anything of the like, which, is a meaningless buzzword like 'complex' since it means nothing by itself.

But we are using 'complexity' in relation to religious belief. We can measure the complexity or sophistication of belief right. Like I said just burying a person rather than leaving them rotting was a simple expression of belief. But building tempes to Gods is much more complex.

So we we get an understanding of the beliefs that were around at the time around 10,000 years ago using cultures like Gobekli Tepe or others discovered around the world.

No, you haven't shown 'cultures were sophisticated enough to come up with such a story'. You've claimed they were but haven't shown a single thing to back up your claim that they were.

What sort of evidence would you like. If you say or someone said that Aboriginals have a flood story then they are a pretty old culture, certainly more than 10,000 years old.

If cultures like Gobekli Tepe can create stories about animals and the stars why not a flood story. It seems flood stories have been a part of most cultures going way back.

Ancient stone carvings confirm date of devastating comet strike

Ancient stone carvings confirm date of devastating comet strike | School of Engineering

www.eng.ed.ac.uk

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A MYTH: DECODING GÖBEKLI TEPE’S ICONOGRAPHY
Situated in the northern part of the Upper Mesopotamia, Göbekli Tepe represents one of the largest early PPN sites in the region. A reference to the disastrous inundations of the Euphrates River and its tributaries seems to have been recorded in the iconography of Göbekli Tepe’s enclosures. The bas-reliefs of Enclosure D show an event similar to the one described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrating with zoomorphic images the diferent stages of a flood.

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A MYTH: DECODING GÖBEKLI TEPE’S ICONOGRAPHY

Water is one of the archetypal elements of all mythologies, to mention only the flood myth which is one of humankind’s most widespread myths. The Epic of Gilgamesh’s depiction (3rd millennium B.C.) of a catastrophic event which occurred in Western

www.academia.edu

Geological folding doesn't just occur with heat, which was the main reason I didn't need to watch the video. Even a basic look at the Wikipedia page on geological folding show that heat is not at all singularly needed for folding rock.
Your knowledge of geology is just as poor as your knowledge of history.

Once again Wiki is not a very good source. You keep saying that there is other ways straight layers in sedimentary rock can fold even back on itself without cracking, snapping or crumbling as it is dry and brittle. What other method could achieve this.

When I said a new post I referred to going to the bottom, clicking the empty box and using that as the post for @-ing me.

Ok does that allow someone to post in the same thread to a specific person.

Since that has no bearing on the OP topic I am under no necessity to answer it.

Ok then why answer my question about your belief in Deism. The followup question was related to that.

It sort of does relate to the OP because quite often the evidence is biased towards a persons worldview.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

But we are using 'complexity' in relation to religious belief. We can measure the complexity or sophistication of belief right. Like I said just burying a person rather than leaving them rotting was a simple expression of belief. But building tempes to Gods is much more complex.

So we we get an understanding of the beliefs that were around at the time around 10,000 years ago using cultures like Gobekli Tepe or others discovered around the world.

And what does complexity at all have to do with the idea of a global flood which clearly did not occur as put forward in the Bible and claimed to have happened by Biblical literalists and YECs?

What sort of evidence would you like. If you say or someone said that Aboriginals have a flood story then they are a pretty old culture, certainly more than 10,000 years old.

If cultures like Gobekli Tepe can create stories about animals and the stars why not a flood story. It seems flood stories have been a part of most cultures going way back.

Ancient stone carvings confirm date of devastating comet strike

Ancient stone carvings confirm date of devastating comet strike | School of Engineering

www.eng.ed.ac.uk

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A MYTH: DECODING GÖBEKLI TEPE’S ICONOGRAPHY
Situated in the northern part of the Upper Mesopotamia, Göbekli Tepe represents one of the largest early PPN sites in the region. A reference to the disastrous inundations of the Euphrates River and its tributaries seems to have been recorded in the iconography of Göbekli Tepe’s enclosures. The bas-reliefs of Enclosure D show an event similar to the one described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrating with zoomorphic images the diferent stages of a food.

