Noah's Flood vs The Epic of Gilgamesh

[jonathan180iq]

Maybe the Pharoh was and egomaniac like Trump is alleged to be by the liberals. Emptied out the bodies gasping for air, put a few inscriptions saying he built them for such and such purposes.

You won't find evidence of people living for 1000.s of years, except by the generations of Noah, because the Pyramids were built just a few feet too short...

Maybe...
Ben Carson once said that the Pyramids were built and used as grain silos. I suppose his assertion is just as good as any other, right? Maybe they were built as corner markers for a giant's soccer field. Maybe they're ramps for ancient motorcross. Maybe they're gravity wells, which allow time travel to be possible.

Or maybe creationist mentalities will go to any lengths to defend utter nonsense.

 

[Altfish]

I didn't know there were any Thomas theme parks. I'd almost want to check it out just to check it out, and to reacquaint myself with something George Carlin worked on that I haven't seen since I was a wee little kid.

Here you go...

Thomas and Friends Day Out | Thomas Land™ Drayton Manor

 

[Sapiens]

It's been long believed that one story is true while the other is myth. The Epic of Gilgamesh is myth because the Pharoahs came after Noah's time, and it's contents are not testable.

Yet, the flood myth persists because the oldest know recording of a global flood is the Bablylonian Epic of Gilgamesh story from 18th century BC. This is before Moses' writings about Noah. However, it only confirms that the EoG tablet was written earlier. Not that it's contents are original or correct.

The many flood myths are re-tellings of the real event that have been distorted through centuries of passing down information. The earliest records of the event date back two millennia before Jesus was born. There are over 200 myths from all over the world about a major flood. If a worldwide flood never happened, then why are there so many stories about it?

Classic false dichotomy.

People need to live near a water source. Human settlements are almost always on rivers, usually just a few feet above where the water is, for ease and convenience. All rivers eventually flood and stories get told that turn to legend.

The Epic of Gilgamesh, a 12-tablet poem, is the most-cited myth people use to discredit the biblical account of Noah. The style is of an epic poem, and most of it has nothing to do with a flood, containing couplets and phrases that seem to point to recited fiction. It was created to honor the Pharoahs of the time.

Aside from that, the Gilgamesh boat is cube-shaped, which would be deadly for its occupants in rough seas. Only seven days were given for building it as well as to gather all the animals. Also, only seven days of rainfall covered the earth, and fickle gods destroy mankind but later give immortality to another.

If you knew anything about marine architecture you'd realize that the Noah vessel is no more seaworthy than Gilgamesh's.

The Biblical account is testable. Today, we have the Ark Encounter and Jonah's Ark. They weren't built to be falsifiable, but to honor God, Moses and Noah. One can equate it to what NASA scientists believe in colonizing Mars because the Earth is doomed, probably due to global warming. They are trying build a ship to reach Mars and test their theory out that it can be achieved. Whether their theory actually happens and becomes falsifiable is yet to be seen.

The testing demonstrates that the design of the Ark is defective.

 

[Jose Fly]

What's always fascinated me about the Biblical flood model is how, among European geologists, it started out as the default framework. In the early days, geologists generally interpreted their findings through the lens of the flood occurring as the Bible depicts. But in the 1800's, as geologists were able to travel more, and increasing numbers of mines and roads were constructed (thereby revealing more geological strata) they began to realize that the Biblical flood model was false. Some abandoned it fairly quickly, while others took longer. You can read their writings and see how for those longer holdouts who were Christian, it was quite a painful process. They struggled with the theological consequences, but being good scientists they had little choice except to follow the data.

 

[james bond]

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here...

• Gilgamesh was written sooner - but it can't be tested.
• The Genesis deluge can be tested because some guy in Kentucky built a boat-shaped museum.
• NASA is filled with atheists who want to colonize Mars.

Is there something that I'm missing?

>>Gilgamesh was written sooner - but it can't be tested.<<

Yeah, I probably could've cleaned it up and explained better. What I was trying to say was Noah's Flood happened BEFORE Gilgamesh, and that is why the Epic of Gilgamesh exists. It's based on a true story.

