Was the Real Flood in Genesis or Gilgamesh?

[tuxbox]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Are you being sarcastic, or is that your actual answer?

Obviously events form ancient history can´t be confirmed with a certainty of 100%, but the fact that there are multiple indepdented sources reporting the same event proves that the event was real. This criteria is widely accepted in accepting facts from ancient history. You are making an arbitrary exception with the flood

There is not enough water to cover the entire globe with water. So yeah, that is my answer.

 

[leroy]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Are you being sarcastic, or is that your actual answer?

Obviously events form ancient history can´t be confirmed with a certainty of 100%, but the fact that there are multiple indepdented sources reporting the same event proves that the event was real. This criteria is widely accepted in accepting facts from ancient history. You are making an arbitrary exception with the flood

There is not enough water to cover the entire globe with water. So yeah, that is my answer.

But you still fail to address my point…

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

 

[SpecialFrog]

Dalrymple GB. The Age of the Earth. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1991.

If you were really curious you could probably have found it on google like I did.

Would you care to provide a primary source that describes the dating procedures?

Just 1 sample that uses 2 or more independent radiometric methods.

The table shows the dating methods that were used for each sample (four for one of the samples). What exactly is it you want?

 

[SpecialFrog]

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

That isn't how history works.

First of all, are the sources independent? The Torah appears to have been compiled in Mesopotamia, which makes the inclusion of Mesopotamian mythology questionably independent.

Secondly, are these actually the same story? Clearly floods happen in many places. How would you tell whether or not they are mythological versions of different events.

Thirdly, when determining the probability that an event happened, you have to factor in the probability that the event could have happened. If this probability is low, the evidence for it having happened has to be proportionately high to compensate. The evidence strongly suggests that no global flood happened. This makes a mythological version of a real -- but local -- flood more probable. It also makes an entirely made up story more probable.

 

[tuxbox]

But you still fail to address my point…

Your point lacks merit

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

If the worldwide flood killed everyone but Noah and his family, then all the groups you mention would not have been around to witness this flood. Therefor, the flood myth is just that, a myth. Local floods may have happened in all the places you mention, but they would have no way of knowing if it was worldwide. Please do not say all those peoples are descendants of Noah and that the Tower of Babel is why they are so spread out with different skin colors, cultures, and languages, or I might puke.

Like I said, the ancients found seashells on mountains and without proper knowledge of how they got there, then it was perfectly reasonable for them to surmise that a flood took place.

People from a lot of cultures also have myths of dragons. Everyone knows that dragons never existed, but using your logic dragons must have existed. There are also multiple myths of bigfoot and the yeti and so called multiple sightings of both these creatures, yet there is not any evidence to support these claims. Again, using your logic these creatures must exist.

*edited* for using You're instead of your... hehe

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

Well multiple independent sources claimed that the sun set at the sea and dwindled in the underworld until it's blood lust was satisfied in which case it would rise again in the next morning.
You know why we don't take this serious? Because it violates the fucking laws of physics and everything we actually know about the real world, that's why! And I would say it is a darn good reason not believe it despite the fact that many people in the past taught it was a thing.
Just because many people believe it, it doesn't mean that it is right.
If such a world wide flood were to take place we would be living in a much different world (at least not one with human beings), and the fact that you don't live in a such a world should ring alarm bells.
Just because there were many distinct and less contiguous groups of human beings in the past, it doesn't mean that no cultural exchange was taking place. I mean Europeans have been trading goods such and silk originating from china (even had gunpowder and paper invented in china) without even knowing that there was such a thing as Asian people or that such a land far east existed.
The origin of the flood myth is as far as I know, unknown, as far as I know it could even predate modern human beings (I'm not claiming that this was the case). It is also not unreasonable to think that people couldn't come up with similar stories independently, after all most of what all those stories have in common is a flood and a man on a boat. We probably don't draw more parallels because stretching it stories just about boats, or floods without a man on a boat would be going to far. One thing that we can tell for certain is that it is not original to the bible.
Now contrast that with the fact that there is not only no physical evidence about such an world wide event, we have evidence that no such world wide event could have taken place (for instance uninterrupted lines of cultures that have remained healthy and dry trough the entire human history as far as there were humans). And that if such an event were to take place, it would not only violate known laws of physics, it would also mean that you wouldn't be here to tell the tale. Just think about that for a moment and le it sink in, it is one of those tales that the fact that such a tale exists means that it could not be true, because were it to be true there would be no one left to tell it.
You know the old saying, "Dead man tell no tales".

