Your opinion of this Noah Flood link, please.

[Magnetic]

+http://www.ancientdays.net/flooddate.htm

I'm just curious as to what you would have to say about this site.

Before you look at it though, I feel as though I should give you this thought. As history goes, many times as we look backwards (the further back we go), our establishable timetables become less and less accurate, especially when we start traversing the BC/BCE periods of time. The further back we go, we "meet" less and less advanced people, those with no real notion of recording events with a "time stamp". Being acurate becomes more and more arduous as we attempt to estimate the precise time period/date that an event was to have taken place.

Having said that, have a look at this site and give an objective opinion.

[Lagmonster]

Oh sweet shit, lad, why bother? You want someone to offer rebuttal to a person trying to set a date for a mythical event? And not just any mythical event - the second biggest whopper in the whole damn book?

The minute anyone tries to defend the flood, you might as well start laughing. They're too damned stupid to understand any arguments you offer them, and they're too damned fanatical to listen in the first place. I exchanged comments with Barry Setterfield's wife on the topic and she still came off thinking she'd won by uttering pointless non-fact after pointless non-fact. I gave up when I asked her to defend her voluminous theory that the earth's crust contained enough water to flood the planet, and she gave the verbal equivalent of waving her hand towards the east and claiming there are reliable evidence in the form of multiple fissures in the Atlantic, some of which she says are still leaking.

In other words, even asking for objective commentary on some minute aspect of a flood proponent's work is a waste of time of, well, biblical proportions, because the entire topic is without a shadow of a doubt the single most easily refuted claim the entire book makes.

[Frank Hipper]

It's a bunch of utterly worthless straw-grabbing.

First and foremost, citing dubious acheological evidence for flood stories, when there is no archeological evidence for the flood, is ridiculous in the extreme.

[Hillary]

So, let me get this right. You want us to examine geological evidence in order to establish when a mythical event happened.

As we know it didn't happen, there won't be any geological evidence for it, so it's a rather pointless exercise really.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

+http://www.ancientdays.net/flooddate.htm

I'm just curious as to what you would have to say about this site.

Before you look at it though, I feel as though I should give you this thought. As history goes, many times as we look backwards (the further back we go), our establishable timetables become less and less accurate, especially when we start traversing the BC/BCE periods of time. The further back we go, we "meet" less and less advanced people, those with no real notion of recording events with a "time stamp". Being acurate becomes more and more arduous as we attempt to estimate the precise time period/date that an event was to have taken place.

Having said that, have a look at this site and give an objective opinion.

The further back we go, the less we rely on humans and the more we rely on basic geology and paleontology.

The article you've linked to makes one or two fatal assumptions: They assume that the events in Genesis are literal fact, and that literary "evidence" must take precedence over scientific evidence.

They then spend their entire time attempting to force history to fit Genesis. Of course, the article is misleading and dishonest, and makes several patently false claims. They lie about the accuracy of radiometric dating. They use the common Creationist tactic of trotting out a single case of measurement error, before liberally applying it to all dating. They also make the claim that there are no river deltas from earlier than 3000 BC. This is a misrepresentation of the facts, and the implication is that Noah's Flood wiped out everything before. As this source says (and this is in reference to the Mississippi River delta:)

Where are the earlier deltas? Pre-Pleisocene deltas fill in most of Louisiana but are mostly buried and not known in detail. Pleistocene deltas formed when sea level was lower than at present and are somewhere under the present Gulf of Mexico. About 7,000 years ago sea level began to stabilize following the melting of the Pleistocene glaciers. That time coincides with the onset in many places of intensive settled agriculture and early civilization. Not only did it become possible to farm river deltas without having to resettle frequently as sea level rose, but the infilling of river valleys slowed, making it possible to farm flood plains as well.

(Bolded parts are my emphases.) That's right, kids, much of the southern part of the state of Louisiana are the remains of many Mississippi river deltas as the river shifted course. (Oh yeah, that's another thing YECs like to ignore. Rivers change course with time, as parts fill with sediment, harder regions of bedrock are exposed, and shifts in climate impact the river's watershed. For a dramatic example, look at the Grand Canyon.)

In short, this is the typical YEC Flood advocate pap. There's nothing to see here. Move along.

[CaptJodan]

This part really sums up the entire article, and the real meaning behind it, I'm sorry.

Conclusion
When literary documents are present to date an event, these must have precedence over and control scientific observations and dating which conflicts with the literary evidence. This is so in that ancient documents are eyewitness observations of the events recorded. And isn't this what science is all about?

Better to Doubt the Scholars Than to Doubt God's Word!

That statement alone shows the extreme bias of the article, and that the person's priorities are a bit off the mark.

As an aside, I'd just like to point out that in the past few weeks when I've been drawn into one of these damned debates, it always starts with the person trying to prove the Bible's infalibility and God's existence, and then ends up with the old line "Well I don't have to prove it. That's what faith is all about." Why the fuck do they try to prove it, then? Isn't your faith enough?

[Magnetic]

The link suggested was given to me in response to a post I started in another forum:

From another thread. I started off with a quote from another thread I had been on:

In 1970, R. Whitelaw, of Virginia Polytechnic Institute, went through the research literature on radiocarbon dating and carefully compiled 25,000 C-14 dates up to that year. The specimens were of people, animals, and vegetation obtained from above and below sea level. Whitelaw then applied certain principles to help avoid disparity problems between radiocarbon production and disintegration. He then put the results of his research into a single graph.
The chart (shown on a nearby page) shows a gradual increase in deaths from about 5000 B.C. onward. The deaths peaked at about 4000 years ago (2000 B.C.). Errors in radiocarbon dating would be responsible for the 2000-year spread in the largest number of deaths—although the Flood took place in a much smaller period of time. (Biblical chronology indicates that the Genesis Flood occurred c.2348 B.C.) But the basic facts are there:
A gigantic loss of life occurred at about that time. Robert Whitelaw found that 15,000 C-14 dates placed it about 2500 B.C. (See R. Whitelaw, "Time, Life and History in the Light of 15,000 Radiocarbon Dates," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, 7 (1970):56.)

