Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

(They died instantly, not from a slow-moving ice age!)

I take it you've never lived in areas where it can be all the seasons in one day.

Keep in mind, some of the water (not most...most were from the “vast springs” underneath the ground) came from above, from the atmosphere....the troposphere?...the mesosphere?...the stratosphere? The Bible doesn’t say, it is silent.

Gotta show us this water layer of the atmosphere. We'll wait.

How come rockets and shuttles and stuff don't go through a water layer?

(That’s why Adam & Eve could go naked, and be very comfortable.

Eden isn't exactly located in Siberia.

Noah’s Ark was the focus of a major 1993 scientific study headed by Dr. Seon Hong at the world-class ship research center KRISO, based in Daejeon, South Korea. Dr. Hong’s team compared twelve hulls of different proportions to discover which design was most practical. No hull shape was found to significantly outperform the 4,300-year-old biblical design. In fact, the Ark’s careful balance is easily lost if the proportions are modified, rendering the vessel either unstable, prone to fracture, or dangerously uncomfortable.

There's an amusement park in KY that shows it doesn't work just SITTING THERE.

3.Coupled with that, the dimensions of the Ark, a 6-to-1 ratio of length to width, and 10-to-1 ratio of length to height, are exactly what is needed for a non-powered vessel of that size to maintain stability! Only in the last 2 centuries have ship builders recognized that this ratio is perfect for non-powered barge-like ships to be seaworthy. This is powerful evidence supporting a literal interpretation: How could Moses have known, in recording the event, that Noah was given such ideal dimensions? Fortunate guessing?

If it's so stable, why aren't our most modern ships based on that design?

The numerous Flood legends (exceeding 250, one anthropologist says near 1,000), that share many similarities, some strikingly so, that indicates a common source.

Yes, there's a common source: living near water.

If these mountains were millions of years old, we would see weathered, rounded features, due to the extreme wind and other erosion forces that they constantly endure. But we don’t!

The Smokies are nothing like the Rockies.

The marine creatures discovered on the tops of many mountain ranges, even on Mt. Everest — gigantic clams, some measuring 5 feet or more across, found in the closed position, indicating (again) that these creatures experienced a catastrophic event, leading to their quick death. (Clams in natural death, die w/ their shells open.) All remain exposed....if they’re millions of years old, why aren’t they eroded, also? Because these particular ones died at the Flood!!

They died in the ocean. That area got pushed up and it's not under water anymore.

If we again take into account what Psalms 104 reveals — that it was the Flood that caused our current topography, the very high mountains and low valleys, then the Earth’s terrain was somewhat smoother than now.

Earth Making

Really? What's a "muck field"?

Maybe it's like the La Brea tar pits?

Whether those massive graveyards were discovered eighty years or yesterday, has no bearing....the evidence is still there; those animals died catastrophically.

There are symptoms of drowning. Find any?

 

[ChristineM]

Wrong, right off the bat!
It shows you didn't read the OP

"He who gives an answer before he hears, It is folly and shame to him." -Proverbs 18:3, NASB

I did read it, the OP stated, and i quote

In the Siberian permafrost, a few have been discovered upright, with food (delicate flowers like buttercups, that only grow in temperate climates) discovered still unchewed in their mouths, like the Berezovka Mammoth. (They died instantly, not from a slow-moving ice age!)

It seems you dont know what you wrote in the OP

You seem keen on condemning people with the bible, how about
Proverbs 6:16-19
Proverbs 19:9

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I must post this:

I will not respond anymore to posts obfuscating the details of the OP and berating my character or education. (What are we, in 3rd grade?)

I've put some on ignore for this reason.

If you want to respond with reason, and discuss the evidence I've presented....I'm all for it!

Welcome to the dark side. It took me awhile but I had to do some of that too. I don't do it right away. I see context but if there is a pattern just specially aimed at me, then, well....

Most of the time it's not aimed at you just how you present your argument and the information you provide. If it's missing some supporters that can be strengthened with more or stronger sources, it's ideal to have some to present or rephrase so the OP doesn't try to speak for itself.

 

[Shad]

If it's so stable, why aren't our most modern ships based on that design?

There is a difference between buoyancy and seaworthiness. The study only established the design could float in perfect, thus unnatural, conditions. It never tested the design in simulated conditions present let alone any model of what a global flood would be like.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Yes you have posted evidence; however, it isn't credible. Heck, you've even included "evidence" that speaks against the flood event.