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A MYTH: DECODING GÖBEKLI TEPE’S ICONOGRAPHY

Water is one of the archetypal elements of all mythologies, to mention only the flood myth which is one of humankind’s most widespread myths. The Epic of Gilgamesh’s depiction (3rd millennium B.C.) of a catastrophic event which occurred in Western

www.academia.edu

Again: you just keep making the claim. Making a claim is not presenting evidence.

And again: people lived near water. Water is needed to survive. Waterways will flood, and when your knowledge of the extant world limits your world to your immediate surroundings, then when that area floods, you're going to think that your world has flooded.

The second link you provided even says so: "A reference to the disastrous inundations of the Euphrates River and its tributaries seems to have been recorded in the iconography of Göbekli Tepe’s enclosures. The bas-reliefs of Enclosure D show an event similar to the one described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrating with zoomorphic images the diferent stages of a food." (And wow that article has some bad spelling)

Once again Wiki is not a very good source. You keep saying that there is other ways straight layers in sedimentary rock can fold even back on itself without cracking, snapping or crumbling as it is dry and brittle. What other method could achieve this.

Wikipedia is good enough to point out that geological folding is not just done through heat, and if you were intellectually honest enough to look at the link, you'd see that the link does show how geological folding occurs without heat being a factor. Do you really want me to copy and paste each bit from the link to show how geological folding occurs?

Ok does that allow someone to post in the same thread to a specific person.

YES! That's why I said it!

Ok then why answer my question about your belief in Deism. The followup question was related to that.

It sort of does relate to the OP because quite often the evidence is biased towards a persons worldview.

Because this isn't a thread or subforum where people are expected to defend their religious beliefs and faiths. Ergo, I'm under not necessity to go into detail about my personal beliefs. I didn't know you were going to try and get into the minutia of my beliefs when I first answered that question, so I don't want to comment on the rest.

 

[stevevw]

And what does complexity at all have to do with the idea of a global flood which clearly did not occur as put forward in the Bible and claimed to have happened by Biblical literalists and YECs?

Like I already said I am not arguing based on the biblical account of Noah. I am argueing for a real event that many cultures made flood myths about that are similar to Noah and the bible.

Again: you just keep making the claim. Making a claim is not presenting evidence.

So what about the links I just attached. Are they not evidence. You seem to keep completely ignoring what I have linked as though it was not even there.

And again: people lived near water. Water is needed to survive. Waterways will flood, and when your knowledge of the extant world limits your world to your immediate surroundings, then when that area floods, you're going to think that your world has flooded.

Yes so we can then look at the beliefs, the real events and see if there is any time that this is going to be more likely. Obviously a certain level of belief sophistication is needed. So we can limit the search down to when humans developed more complex beliefs about gods who send floods.

That would include I think the last 10 to 12,000 years by the evidence that these cultures had such sophisticated beliefs that their gods were sending such a flood. Maybe a bit further back but not too far I don't think. We are not talking about a belief level of say burying the dead as this is simple and could mean a number of things. I mean sophisticated beliefs such that a god was created who interacts with humans and punishes them.

Insofar as an evolutionary origin of deities is correct, the concept of a god would not have occurred to hominins prior to about 40,000 years ago, and the gods themselves would probably not have become fully visible prior to about 10,000 years ago.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/torr18336#:~:text=Insofar%20as%20an%20evolutionary%20origin,to%20about%2010%2C000%20years%20ago.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.731...volutionary origin,to about 10,000 years ago.
So it seems that humans did not fully develop religious belief in specific gods and their expression of this until around 10,000 years ago. Which just about fits nicely with cultures back then like Goblekli Tepe.