Since Noah's Ark and the Flood raised so many questions on how it was possible, the Creation Museum organization and an unrelated wealthy chap both built arks according to the directions in the Bible. Thus, they have arks that can be tested to an extent. The Ark Encounter is on land, but it allows the public to see how big the ship is, how it was built and other details and how she could carry all the animal pairs. The Dutch (?) wealthy chap, Jonah, built his ark so that it floats and is able to be transported to different ports. I'm not sure if he's going to let the public aboard, but it demonstrates that the Ark can be put on water and not sink.

As for the Ark in Gilgamesh, there isn't any point building it because it was based on a mythical poem. It's a cube shape so it's not a seaworthy ship and would be dangerous to put on water. The details of building it are lacking, too. Really, the poem was marketing to promote the Pharoah to the people. Thus, the EoG is a just a myth and not worth pursuing further.

>>NASA is filled with atheists who want to colonize Mars.<<

NASA has proposed sending colonizing Mars based on it being the planet in our solar system most like the Earth. What I did was compared this task to Noah building the Ark by himself. Noah was 500 years old or past his mid-life. All life on Earth was extinguished except for Noah's family and the starter animals. God gave him around 120-years to do it, but he completed it in 100. NASA hasn't proposed the details yet, but is trying to raise the money for the mission. The similarities are both missions are to save lives and start a new colony. One has God supporting it directly to Noah. I haven't heard much talk about God regarding NASA's mission, and I don't think we will. If it does get funded, then someone may say, "May the Force be with you" before they take off. This would be equivalent of, "May God be with you," but who knows how NASA thinks nowadays ha ha. There is danger to both missions. Noah and his family could have died during the inclement weather and flooding, but they survived and were successful in starting a new colony which today's animals and humans are descendents of. There was no fish to human and apes to human evolution. All of that is myth. Cosmic rays hit the new colony and thus, their lives were cut short from living close to 1000 to around 120 years. In the past, NASA's scientists may have mentioned God, but today that is rarely done. Thus, I do not think God has inspired Obama (who canceled colonizing the moon), NASA or Elon Musk (who is promoting this mission by using his SpaceX company). This is strictly their own doing. I think since Jesus loved the moon so much that his inspiration would have been to colonize it.

 

[james bond]

No I get the facts from reading of the Milky Way Myths from all over the world - an from connecting the ancient myths to their correct celestial objects and motions.
Read more here - Milky Way (mythology) - Wikipedia and here - List of names for the Milky Way - Wikipedia
Ancient Myths of Creation aren´t just mumbo jumbo but real cosmological observations and explanations and illustrated by lots of symbols.

>>Ancient Myths of Creation aren´t just mumbo jumbo but real cosmological observations and explanations and illustrated by lots of symbols.<<

The story of Noah's Ark in Genesis isn't myth, but a historical reference. I was saying the Epic of Gilgamesh and the other 200 or so flood stories were handed down from a real global flood.

 

[james bond]

This may be the Christian perspective - but the rest of us understand that they're both Mythological stories - giving reference and meaning to events within a religious and cultural ethos.


It doesn't persist as something that is to be taken seriously as a literal fact... Flood myths persist because every major cultural center before the advent of more efficient ground transportation was located along a large water way - most of these being rivers throughout Mesopotamia. Cultures whose well-being was directly tied to the health and stability of their local river developed grand tales about past stories of flooding. When propagating tales about their cultures, and as a process of sharing competing tales with surrounding cultures, each flood mythology grew into something more than an actual recording of events.


As long as you understand that the real events that you're describing here were localized river floods and not global submersions, then you're right.

To answer your last question - please read my previous paragraph.


http://www.aina.org/books/eog/eog.pdf

Why don't you apply this same level of discernment to your Biblical account? Wouldn't that let you observe them both through the same lens, removing your personal bias from the equation?

How is a modern retelling of Noah's flood any different?
A 500 year old man, with no real training, builds the largest wooden boat the world has ever seen so that an invisible voice in the sky can send him a pair of all the animals on the planet (which no one knew was a massive globe) and save them from a flood that submerged even the highest mountain peak. Then, the magic layer of water which somehow floated above the atmosphere was released onto the Earth (which no one knew was a massive globe) killing everything and everyone that wasn't on the boat... After that, this 500 year old man, and his sons and daughters repopulated the entire planet (which no one knew was a massive globe) and they all lived happily ever after - until they began sinning again, of course.