So let's see, on one plate we have "people came up with a myth about a flood, told other people about it, and maybe other people could have reinvented it", on the other "It's true, but it happens to violate the laws of physics and everything we know about the real world including what we know about ancient civilizations and the fact that they existed and that we exist today".
Is there even a contest here?

 

[leroy]

[
The table shows the dating methods that were used for each sample (four for one of the samples). What exactly is it you want?

I asked for a peer revied article that describes the actual process of dating, you are just shoing a random image that you took from an anticreationist site….see the difference?

For example the AR AR dating is a relative dating method, which means that you need to know the approximate age of the sample, before dating it. The same might be true with other methods (depends on how the methods where used) this is why a require the actual source.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

For example the AR AR dating is a relative dating method, which means that you need to know the approximate age of the sample, before dating it. The same might be true with other methods (depends on how the methods where used) this is why a require the actual source.

What is it that you know about radioactive decay to be able to make such a claim? How much do you know about radioactive decay? So that we could present what you need to know to reach our conclusion.

 

[leroy]

tuxbox If the worldwide flood killed everyone but Noah and his family, then all the groups you mention would not have been around to witness this flood. Therefor, the flood myth is just that, a myth. Local floods may have happened in all the places you mention, but they would have no way of knowing if it was worldwide. Please do not say all those peoples are descendants of Noah and that the Tower of Babel is why they are so spread out with different skin colors, cultures, and languages, or I might puke.

Like I said, the ancients found seashells on mountains and without proper knowledge of how they got there, then it was perfectly reasonable for them to surmise that a flood took place.

People from a lot of cultures also have myths of dragons. Everyone knows that dragons never existed, but using your logic dragons must have existed. There are also multiple myths of bigfoot and the yeti and so called multiple sightings of both these creatures, yet there is not any evidence to support these claims. Again, using your logic these creatures must exist.

You still have not answered my objection, when multiple independent sources describe the same event it is always considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood. The issue is not “flood” legends, the issue is flood legends with parallels, there are docens of legends with parallels,

When we find this kind of things historians always conclude that the event was based on a historical event, for example Cassius Dio, Suetonius and Tacitus all reported a fire in rome in the year 64BC, since they all reported the same event, it is considered a historical event, no one argues that each of them invented the same story.


About dragons: Well I honestly don´t know much about dragosn, but I´ll bet that the American dragons, the European dragons and the Asian dragons where all different creatures.

 

[leroy]

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

Well multiple independent sources claimed that the sun set at the sea and dwindled in the underworld until it's blood lust was satisfied in which case it would rise again in the next morning.
You know why we don't take this serious? Because it violates the fucking laws of physics and everything we actually know about the real world, that's why! And I would say it is a darn good reason not believe it despite the fact that many people in the past taught it was a thing.
Just because many people believe it, it doesn't mean that it is right.
If such a world wide flood were to take place we would be living in a much different world (at least not one with human beings), and the fact that you don't live in a such a world should ring alarm bells.
Just because there were many distinct and less contiguous groups of human beings in the past, it doesn't mean that no cultural exchange was taking place. I mean Europeans have been trading goods such and silk originating from china (even had gunpowder and paper invented in china) without even knowing that there was such a thing as Asian people or that such a land far east existed.
The origin of the flood myth is as far as I know, unknown, as far as I know it could even predate modern human beings (I'm not claiming that this was the case). It is also not unreasonable to think that people couldn't come up with similar stories independently, after all most of what all those stories have in common is a flood and a man on a boat. We probably don't draw more parallels because stretching it stories just about boats, or floods without a man on a boat would be going to far. One thing that we can tell for certain is that it is not original to the bible.
Now contrast that with the fact that there is not only no physical evidence about such an world wide event, we have evidence that no such world wide event could have taken place (for instance uninterrupted lines of cultures that have remained healthy and dry trough the entire human history as far as there were humans). And that if such an event were to take place, it would not only violate known laws of physics, it would also mean that you wouldn't be here to tell the tale. Just think about that for a moment and le it sink in, it is one of those tales that the fact that such a tale exists means that it could not be true, because were it to be true there would be no one left to tell it.
You know the old saying, "Dead man tell no tales".