I find it interesting that the date as given above, 2348 B.C., just happens to pass right in the middle of Egyptian dynasties that recorded no flood, and obviously survived during that time. What are we to conclude when aproached with such facts, either biblically or scientifically?

That was my first post. The one and only reply gave that link. Just FYI

[Magnetic]

For a dramatic example, look at the Grand Canyon.)

Well, actually they will state that the Grand Canyon was carved out during the run-off of the flood.

[Frank Hipper]

For a dramatic example, look at the Grand Canyon.)

Well, actually they will state that the Grand Canyon was carved out during the run-off of the flood.

That's deserving of no consideration as being possible, whatsoever.

Not only does the Grand Canyon display wildly disparate layers that would have been impossible to form in a single event, but how does rapid runoff cause the loops and switchbacks found in the course of the Colorado River as it flows through it?

[Magnetic]

For a dramatic example, look at the Grand Canyon.)

Well, actually they will state that the Grand Canyon was carved out during the run-off of the flood.

That's deserving of no consideration as being possible, whatsoever.

Not only does the Grand Canyon display wildly disparate layers that would have been impossible to form in a single event, but how does rapid runoff cause the loops and switchbacks found in the course of the Colorado River as it flows through it?

Yes, . . . . that would be a true observation one would make when observing the Grand Canyon.

[Wyrm]

Better to Doubt the Scholars Than to Doubt God's Word!

If "Scholars" == all literary works and statements, including the Bible, and "God's Word" == physical evidence found and collected from the field (ie, God's work), then this statement is absolutely sensible advice.

[Braedley]

I'd just like to point out that although they may not be connected with the bible, there is evidence for a (number of) very large flood(s) (I'll refrain from using "great" due to its association with several of the myths). I make no assertions as to whether they are connected to the bible, when they happend, how long they lasted, or how much of the Earth they covered, just that they did happen. Is it mere coincedence that a number of totally unconnected civilizations have flood myths? Besides the Mesopotamiams, the Norse, Greeks, and Mi'kmaq of Eastern Canada and United States, among others all have flood myths.

Just because Noah probably wasn't at the helm of a great ship (and probably didn't even exist) doesn't mean that a natural large flood on the scale of 10,000 square km couldn't have happened.

http://www.mystae.com/restricted/stream ... flood.html
http://www.atheistresource.co.uk/flood.html

[SirNitram]

Is it mere coincedence that a number of totally unconnected civilizations have flood myths?

No. It's the natural, completely normal outcome of civilization clustering on riverbanks, shores, and other locations which have this funny tendency to flood.

Here's something: The Eygptians didn't have a flood myth. Why? The Nile floods regularly, and thus they were never taken by surprise.

Noah's flood has been traced to a Sumerian myth, which in turn grew out of a farmer saving his cattle and family when the Tigris and Euphrates flooded. That being something we know happens, unlike worldwide flooding.

[LadyTevar]

For a dramatic example, look at the Grand Canyon.)

Well, actually they will state that the Grand Canyon was carved out during the run-off of the flood.

That's deserving of no consideration as being possible, whatsoever.

Not only does the Grand Canyon display wildly disparate layers that would have been impossible to form in a single event, but how does rapid runoff cause the loops and switchbacks found in the course of the Colorado River as it flows through it?

There is also the New River Gorge in WV, which is older than the GrandCanyon iirc. The New River carved it as the Appalachian mountains were uplifting.

[Lost Soal]

Noah's flood has been traced to a Sumerian myth, which in turn grew out of a farmer saving his cattle and family when the Tigris and Euphrates flooded. That being something we know happens, unlike worldwide flooding.

Having never actually bothered to look up any research/claims/whatever regarding the flood i was about to post my belief that it was an exageration based on a story similar to what you've said.
Then I read your post.
Damnit.

At the time that this is suppopsed to have happened, just how big was "the world". As far as they are concerned, a damn sight smaller than it is now. A pair of every animal in the world is placed on the ark. Just how many animals even existed as far as Noah would be concerned. There would be thousands of species in parts of the world which simply don't exist to them.
However, a sudden flooding during which a farmer saves his animals can easily be exagerated, retold and exagerated again untill we get Noah's Ark.
In much the same way that that a Welsh warrior can become the King of all Britain (and possibly the greatest we've had).

[K. A. Pital]

Oh my.
I thought Morton effectively buried all "big Mesopotamian" or, even more stupid, "global" flood.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/fld.htm

Seriously, Flood catastrophists are viewed as fringe loonies by most adequate people. That's probably the most ridiculous hype that they could produce (aside from the "all carnivores were eating grass in Eden" that is).

[Ryushikaze]

Hopefully this isn't so old that posting is Necroing, but I wish to add something.

Is it mere coincedence that a number of totally unconnected civilizations have flood myths? Besides the Mesopotamiams, the Norse, Greeks, and Mi'kmaq of Eastern Canada and United States, among others all have flood myths.

The Norse flood myth technically hasn't happened yet. There flood myth was of a flood that was to be so massive that it wiped out the rest of existence. To my knowledge their region has never been known, though through their extensive travels (they did more than JUST pillaging), they might have learned about the destructive power of floods and picked up a 'flood to be named later' from another mythology in their travels.