Don't these "couplets and phrases seem to point to recited fiction"?


Pretty unbelievable, right?
How is this any more ridiculous than the Biblical account?

Odysseus was able to survive a terrible tempest which killed his entire crew by quickly brandishing a few boards together to make a raft. Does the fact that his story seems more plausible make it an historical fact?


How is the Biblical account testable, pray tell?
If the encounters aren't built to be falsifiable, then what are you actually saying here?

No NASA mission is focused on colonizing Mars... And it's not because "The Earth is doomed!" We're traveling to Mars because geological and chemical study with a human being in 3 days will be vastly more productive in determining if the planet ever once harbored life than the work of all the rovers over the past two decades.

The non-believers think it's a myth because Noah's flood true story is similar to the Epic of Gilgamesh poem in regards to the ark, animals and flooding. However, Noah's flood was a true historical story that happened before Gilgamesh. Not the other way around. Gilgamesh is a myth because it's not testable. Noah's Ark isn't a myth because parts of it has been tested.

I don't disagree, but again these flood stories from all around the world was inspired by the actual historical event. The actual story got convoluted, but that is another historical story for another day.

I'm glad you're agreeing that Noah was a true story, but the part of it being a global flood is true, too.

>>How is a modern retelling of Noah's flood any different?
A 500 year old man, with no real training, builds the largest wooden boat the world has ever seen so that an invisible voice in the sky can send him a pair of all the animals on the planet (which no one knew was a massive globe) and save them from a flood that submerged even the highest mountain peak. Then, the magic layer of water which somehow floated above the atmosphere was released onto the Earth (which no one knew was a massive globe) killing everything and everyone that wasn't on the boat... After that, this 500 year old man, and his sons and daughters repopulated the entire planet (which no one knew was a massive globe) and they all lived happily ever after - until they began sinning again, of course.

Don't these "couplets and phrases seem to point to recited fiction"?<<

The difference is Noah's story is in the Bible. I realize the story sounds incredulous, but that's why I am trying to compare that mission or journey to something today. There really isn't anything like it unless it's for us to survive global warming and colonize Mars. It's not just one ship going, but the plan is for one ship after another to go based on what we know today. Isn't that an incredulous undertaking? Noah's historical story said the flood is going to destroy the world. The other story says that global warming is going to destroy the world.

>>How is the Biblical account testable, pray tell?
If the encounters aren't built to be falsifiable, then what are you actually saying here?<<

I already explained. Obviously, we can't test it under actual conditions.

Well, what quantum scientist Edward Witten said was this science being falsifiable has been blown out of proportion. We do not explore by saying oh, we're going to Mars to test the falsifiability of being able to travel there is reasonable time. That isn't the goal, but to go there and explore as well as start a new colony.

>>No NASA mission is focused on colonizing Mars... And it's not because "The Earth is doomed!" We're traveling to Mars because geological and chemical study with a human being in 3 days will be vastly more productive in determining if the planet ever once harbored life than the work of all the rovers over the past two decades.<<

This isn't what I got from listening to Elon Musk. Just read my sig.

 

[james bond]

Yes, it is testable and it has failed every test thrown at it.
Yes, NASA is investing in space exploration but serious colonisation of Mars is a non-starter; lack of food and water for a start.
Ark Encounter - you are having a laugh; in the UK we have Thomas the Tank Engine Land & Lego Land elsewhere there is Parc Asterix and Disney Parks. It doesn't make them true.

Ha ha. The Ark Encounter and Creation Museum is different. They're historical theme parks.

 

[james bond]

That doesn't prove Gilgamesh was written first but Noah happened first.

Perhaps, but it fails miserably at making predictions. Such as, if Noah's, or anybody else's global flood were real, we could expect to find evidence of such a flood in the sedimentary layers of the Earth as well as a sudden disruption and abrupt end to what seems all human civilization. We don't find either of these things, even though they are crucial in proving anyone's flood story. And even if both of these conditions where met, it still leaves us with attempting to solve how it happened, where all the water came from/went to, and other details relating to it. It would still require more evidence to prove it was specifically your god that caused it.