So let's see, on one plate we have "people came up with a myth about a flood, told other people about it, and maybe other people could have reinvented it", on the other "It's true, but it happens to violate the laws of physics and everything we know about the real world including what we know about ancient civilizations and the fact that they existed and that we exist today".
Is there even a contest here?

Just curios, what would you expect to find if there was a global flood? What laws did the biblical flood contradicts?
Would you at least agree that the presence of multiple independent legends indicate that the biblical flood was based on a real event? (maybe exaggerated by the author)

 

[leroy]

For example the AR AR dating is a relative dating method, which means that you need to know the approximate age of the sample, before dating it. The same might be true with other methods (depends on how the methods where used) this is why a require the actual source.

What is it that you know about radioactive decay to be able to make such a claim? How much do you know about radioactive decay? So that we could present what you need to know to reach our conclusion.

form Wikipedia

Relative dating only[edit]

The 40Ar/39Ar method only measures relative dates. In order for an age to be calculated by the 40Ar/39Ar technique, the J parameter must be determined by irradiating the unknown sample along with a sample of known age for a standard

 

[Deleted member 619]

Aronra:
There are extenuating circumstances, environmental factors that we know can produce a variance, and these can be predicted and accounted for. As Rumraket illustrated, they can also be correlated, corrected, or cross-confirmed by multiple other methods –so that our combined dating systems are reliable. Whereas, the creationist counter-position cannot be substantiated in any way by any means

I challenge anyone to provide a single example where a sample was dated my MULTIPLE, INDEPENDENT, radiometric methods, all converging to the same result.

I challenge you to learn to read, because that's not what was claimed.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Obviously the answer is: “I don´t know” obviously no one knows how Noah build the ark, but that is not relevant, we don´t know how ancient men build the pyramids ether, it is obvious that ancient men had technology that we don´t understand today.

The problem is that we know exactly how the ark was built, namely out of whole fucking cloth. Your fantasy magic fludd never happened.

The fact that there are dozens independent legends from floods (with parallels with the biblical flood) prove that the flood was real. When independent sources report the same event, it always considered a historical fact, you seem to be making an arbitrary exception with the biblical flood.

Interestingly, I saw a flood in Dieppe a few years ago, and I saw a flood in Iowa in the 70s, and I saw a flood in Frankfurt in 1981, and I saw a flood in Glasgow in 1983. Surely that's evidence for a global flood.

Fuck me, but do you even read this nonsensical tripe before you fucking hit submit?

 

[Deleted member 619]

When multiple independent sources report the same event, it is considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood?

You're not talking about multiple independent sources reporting the same event in the case of your fantasy fludd (which didn't happen, by the way), you're talking about multiple independent sources talking about floods.

Of all the stories that Moses (or whoever you believe is the author of genesis) could have invented, why did he invent the same flood story that the Sumerians, the Chinese, the Australian, the Mesoamericans, the Native Americans etc. invented?

The more interesting question is why the Egyptians were digging canals when they were under 9 km of fucking water, and with mention of your fantasy fludd in any of their writings from the relevant time.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I asked for a peer revied article that describes the actual process of dating, you are just shoing a random image that you took from an anticreationist site….see the difference?

Speaking of which, got any peer-reviewed articles from the primary literature detailing the evidence for your fantasy fludd?

Didn't think so, not least because, when cretinists went out looking for the one thing that would demonstrate that this event had happened, namely a consistent sedimentary deposit world-wide, what did they find?

For example the AR AR dating is a relative dating method, which means that you need to know the approximate age of the sample, before dating it. The same might be true with other methods (depends on how the methods where used) this is why a require the actual source.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Thank you for playing.

That's not what it means at all. What it actually means is that a sample of known age must be irradiated along with the sample you're dating so that a robust comparison can be made.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Just curios, what would you expect to find if there was a global flood?

Well, one thing I'd expect to find is a reasonably uniform global sedimentary deposit. When cretinists went out looking for it, they didn't find it.

More interesting is what you would expect not to find if this fantasy event had happened within the last few tens of thousands of years. For example, life. Had this occurred within the last several hundred decades, the planet would be sterile, having been heated to the point that the surface of the planet would have been an incandescent plasma from the thermodynamic exchanges involved in sufficient rainfall to cover the planet to a depth of 9km. Even a less ridiculous deluge would result in entire taxa being extinct that are extant now, such as all the cichlid populations of lakes Victoria, Malawi and Tanganyika.

