Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 905 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 456,287
Pageviews Today: 569,034Threads Today: 137Posts Today: 1,894
04:57 AM

Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing

Besides the Bible's account, {Genesis Chapter 6-9}- What evidence do we see on the earth to confirm there was a global flood?

Squatch Hunter

User ID: 25765147
United States
01/27/2013 11:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Besides the Bible's account, {Genesis Chapter 6-9}- What evidence do we see on the earth to confirm there was a global flood?
Why do the Heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing? Psalms 2:1

There is evidence worldwide of a massive flood. It cannot be denied. It exists both physically and in oral traditions. Most people will accept physical evidence but are stumped regarding oral traditions. But there's an easy explanation for those oral traditions.

The earth repopulated after the flood and regathered around Babel. If you remember the story of the tower of Babel, God confused their languages and the people split up according to their language and went their separate ways. Even though their languages were different, that doesn't mean their knowledge of history was lost. Hence, the reason why all these different cultures retain the flood story and the knowledge.

Whether or not one chooses to believe God created everything or that we evolved from the goo to the zoo to you, it takes faith. Science cannot prove evolution. That's why they call it a theory. Ive heard it said that the chances of every living thing being a by product of rain hitting rocks for millions of years is like watching a tornado pass through a junkyard and fully assembling a 747 as it passes.

If a person wants to reject God, fine. That's your choice. But don't think science has the answers. It takes a leap of faith to believe evolution just as it takes faith to believe in God. One has the power unto Salvation & the other degrades man to a position of equality with that of a single blade of grass or an animal. Is it any wonder the elite of the world reject God & embrace evolution? How better to cull the human race than to make us believe we aren't special & are but a cancer on the earth. History is replete with these types of examples. The Nazi's were able to mass murder Jews because they thought Jews were not authentically human but some species less perfect than they.

Just saying that rejecting God, the Creation, the Flood etc is not something that empowers the person or enlightens the mind. Its a way to tear men down, remove their hope & ultimately destroy them.

Last Edited by Squatch Hunter on 01/28/2013 12:04 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4421057
United States
01/29/2013 08:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Besides the Bible's account, {Genesis Chapter 6-9}- What evidence do we see on the earth to confirm there was a global flood?
Just for the sake of the same story being told throughout the world, gives credence to the fact that some sort of global catastrophe took place. Being that it is commonly believed that some of these tribes were completely isolated from other parts of the world; how then is it possible that they all have the same historical account. Although oral traditions tend to become convoluted over time, their basic principle tends to remain constant.
According to the logic of mass, stating that there is not enough water to completely inundate the world; perhaps there is a different explanation to this "flood" accord. When looking at places, such as in Alaska, where the "black goo" is; one can easily conclude that this tangled/shredded mess of plant and animal, is the result of some form of violent aquatic inundation. So with understanding that this "black goo" is dated from the same period as when believed the "flood" happened; perhaps what we commonly think, was not a "flood" at all. I speculate that the "flood" was in fact a near-global reaching, super-sonic tidal wave of immense proportions--one which was perhaps 2 miles high. With such an event, places that are far inland would not experience the destruction of the super-sonic tidal wave; but instead, it would be more of a rapid influx of water, coming from the runoff and/or slowing inlet of the tidal force flowing inland.
One possible cause of this super-sonic tidal wave, could have been from a comet impact. One which struck somewhere, so that its trajectory spread it all across the near-entire globe---such as some place in the southern ocean, near Antarctica. Another thought is that it could have struck the continents' ice sheet itself, shattering it so that it's flooding repercussions, spread the entire globe. Or perhaps this "flood" was caused by some form of violent volcanic eruption which took in the southern ocean. The end result of the volcanic eruption, would have been the same as in a cometary impact.
 Quoting: FiRe_DrAgOn

you put yourself if dangerous territory when you take oral tradition as fact in spite of physical evidence.
You can't really take only the stories that you think are correct, you have to look at the culture and their other "oral traditions", and take them all into account. That's when you find yourself in the territory of spirit animals, monsters, miracles, and an abundance of things that aren't physically possible. It's nice that some cultures accounts meet up somewhere near the middle, but as a whole, oral tradition is bad place yo rest your belief in. That's water I don't feel like swimming in... But feel free.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33113414
01/29/2013 12:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Besides the Bible's account, {Genesis Chapter 6-9}- What evidence do we see on the earth to confirm there was a global flood?
A global flood would have produce evidence contrary to the evidence we see.