The second link you provided even says so: "A reference to the disastrous inundations of the Euphrates River and its tributaries seems to have been recorded in the iconography of Göbekli Tepe’s enclosures. The bas-reliefs of Enclosure D show an event similar to the one described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrating with zoomorphic images the diferent stages of a food." (And wow that article has some bad spelling)

But did you just read through that without stopping to consider what it means. I said cultures like Göbekli Tepe were sophisticated enought to come up with the flood myth and may be even the original one. You just literally read out the support for what I said. That the flood myth belief of Göbekli Tepe are more of The Epic of Gilgamesh which also has remarkable similarities with Noahs flood.

Wikipedia is good enough to point out that geological folding is not just done through heat, and if you were intellectually honest enough to look at the link, you'd see that the link does show how geological folding occurs without heat being a factor. Do you really want me to copy and paste each bit from the link to show how geological folding occurs?

Well I could say that if you bothered to look at the scientific evidence in the video then you would not have claimed such a thing as the video explains how the only way their folds could have formed is when the layer was still soft and pliable. They go into extensive testing to rule out all other possibilities.

We are talking about folds that go back on themselves. Not just angled bends that span miles. But making right angle folds for 30 feet and then straightening out again. If it was a fault in dry brittle rock even a slow bend will crack. But these are smooth and continuous folds that suddely appear and then disappear.

YES! That's why I said it!

Ok thanks. I am not very good at all the buttons and what not.

Because this isn't a thread or subforum where people are expected to defend their religious beliefs and faiths. Ergo, I'm under not necessity to go into detail about my personal beliefs. I didn't know you were going to try and get into the minutia of my beliefs when I first answered that question, so I don't want to comment on the rest.

Didn't you just cite the YEC belief and are saying its unreal. Or theres no evidence. Isn't that about belief. Doesn't tyhis claim then cause YEC to defend their belief.

Just like the YEC have certain beliefs so do other people along a spectrum of beliefs who have differing views on the flood myths and evidence. If just showed you a link where I think some sort of creationist scientists, are claiming scientific evidence for the flood. Others claim the ancient cultures mention the flood myths and still others believe the science points to a giant flood at the time.

I don't think we can seperate the science for belief. Not just yet anyway. For example scientists were claiming sophisticated belief, agriculture and forming organised communities only happened around 6,000 years ago. But the evidence now points to a much earlier beginning. They said the Exodus was fake and now evidence is supporting this. So I would be waiting and open for all possibilities.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Like I already said I am not arguing based on the biblical account of Noah. I am argueing for a real event that many cultures made flood myths about that are similar to Noah and the bible.

Then you're arguing off-topic then. Glad you admit it.

So what about the links I just attached. Are they not evidence. You seem to keep completely ignoring what I have linked as though it was not even there.

No. They're just links, and what you say they claim doesn't even support what you claim. It's been shown already that you quote links and articles out of context and quote mine them.

Yes so we can then look at the beliefs, the real events and see if there is any time that this is going to be more likely. Obviously a certain level of belief sophistication is needed. So we can limit the search down to when humans developed more complex beliefs about gods who send floods.

That would include I think the last 10 to 12,000 years by the evidence that these cultures had such sophisticated beliefs that their gods were sending such a flood. Maybe a bit further back but not too far I don't think. We are not talking about a belief level of say burying the dead as this is simple and could mean a number of things. I mean sophisticated beliefs such that a god was created who interacts with humans and punishes them.

Insofar as an evolutionary origin of deities is correct, the concept of a god would not have occurred to hominins prior to about 40,000 years ago, and the gods themselves would probably not have become fully visible prior to about 10,000 years ago.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/torr18336#:~:text=Insofar%20as%20an%20evolutionary%20origin,to%20about%2010%2C000%20years%20ago. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.731...volutionary origin,to about 10,000 years ago.
So it seems that humans did not fully develop religious belief in specific gods and their expression of this until around 10,000 years ago. Which just about fits nicely with cultures back then like Goblekli Tepe.

And what does this have to do with the fact that there is not geological evidence for a global flood?

But did you just read through that without stopping to consider what it means. I said cultures like Göbekli Tepe were sophisticated enought to come up with the flood myth and may be even the original one. You just literally read out the support for what I said. That the flood myth belief of Göbekli Tepe are more of The Epic of Gilgamesh which also has remarkable similarities with Noahs flood.