What laws did the biblical flood contradicts?

It isn't that it contradicted any laws, it's more that, if it occurred, it's having left no evidence of it having occurred violates some fairly robust laws.

Would you at least agree that the presence of multiple independent legends indicate that the biblical flood was based on a real event? (maybe exaggerated by the author)

No, I'd agree that they're evidence of multiple local events. There was no global flood. The only global flood in the last several thousand years is the global fludd of cretinist arse-water, and that's a recent phenomenon.

Edit: Sppeeeloing

 

[Deleted member 619]

form Wikipedia

Relative dating only[edit]

The 40Ar/39Ar method only measures relative dates. In order for an age to be calculated by the 40Ar/39Ar technique, the J parameter must be determined by irradiating the unknown sample along with a sample of known age for a standard

Yeah, that doesn't say what you said. Try again.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Would you at least agree that the presence of multiple independent legends indicate that the biblical flood was based on a real event? (maybe exaggerated by the author)

No. Next.

Just curios, what would you expect to find if there was a global flood?

I don't know, ablation of most geographical features such as glaciers, river beds, most of the top soil, human constructions such as buildings, cemeteries, farms. Massive deposits provinient from said ablation, not necessarily uniform but contiguous across the entire world. Massive deposit of dead fauna and flora heavily concentrated. The extinction of all trees and most of the land flora, extinction of all fresh water fish, extinction of most birds, extinction of most land dwelling fauna including all land mammals witch includes humans.
Just to name a few things.

What laws did the biblical flood contradicts?

Well, the fact that you have 2 * 10 ^18 metric tones water coming out of fucking thin air for 40 days and then fucking off for equally magical reasons to restore the water to it's original level by no other than the miracle powers of God himself. I taught that was a death give away.

And you have a guy that knew about this well in advance to be able to build a boat for his family and 2 of every living thing on earth, with wood based space age materials to withstand a catastrophe that would put the 1755 Lisbon earthquake to shame. And all this catastrophe not only didn't kill every single thing on land, it managed to distribute all the species geographically, and couldn't even as much as buttfuck paleolithic architecture.

 

[tuxbox]

You still have not answered my objection, when multiple independent sources describe the same event it is always considered a historical fact, why are you making an arbitrary exception with the flood. The issue is not “flood” legends, the issue is flood legends with parallels, there are docens of legends with parallels,

Others have answered that question. I do not see the point in repeating what has already been pointed out to you.

Since you used Wikipedia early, I thought I would as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth#Claims_of_historicity:

Adrienne Mayor promoted the hypothesis that global flood stories were inspired by ancient observations of seashells and fish fossils in inland and mountain areas. The ancient Greeks, Egyptians, and Romans all documented the discovery of such remains in these locations; the Greeks hypothesized that Earth had been covered by water on several occasions, citing the seashells and fish fossils found on mountain tops as evidence of this history.

Other sites, such as Ur, Kish, Uruk, Lagash, and Ninevah, all present evidence of flooding. However, this evidence comes from different times periods. Geologically, the Shuruppak flood coincides with the 5.9 kiloyear event at the end of the Older Peron. It would seem to have been a localised event caused through the damming of the Kurun through the spread of dunes, flooding into the Tigris, and simultaneous heavy rainfall in the Nineveh region, spilling across into the Euphrates. In Israel, there is no such evidence of a widespread flood. Given the similarities in the Mesopotamian flood story and the Biblical account, it would seem that they have a common origin in the memories of the Shuruppak account.

When we find this kind of things historians always conclude that the event was based on a historical event, for example Cassius Dio, Suetonius and Tacitus all reported a fire in rome in the year 64BC, since they all reported the same event, it is considered a historical event, no one argues that each of them invented the same story.

I'm assuming you meant 64AD. That said, there is archaeological evidence for the fire in Rome.

About dragons: Well I honestly don´t know much about dragosn, but I´ll bet that the American dragons, the European dragons and the Asian dragons where all different creatures.

So you believe dragons existed?

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

What is it that you know about radioactive decay to be able to make such a claim? How much do you know about radioactive decay? So that we could present what you need to know to reach our conclusion.

form Wikipedia

That is not what I asked.