Why we know that there was no global flood.

[Subduction Zone]

Ever heard of the ocean, if you enter the ocean from a flood you could end up anywhere in the world, like the middle east.

Please make up your mind. At one point you are talking about local floods and now you mention the ocean. The flood that probably inspired the flood myth was an inland flood.

And you keep forgetting that local floods make the Ark itself pointless.

Of course all you can make are vague statements. This indicates that you know that you are wrong. People that actually believe something do not need to play games like that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Genesis does not say Noah lived in the Middle East before the flood.

Yes, but it also said that he landed in the mountains. We know that did not happen.

What straws do you want to grasp at next?

 

[Twilight Hue]

There are two things in the video that give me clues that there must have been a flood.
First, there is a lot of water behind the guy talking. It had to come from somewhere.
Second, I cannot take a guy seriously with such long hair. Mainly because I’m jealous.

Not to mention his last name is Ra.

Most certainly a god incognito. He ain't fooling anyone! *Grin*

 

[Lyndon]

The end of the ice age was not a local flood, how many times do I have to say that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The end of the ice age was not a local flood, how many times do I have to say that.

You are all over the place in your claims. Perhaps you might want to fully flesh out your responses before posting.

 

[Lyndon]

You're totally unsubstantiated in your claims. Just because I don't accept the Biblical account as 100% accurate doesn't mean I don't have a right to my own opinion. Atheists on this forum spend more time quoting the bIble than believers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're totally unsubstantiated in your claims. Just because I don't accept the Biblical account as 100% accurate doesn't mean I don't have a right to my own opinion. Atheists on this forum spend more time quoting the bIble than believers.

There has been no need to yet. I have only stated obvious facts. If you disagree with any of my claims I will gladly support them. What did you not understand?

 

[Lyndon]

Please make up your mind. At one point you are talking about local floods and now you mention the ocean. The flood that probably inspired the flood myth was an inland flood.

And you keep forgetting that local floods make the Ark itself pointless.

Of course all you can make are vague statements. This indicates that you know that you are wrong. People that actually believe something do not need to play games like that.

I never said anything about local floods, try reading my posts carefully, I said there was universal flooding at the end of the last ice age, and Noah and his contempories were probably living below the the post ice age sea level, and since they were living by the ocean, there's a good chance their ark ended up floating around in the ocean.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never said anything about local floods, try reading my posts carefully, I said there was universal flooding at the end of the last ice age, and Noah and his contempories were probably living below the the post ice age sea level, and since they were living by the ocean, there's a good chance their ark ended up floating around in the ocean.

You made gross errors. There was no "universal flooding at the end of the last ice age". Sea level rose, but that occurred over hundreds of years. And once again, your version of the Flood negates the need of an Ark. People simply moved inland as water levels rose. That was all. Here:

Global sea-level rise at the end of the last Ice Age | National Oceanography Centre

"Global sea level rose by a total of more than 120 metres as the vast ice sheets of the last Ice Age melted back. This melt-back lasted from about 19,000 to about 6,000 years ago, meaning that the average rate of sea-level rise was roughly 1 metre per century.

Previous studies of sea-level change at individual locations have suggested that the gradual rise may have been marked by abrupt ‘jumps’ of sea-level rise at rates that approached 5 metres per century."

Please note, even the "jumps" were at the rate of 5 meters per century. A rise in sea level of 15 feet over one hundred years is not a catastrophic flood.

 

[Lyndon]

You have no proof for any of your comments, its all conjecture, you have no idea how quickly the ice melted and the sea level rose.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have no proof for any of your comments, its all conjecture, you have no idea how quickly the ice melted and the sea level rose.

I just posted you a link. I can explain to you how they know this. You are merely projecting your sins upon others. You make amazingly ignorant claims and have no support at all for them and ignore corrections. You will never learn this way.


You do understand that at the end of the last glaciation that the ice did not melt over night, don't you?"

 

[Lyndon]

Way to get personal!! You should check the TOS for the forum before proceeding further!! It seems the one with the weak arguments are the first to resort to personal attacks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Way to get personal!! You should check the TOS for the forum before proceeding further!! Maybe I'm just not willing to accept you as an authority.

I was no more "personal" than you were. And please note, I am not basing this solely upon my claims. I gave you a link to read. You can probably think logically and reasonably when you try.

When the last glaciation ended (we are still in an ice age by the way) the ice did not disappear overnight. There is no reason to think that it disappeared in a year. It took thousands of years for the ice to melt. Here is another article that will help you on that:

What Thawed the Last Ice Age?

All of this is well known. One does not melt that much ice over night. Even today with massive global warming the rate in rise of sea level is going to be measured in meters per century, not tens of meters per century. And to have "flooding" you would need meters of rise in one year.