Because that abstract alone tells me that I don't need to read it because it doesn't say what you claim it says.

Well I could say that if you bothered to look at the scientific evidence in the video then you would not have claimed such a thing as the video explains how the only way their folds could have formed is when the layer was still soft and pliable. They go into extensive testing to rule out all other possibilities.

We are talking about folds that go back on themselves. Not just angled bends that span miles. But making right angle folds for 30 feet and then straightening out again. If it was a fault in dry brittle rock even a slow bend will crack. But these are smooth and continuous folds that suddely appear and then disappear.

If you had bothered to actually learn and read then you'd know that geological folding isn't only caused by extreme heat. It's caused as much by continental drift, fault lines pressing against each other, one layer of rock not being the same depth and thickness in certain places compared to the layers above and below it, among numerous other ways. Heat has nothing to do with it.

Didn't you just cite the YEC belief and are saying its unreal. Or theres no evidence. Isn't that about belief. Doesn't tyhis claim then cause YEC to defend their belief.

Just like the YEC have certain beliefs so do other people along a spectrum of beliefs who have differing views on the flood myths and evidence. If just showed you a link where I think some sort of creationist scientists, are claiming scientific evidence for the flood. Others claim the ancient cultures mention the flood myths and still others believe the science points to a giant flood at the time.

I don't think we can seperate the science for belief. Not just yet anyway. For example scientists were claiming sophisticated belief, agriculture and forming organised communities only happened around 6,000 years ago. But the evidence now points to a much earlier beginning. They said the Exodus was fake and now evidence is supporting this. So I would be waiting and open for all possibilities.

I don't care. I don't need to explain my faith and beliefs to you or anyone. The only person I need to square it with is God.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The Canyon was suppose to have occurred very slowly as sea sediment settled dried up and hardened into layers one by one. If this is the case then the layers cannot fold. They will crack, shatter and breakup.

I just realised that this comment just... is fundamentally wrong. No canyons are formed from sea sediment 'very slowly' drying up and hardening in layers one by one. That's not how canyons from in the slightest. Canyons are formed by water flowing downstream, through the multitudes of gaps in rocks and then eroding them through the years. That's why the Grand Canyon meanders along with the Colorado River.

Your 'idea' of how canyons forms is not what we see at all.

 

[stevevw]

Then you're arguing off-topic then. Glad you admit it.

Not really. Your jumping the gun again. It seems logical to me that part of supporting the possibility of Noah's flood is to first establish where the story came from. What was the world like back then. Not just for the Hebrews but for the cultures that came before it.

If we can show that there was a real flood event which all cultures are referring to then this lends weight to Noahs flood story because it lends support for all flood stories. Thats the first step'. No sense in trying to prove Noah's flood if the skeptic doesn't believe theres any truth to the flood story in the first place.

No. st liThey're junks, and what you say they claim doesn't even support what you claim. It's been shown already that you quote links and articles out of context and quote mine them.

So your saying they are just links because you claim they don't support what I say or because they are not evidence in the first place. What I say they claim is what they claim. Thats the evidence found from the research. For example from the links.

Engineers studied animal carvings made on a pillar – known as the vulture stone – at the site. By interpreting the animals as astronomical symbols, and using software to match their positions to patterns of stars, researchers dated the event to 10,950BC. The dating from the carvings agrees well with timing derived from an ice core from Greenland, which pinpoints the event – probably resulting from the break-up of a giant comet in the inner solar system – to 10,890BC.

This is science and these are the findings. They support what I have been saying that a major disaster occured around the time of Gobleki Tepe that melted the ice and caused massive flooding.

You would have read the quote from the other link as I copied it into the post. I cannot see how you could say the links are not supporting what I am saying. This is what that quote said once again.

Göbekli Tepe represents one of the largest early PPN sites in the region. A reference to the disastrous inundations of the Euphrates River and its tributaries seems to have been recorded in the iconography of Göbekli Tepe’s enclosures. The bas-reliefs of Enclosure D show an event similar to the one described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrating with zoomorphic images the diferent stages of a food.