"Could Noah’s Ark Float? In Theory, Yes

Basic physics suggests that an ark carrying lots of animal cargo could float, but science doesn’t support other facets of the biblical tale
​

and

"University of Leicester physics students says Noah’s Ark would have floated with two each of 35,000 species of animal"
​

Students for god's sake! This is really reaching.

Plus the fact that they say only35,000 species of animals. Do you know how many animal species there are on earth? An estimated 7.77 million, and in pairs that would mean 15.5 million animals.* Plus all the plant and mushroom species that would have to have been saved:

Nope. you submitted evidence alright, but it's hardly useful. In fact, some of it is damaging to your proposition.

* source



.

So...doesn't the Bible present the Flood as a phenomenon caused by God? (It wasn't natural.) But then, you propose He did nothing else? He wouldn't protect the arks contents, during and after? (One of the last paragraphs in the OP discusses this.)

Regarding the animals....don't you believe in evolution? I do, to an extent. Those animals would be all that was needed, for the diversity within the families and genera we see today.

We're not told, but Jehovah could've induced a state of hibernation or torpor, to keep them calm.

We have precedent in the Bible, other accounts, describing God keeping people and animals from eating.

You give Jehovah very little credit.

But at least you discussed some of the OP evidence. Thanks for that.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

There is a difference between buoyancy and seaworthiness. The study only established the design could float in perfect, thus unnatural, conditions. It never tested the design in simulated conditions present let alone any model of what a global flood would be like.

Read again, please. Dr. Hong found the vessel seaworthy while enduring 100-ft. waves.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

How come rockets and shuttles and stuff don't go through a water layer?

(Really??)

Think about it, then you tell me.

 

[Shad]

Read again, please. Dr. Hong found the vessel seaworthy facing while enduring 100-ft. waves.

I was talking about the only study linked. The one from the students.

Link the study from Hong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Read again, please. Dr. Hong found the vessel seaworthy while enduring 100-ft. waves.

how did he do that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So...doesn't the Bible present the Flood as a phenomenon caused by God? (It wasn't natural.) But then, you propose He did nothing else? He wouldn't protect the arks contents, during and after? (One of the last paragraphs in the OP discusses this.)

Regarding the animals....don't you believe in evolution? I do, to an extent. Those animals would be all that was needed, for the diversity within the families and genera we see today.

We're not told, but Jehovah could've induced a state of hibernation or torpor, to keep them calm.

We have precedent in the Bible, other accounts, describing God keeping people and animals from eating.

You give Jehovah very little credit.

But at least you discussed some of the OP evidence. Thanks for that.

all of these claims of magic by you make the Ark unneeded.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

There's an amusement park in KY that shows it doesn't work just SITTING THERE.

You know than Dr. Hong, huh?
Yeah, all the boats I know of don’t work out of water, “just SITTING THERE.”

If it's so stable, why aren't our most modern ships based on that design?

Many are. Or close to it. But then, most boats are powered, with steering.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I was talking about the only study linked. The one from the students.

Link the study from Hong.

It’s in the OP! Plain as day.

Wow.

 

[Salvador]

At least thanks for providing a counter argument w/ references....other than just ranting and raving!



As per your link, on pg. 729, it says "> 4,000 years of age."
And that the oldest known tree is "Currey Tree," which is close to 4900 years of age.

You're close, but you misrepresented it. (Hey, it's your link.) Why?
It's neither here nor there, though.... it still fits an interpretation of the Flood timeline.

As far as the genetic/generational evidence, I'll get back to this.
I know genetics are pretty accurate in discovering from where a person's ancestors originated, but as to how far back the lineage goes, I'm sure there are problems and discrepancies with that. Genetics is a relatively new field, I know you're aware of this.

My bad,.....I didn't make specific reference to the bristlecone pine in California's White Mountains measured by Tom Harlan to be 5062 years old, making it the oldest known tree in North America and the oldest known individual tree in the world.

Reference: Pinus longaeva (Great Basin bristlecone pine) description - The Gymnosperm Database

The Gymnosperm Database

Pinus longaeva

D.K. Bailey 1970

 

[Audie]

The vegetation found in association with frozen
mammoths is not as described. All of it consists
of species from the tundra or boreal forest.