Those are nothing more than amusement/theme parks. I've to Hogwarts at Universal Studios, but it makes Hogwarts no more real than a fantasy from a book.

A scientific theory, starting as a hypothesis, must be by default falsifiable. You don't figure out if it's falsifiable later, it has to be falsifiable from the start.

It could be built, but the dimensions the Bible gives us would make it simple impossible to house that many animals. There just wouldn't be enough room.

I didn't know there were any Thomas theme parks. I'd almost want to check it out just to check it out, and to reacquaint myself with something George Carlin worked on that I haven't seen since I was a wee little kid.

Not just by itself, but the 200 other flood stories around the world had to come from something or event. Some people think Noah's story came after EoG since it was written before the Bible. Yes, the Bible was written after EoG, but the actual events came prior.

There is a difference because of the Creation Museum and it being based on a historical book.

>>It could be built, but the dimensions the Bible gives us would make it simple impossible to house that many animals. There just wouldn't be enough room.<< That's one of the testable parts of the Ark Encounter. It theorizes how it was done.

>>A scientific theory, starting as a hypothesis, must be by default falsifiable. You don't figure out if it's falsifiable later, it has to be falsifiable from the start.<<

The falsifiability has been overblown and is discussed now of being scrapped. It doesn't allow for the wilder exotic things like dark energy and dark matter or multiverses to be explored. Of course, the supernatural is still verboten. For example, no one is going to go look for a black or other color swan if the theory is all swans are white. If it was a hypothesis, then it would be different. It only became falsifiable because a black swan was found when all the swans before that time were white. Are we going to look for a unicorn or the FSM in order to falsify some other theory?

 

[james bond]

Classic false dichotomy.

People need to live near a water source. Human settlements are almost always on rivers, usually just a few feet above where the water is, for ease and convenience. All rivers eventually flood and stories get told that turn to legend.
If you knew anything about marine architecture you'd realize that the Noah vessel is no more seaworthy than Gilgamesh's.
The testing demonstrates that the design of the Ark is defective.

I'm not sure what you are saying by false dichotomy and I live next to a river which was in danger of flooding this past winter. The difference between a local flood and global was there is no way to prevent an act of God like that. The only survival mechanism we had was a warning of a global flood and to prepare the Ark. It was a catastrophe that wiped out all the inhabitants of Earth. The biggest evidence it occurred is 3/4 of our planet is covered by water.

As for the your last two comments, I think it's based on hyperbole, conjecture and trolling because it goes against your worldview.

 

[james bond]

What's always fascinated me about the Biblical flood model is how, among European geologists, it started out as the default framework. In the early days, geologists generally interpreted their findings through the lens of the flood occurring as the Bible depicts. But in the 1800's, as geologists were able to travel more, and increasing numbers of mines and roads were constructed (thereby revealing more geological strata) they began to realize that the Biblical flood model was false. Some abandoned it fairly quickly, while others took longer. You can read their writings and see how for those longer holdouts who were Christian, it was quite a painful process. They struggled with the theological consequences, but being good scientists they had little choice except to follow the data.

Do you know why some Christian geologists and scientists changed their minds including Alfred Russel Wallace?

Creation scientists say that uniformitarian geologists during the 1800s asserted that the fossil record formed over hundreds of millions of years and provided the geologic ages in order to determine an evolutionary history of life on earth. They said the primitive organisms were buried first and thus deeper in the rock strata while more recent ones ended up on top. Because no one had questioned the creation scientists up until then, fossil sorting and the uniformitarian interpretation became widely accepted. The creationists of that time found the biblical global flood explanations could not mount a counterpoint to the uniformitarian viewpoint. Instead of using science to prove their theories, they had relied up God of the gaps. Also, Darwin's views of evolution took root as you know. I think either Darwin's or Lyell's professor became depressed an committed suicide. However, in the 1930s, the creationists started to fight back and thus we have creation vs evolution.

 

[Altfish]

Ha ha. The Ark Encounter and Creation Museum is different. They're historical theme parks.

Are you saying that Thomas and Asterix and Donald and Mickey don't exist!!