That could not be more clear as supporting what I said. In fact I was only trying to support that Gobleki Tepe was the source of a flood myth and not Noah's. But as the link says the bas-relief in Enclosure D mentions an event similar to the 'The Epic of Gilgamesh' that is very much the same as Noah's flood. How is this not supporting what I said.

You can't just pretend that the words are not there. You have to address whats written and not make claims that its not written there is plain black and white words lol. If you disagree with what is written then thats fair enough. But don't say its not written in the first place. Thats just epistemically false.

And what does this have to do with the fact that there is not geological evidence for a global flood?

Hum. Here we were talking about cultural evidence for whether the flood myth originated some 10,000 years ago and your happily going along. Then when it gets to the nitty gritty you want to object thats its not relevant. Thats its not about the geology.

Your changing the goal posts on me lol.

This evidence should be included if its about proving a global flood. Especially in that we are seeking to prove if the story has any truth based on a real event. Its going to be understanding the belief and not the geology.

We can find a number of events in the geological records that point to floods. But we want a special kind of flood that impacted humans that they would make a whole worldview around. The only way to do that is to link both the geology and the cultural beliefs. One without the other means nothing as far as flood myths.

Because that abstract alone tells me that I don't need to read it because it doesn't say what you claim it says.

Are we reading the same link lol. It said the glyphs on one of the pillars at Gobleli Tepe had similarities to the 'The Epic of Gilgamesh'. That alone should have caught your eye and caused you to read further. That could not be more clear. Like I said it goes beyond my claims so its even better.

I was only supporting a big flood that caused the original flood myth. It didn't have to be similar to Gilgamesh or Noah's flood. BUt this scientific research is showing it has similarities to both these flood stories which gives weight that its not just any myth but in line with the other flood myths that came later. Which then lend weight that it may have been around before Gilgamesh and closer to the time of Goblekli Tepe.

If you had bothered to actually learn and read then you'd know that geological folding isn't only caused by extreme heat. It's caused as much by continental drift, fault lines pressing against each other, one layer of rock not being the same depth and thickness in certain places compared to the layers above and below it, among numerous other ways. Heat has nothing to do with it.

Ok I will have to look into that. I still cannot see how such folding back onto itself with such unbroken and continious lines can be caused when the layers are dry and brittle. Even deep down which these layers are in the Canyon under layers which have not folded in the above layers form different time periods supposedly. Doesnpt make sense even just looking at the pictures they look like they were soft when folded.

I don't care. I don't need to explain my faith and beliefs to you or anyone. The only person I need to square it with is God.

OK fair enough and I wasn't implying anything about peoples faith. Only that in the bigger picture we humans tend to have different worldviews that influence how we see things including the evidence. Thomas Kuhn mentions this with how different scientific paradigms like say biologists or physicsts may see things differently to evolutionary psychologists or anthropologists.

Its just something to keep in mind when understanding how people see things and how this can also influence things overall. Of course the fundemental paradigm difference is between materialists and naturalist verses spiritualist and a Creator God. Or something beyond the material. Materialist will see all evidence as naturalistic where as non materialist will see both the immaterial nature and material nature of reality.

Anyway I don't want to get into that but just say its a factor to consider.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

@stevevw I'm not going to respond to that post since it's just you repeating the same things again and again after you've been told and shown that you're in error, as well as another case of you typing out so much but saying so little with it.

The OP topic is talking about physical, geological evidence for a flood, which if there was a global flood, we would see repeated across the globe in various locations. We do not see that evidence at all. This was confirmed by the original geologists who went out to try and prove that the Noahic Flood occurred as in the Bible, and it's also confirmed by modern day understandings of geology. You don't need to try and bring up ancient cultures having flood myths of their own in whatever form of complexity you feel they have since that has nothing to do with the OP topic.

Try and actually address the OP topic next time. Then we'll talk.