And,all of the remains are in various stages of
putrefaction, some quite advanced, producing a
sickening stench when thawed. Only a few are
more or less complete, the rest being fragmens
such as a leg, and showing signs of having been
scavenged by carnivores before freezing / burial.

These things are to be found in the actual research
papers written about the various finds.

But then, why do I bother.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You know than Dr. Hong, huh?
Yeah, all the boats I know of don’t work out of water, “just SITTING THERE.”


Many are. Or close to it. But then, most boats are powered, with steering.

From what I have seen of "Dr Hong's" work, yes. The only references that I can find on this supposedly world famous authority are at sites that are notorious for dishonesty and idiocy. It would have been nice if you could have supported your claims with valid links.

does anyone know of any re!iable.work at all by this supposed expert?

 

[Audie]

From what I have seen of "Dr Hong's" work, yes. The only references that I can find on this supposedly world famous authority are at sites that are notorious for dishonesty and idiocy. It would have been nice if you could have supported your claims with valid links.

does anyone know of any re!iable.work at all by this supposed expert?

You always fall for a good gish

 

[Subduction Zone]

You always fall for a good gish

I have requested that he not Gish. Sadly he ran away.

 

[metis]

In regards to the OP Dr. Frank Hibbins was cited as a source. The article given was not even close to being reliable. Doing a Google Scholar search on the man I did find that he did some work once in the Alaska "muckfields" From reading that I could see that he was talking about the Alaska permafrost. Unfortunately the body of the article was behind a paywall. Do you know anything about that work as an anthropologist? It is hard to check out a supposed source when nothing reliable is given to begin with.

Thanks for the info but I'm not familiar with him. However, in Wikipedia it says he has also been suspected of scientific fraud and on more than one occasion: Frank C. Hibben - Wikipedia

 

[Skwim]

In regards to the OP Dr. Frank Hibbins was cited as a source. The article given was not even close to being reliable. Doing a Google Scholar search on the man I did find that he did some work once in the Alaska "muckfields" From reading that I could see that he was talking about the Alaska permafrost. Unfortunately the body of the article was behind a paywall. Do you know anything about that work as an anthropologist? It is hard to check out a supposed source when nothing reliable is given to begin with.

Frank Cumming Hibben (December 5, 1910 – June 11, 2002) was a well-known archaeologist whose research focused on the U.S. Southwest. As a professor at the University of New Mexico (UNM) and writer of popular books and articles, he inspired many people to study archaeology. He was also controversial, being suspected of scientific fraud during his studies of Paleo-Indian cultures

Hibben's first marriage and subsequent investments made him a millionaire. In 2000, he donated part of his fortune to build an archaeology research building at UNM. (Due to the controversies surrounding his career, the decision to name the new building after him was questioned.

The primary source of the controversies was Hibben's claim to have found a deposit with pre-Clovis artifacts (including projectile points, which he termed "Sandia points") in Sandia Cave (in the Sandia Mountains near Albuquerque, New Mexico). Hibben believed the layers to be about 25,000 years old, much older than the Paleo-Indian cultures previously documented in the U.S. Southwest. The layers also included the bones of Pleistocene species such as camels, mastodons, and horses.[5]

The 25,000 year age for the "Sandia Man" deposits was a best guess based on the strata in the cave, and was later called into question, in part through radiocarbon dating. Also, research notes by Wesley Bliss (who had excavated in the cave in 1936) and others indicate that animal burrowing led to a mixing of deposits. The notion of a "Sandia Man" occupation of the U.S. Southwest is no longer accepted by professional archaeologists, but that in itself is not the source of controversy. Instead, some researchers believe that artifacts were "salted" (fraudulently placed) in the cave deposits to support the notion of the "Sandia Man" occupation. Those who believe that fraud was committed often suspect Hibben of being involved in the fraud.[4][6][7] The evidence is inconclusive, however, and Hibben maintained his innocence in the matter until his death.
Source: Wikipedia

​

In short, his scholarship and veracity is questionable.

.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks for the info but I'm not familiar with him. However, in Wikipedia it says he has also been suspected of scientific fraud and on more than one occasion: Frank C. Hibben - Wikipedia

That I did read. A man whose work is suspect and no reliable articles.posted of his work. Some "evidence"