You blasphemer, they are real. I've read about them in an old book.

 

[Native]

Cultures whose well-being was directly tied to the health and stability of their local river developed grand tales about past stories of flooding.

Agreed.
But they also made their ritual buildings as "a mirror of the Sky" which again provided their Myths of Creation. And here, the white band of the Milky Way contours were incorporated in the myths as a "Great River in the Sky" which can be observed all around the Earth on the darker periods of the seasons.
This running river in the Sky is later interpreted by scholars as a "river running over/on the entire Earth" as a divine revenge.
Regarding the "Noa Ark", there are several other cultural myths of divine ships, just read here - The origin of Mythical Ships - and here - Category:Mythological ships - Wikipedia -

 

[TheloniousX]

So, reading through the remarks, there seems to be a conflict of interest, timeline, perspective. Plus, there is a lack of physical/geological evidence to prove that such an event as the great flood ever took place. The question of why there are so many cultural myths depicting such an event, and why they cannot be proven to take place in a relative timeline can be partly due to the depiction of time in the Bible or Quran.

Supposedly, Noah survived for 350 years after the flood and lived to be around 950 years old. Moses after him, only lived to be 120 years old.

The perspective of world cultures living close to bodies of water with the depiction of the great flood myth as a global phenomenon raises many questions... If the timeline of each cultural event could be narrowed down to a comparative/relative timeframe it could be proven to be a singular, global event. The problem with the depiction of time in the Bible makes it impossible to compare and put it all in chronological order.

 

[Sapiens]

I'm not sure what you are saying by false dichotomy and I live next to a river which was in danger of flooding this past winter. The difference between a local flood and global was there is no way to prevent an act of God like that. The only survival mechanism we had was a warning of a global flood and to prepare the Ark. It was a catastrophe that wiped out all the inhabitants of Earth. The biggest evidence it occurred is 3/4 of our planet is covered by water.

As for the your last two comments, I think it's based on hyperbole, conjecture and trolling because it goes against your worldview.

Please, you should know by now that I do not make comments based on anything other than fact:

A. M. Robb, there was an "upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight" (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that "a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging' " (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water.

John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that "six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction" (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage.

So it should be clear by now why "intelligent people" somehow see a "problem" in the building of the ark.

(thanks NCSE)

Robb, A. M. 1958. "Ship-Building." In Singer, Charles, Holmyard, E. J., Hall, A. R., and Williams, Trevor I. (editors), A History of Technology, vol. V: The Late Nineteenth Century, c1850 to c1900. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 350-390.

Pollard, Sidney, and Robertson, Pail. 1979. The British Shipbuilding Industry 1870-1914. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Laing, Alexander. 1971. American Ships. New York: American Heritage Press.

See also: Noah's Ark: Sea Trials

 

[Native]

The story of Noah's Ark in Genesis isn't myth, but a historical reference. I was saying the Epic of Gilgamesh and the other 200 or so flood stories were handed down from a real global flood.

The numerous cultural Flood Myths are all connected to the cultural Stories of Creation. Modern science claims the creation of our Solar System for some 4.6 bill. years ago. If you connect the Flood Myths to a specific historic time, how old are your Solar System/Universe then?

 

[jonathan180iq]

The non-believers think it's a myth because Noah's flood true story is similar to the Epic of Gilgamesh poem in regards to the ark, animals and flooding. However, Noah's flood was a true historical story that happened before Gilgamesh. Not the other way around. Gilgamesh is a myth because it's not testable. Noah's Ark isn't a myth because parts of it has been tested.

Listen... Is the story of Odysseus true because rafts exist? Is it true because there are islands in the Mediterranean? Can we conclude that it's true because Ileon (Troy) was a real place? Do those individual bits of information mean that the whole of the story was a factual retelling of events?

If the answer is "no" - then you have to rewrite your explanation for accepting the Biblical deluge as historical fact.

I'm glad you're agreeing that Noah was a true story, but the part of it being a global flood is true, too.

Which is a claim that many literalists make. Yet not one of you has ever presented evidence to substantiate that claim. No one in the world at the time of the writing of these ancient flood stories had any concept of the actual size of the Earth. A vast regional flood would have seemed like the entire world was under water... I'm simply asking you to be reasonable and apply the same level of criticism to your own beliefs as you would to those of anyone else.