How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. [Johnsen et al, 1992,; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?

How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10 ky) climatic conditions.

Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10310280

Oh sorry, I have to post this once more that I wrote 01/27/2013 05:35 PM.
Because it must seem quite obvious that the Noah's flood could not have occured after the Ice Age. And that also it can be quite reasonable to think that even Noah's Flood could be the cause of the Ice Age.

This was what I wrote;

Noah's Flood was the precursor to the the Ice Age some millions of years ago. The heavy precipitation and the opening up of channels for hot water from below caused heavy clouds and volcanic ashes to cover the Earth for many years. This prevented sunrays to protrude, thus causing much cooling, and the evaporation from the hot oceans were transported north- and southwards to form large ice sheets. A repetitive sequence of the Ice sheets forming and melting again then occured for some million years (4-5(?)). So we get Sub-IceAges with almost ice free interglacials. This I believe was a consequence of the periodic cycles in the Sun intensity combined with the precession of the Earth's axis.
The consequence of Noah's Flood could, however, be an overall significant decline in the average temperature of the Biosphere. This was caused by the removal of the watercanopy covering the Earth above the Biosphere prior to the Flood.

So we can tell from the Bible account that since the Noah's Flood must have caused a fall in the temperature by the removal of the watercanopy and combined with a heavy evaporation of oceans that this can be inferred as resulting in the Ice Age.

If we consider the precessional movement of the Earth axis, it has now a maximum inclination towards - or away from the Sun when the Earth is farthest away or closest to the Sun respectively. These parts of the ecliptic movement of the Earth around the Sun, the Summer and Winter seasons have a shorter path way than the parts where the axis is inclined close to 0 degrees with the Sun rays.

About 12000 years ago the last Sub-IceAge ended. At that time the Earth axis was half way through a precessional cycle relative to the present. Therefore, at that time, the Earth axis was inclined maximum towards- or away (Summer or Winter) from the Sun during the longer paths of the present Spring and Autumn paths.

The longer Summer season 12000 years ago could have caused the melting of the Ice Caps and the heating of the oceans around the Poles thus changing the ocean current patterns. Higher water temperatures and new currents (Gulf Stream) prevented any continuous Ice Cap of forming.

So this could be the reason we are now in for a new Sub-Ice Age of forming again. Just as for example the Gulf Stream changes or halts, the Ice caps can start growing. May be it will occur as abruptly as the former Ice cap melted.

As a reminder here in Norway, the deposits from the ice movements in the last Sub-IceAge are not covered by any other sediments as it should if Noah's Flood covered the whole land.

To me it is therefore easy to conclude by using my naked eyes that Noah's Flood could not have been after the Ice age

The Bible doesn't say anything about the age of the Earth. God sees time in a circular pattern and each of the patriarchs in the Bible represents a new circle of time. Each of these circles is a repetition of former processes. May be the genealogies from Noah started out while a huge Ice covering were forming just in the North and they started to move South wards to the Persian Gulf and forming cities in Iraque and then some moved even further south to Africa.

Some of the main personalities mentioned in the Bible may be representing only the start of a new circle of time. If these new time periods for example could correspond to the the Interglacials of the Ice Age, it would be nice to find out that. One of Abraham's ancestors (Arphaxad for example ?) thus we could place early into the present Interglacial.

Each of the patriarchs of the predeluvial world also may correspond to start of a new time circle. So when was Adam and Eve created? 10 time circles before the flood. I believe that the repetetive time circles before the flood were very much longer than after the flood. But they may be separated by some catastrophic event starting with the breaking up of the Gondwana continent into the present 5 major contients about 80 million years ago. As I see it.