So far the ideas that you have floated have been shown to be wrong. The past rates of sea level rise have been measured. They do not come anywhere near the rate needed for the flood that you proposed.

 

[Sapiens]

You're totally unsubstantiated in your claims. Just because I don't accept the Biblical account as 100% accurate doesn't mean I don't have a right to my own opinion. Atheists on this forum spend more time quoting the bIble than believers.

Here we go ... again. You have a right to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.

You have no proof for any of your comments, its all conjecture, you have no idea how quickly the ice melted and the sea level rose.

You need to look to the geological work of Dr. Nick Flemming at the Institute for Oceanographic Studies in Surrey. He lays out the rates for sea level rise as well as the changes in the terrestrial topography.

Current Projects include:

Reconstruction of submerged prehistoric landscapes in the Aegean

In this project we study the main geological and tectonic processes which have controlled the evolution of the submerged Pleistocene landscapes in the Aegean Region and explore the potential for further research on the seafloor of the continental shelf to address questions of Palaeolithic settlement. The Aegean Region is a unique environment in terms of active geodynamics, plate movements, on-going geological processes, formation of new relief and dynamically changing landscapes. Geological, morphological and hydrogeological data along with the palaeo-geographical evolution of the shallow coastal and shelf areas are studied in parallel with the terrestrial archaeological record to open windows to future research into the origins of humanity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here we go ... again. You have a right to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.
You need to look to the geological work of Dr. Nick Flemming at the Institute for Oceanographic Studies in Surrey. He lays out the rates for sea level rise as well as the changes in the terrestrial topography.

Current Projects include:

Reconstruction of submerged prehistoric landscapes in the Aegean

In this project we study the main geological and tectonic processes which have controlled the evolution of the submerged Pleistocene landscapes in the Aegean Region and explore the potential for further research on the seafloor of the continental shelf to address questions of Palaeolithic settlement. The Aegean Region is a unique environment in terms of active geodynamics, plate movements, on-going geological processes, formation of new relief and dynamically changing landscapes. Geological, morphological and hydrogeological data along with the palaeo-geographical evolution of the shallow coastal and shelf areas are studied in parallel with the terrestrial archaeological record to open windows to future research into the origins of humanity.

These claims of floods after the last glaciation reminded me of a class that I took. The professor "cheated" for us a bit. He took us to the important sites that gave the evidence for what happened, but he did not give us the work of various geologists of the area. Others had done all of the hard footwork for us. We merely reexamined the evidence provided. In the Syracuse area as the ice sheet melted and retreated there was a series of catastrophic floods. Most of our conclusions were the same as in this article here:

http://ottohmuller.com/nysga2ge/Fil...annels - Evidence Of A Catastrophic Flood.pdf

Floods leave evidence. Compared to a global flood this one would be tiny and it was still fairly obvious what happened. It was an excellent learning experience. One can't reproduce the work that took others years to make in one short class, but one can follow the highlights of their work if led to the various sites.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I just posted you a link. I can explain to you how they know this. You are merely projecting your sins upon others. You make amazingly ignorant claims and have no support at all for them and ignore corrections. You will never learn this way.


You do understand that at the end of the last glaciation that the ice did not melt over night, don't you?"

Way to get personal!! You should check the TOS for the forum before proceeding further!! It seems the one with the weak arguments are the first to resort to personal attacks.

I'll just leave this here...

ig·no·rant
ˈiɡnərənt/
adjective

1. lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
   "he was told constantly that he was ignorant and stupid"
   synonyms: uneducated, unknowledgeable, untaught, unschooled, untutored, untrained, illiterate, unlettered, unlearned, unread, uninformed, unenlightened, benighted; More
   
2. lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.
   "they were ignorant of astronomy"
   synonyms: without knowledge of, unaware of, unconscious of, oblivious to, incognizant of, unfamiliar with, unacquainted with, uninformed about, ill-informed about, unenlightened about, unconversant with, inexperienced in/with, naive about, green about; More

ignorant definition - Google Search

 

[Lyndon]

More personal attacks, give the moderators a break!!

 

[Lyndon]

The contention of the biblical account is the flood was caused by a cataclysmic event, Im not sure that the Ice age ended slowly and was not accelerated by some sort of cataclysm. If the event caused more of the ice to melt than present day, the sea level may have gone higher than today before returning to its present level. I'm not saying its a sure thing, but great flood events are in the creation stories of most cultures all over the known world, something happened otherwise the flood stories were all this great big made up coincidence, which is not very scientific.

 

[SalixIncendium]

More personal attacks, give the moderators a break!!

Please explain how you're interpreting a dictionary definition as a personal attack. Did you bother reading the second definition which I emboldened for emphasis?

 

[Lyndon]

Calling or implying someone is ignorant is still against the TOS, and you definition was in reply to my post specifically.