The difference is Noah's story is in the Bible. I realize the story sounds incredulous, but that's why I am trying to compare that mission or journey to something today. There really isn't anything like it unless it's for us to survive global warming and colonize Mars. It's not just one ship going, but the plan is for one ship after another to go based on what we know today. Isn't that an incredulous undertaking? Noah's historical story said the flood is going to destroy the world. The other story says that global warming is going to destroy the world.

As a person who has made the study of Space Science a hobby since I was 12 years old, I'm telling you that no one has any real plan or interest in colonizing Mars. It's a cute little idea to toy with - but it's not something that is going to exist in reality.

I already explained. Obviously, we can't test it under actual conditions.

Well, what quantum scientist Edward Witten said was this science being falsifiable has been blown out of proportion. We do not explore by saying oh, we're going to Mars to test the falsifiability of being able to travel there is reasonable time. That isn't the goal, but to go there and explore as well as start a new colony.

Again - it's not happening. It's science fiction. The only goal right now is to land humans there, briefly, to further our understanding of Astrobiology.

This isn't what I got from listening to Elon Musk. Just read my sig.

Elon Musk does many things very well, partly because of his propensity for thinking outside the box. But launching nukes at Mar's polar ice caps and then waiting 500-1,000 years for the fallout to clear and the warming to begin is, like I said, science fiction. He's never taken humans to space, and think she can land 2 on the moon next year... and within a few more years land colonizing parties on the Martian surface, where there is nothing to eat, drink, or breathe... Again, be reasonable.

Ha ha. The Ark Encounter and Creation Museum is different. They're historical theme parks.

Think about this for a moment... Don't you find it a bit odd that these historical "museums" don't have a single artifact from the time period or events that they are hoping to portray? Like with anything that's real and true, a global flood just a few thousand years ago would leave traces of itself. There would be more to the Ark encounter than just an artistic recreation of a large wooden vessel. There should be more period appropriate clothing, artwork, and utensils, don't you think? If that place had any value for intellectual honesty, shouldn't they present ACTUAL supporting parts of their "falsifiable" evidence. If they could do so, they would change the world - but they haven't. Why is that?

 

[jonathan180iq]

Agreed.
But they also made their ritual buildings as "a mirror of the Sky" which again provided their Myths of Creation. And here, the white band of the Milky Way contours were incorporated in the myths as a "Great River in the Sky" which can be observed all around the Earth on the darker periods of the seasons.
This running river in the Sky is later interpreted by scholars as a "river running over/on the entire Earth" as a divine revenge.
Regarding the "Noa Ark", there are several other cultural myths of divine ships, just read here - The origin of Mythical Ships - and here - Category:Mythological ships - Wikipedia -

True. And, if anything, this is evidence that ancient people's simply had no idea what they were talking about - this is true for Isrealites, Canaanites, Babylonians, Hindus, Greeks, Gauls... etc, etc, etc. And it's why so many mythologies have been created which seem similar. Since all these ancient peoples experienced pretty much the same kind of natural occurrences, they have slightly differing explanations for the same types of things. The variances are simply biased towards their cultural and regional identities. I don't think it's any more complicated than that.

 

[David T]

"The many flood myths are re-tellings of the real event that have been distorted through centuries of passing down information"

And science does not magically have this I problem as well? Distortion is fundemental fact requirement in reductionism of nature cosmos physical etc. Our treating of the Gilgamesh story as fLse myth is from Christianity. So when say christianity is myth we are creating a new false objectivity just like reductionism has in Christianity. So what's more bs reductionism nature as a machine or there were epic floods that we didn't cause but a bigger causer than us caused them? So intelllectual causality curiously is deified in religion curiouslh that is reductionism at its dumbest!!!!! Morons, evolve please starting In science and religion, both.

 

[Native]

True. And, if anything, this is evidence that ancient people's simply had no idea what they were talking about . . .

Or else they had a very similar explanation of the same celestial figure (we are talking of the Milky Way figure and its mythical symbols) which they described in similar ways.