Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Greeks tradition certainly mentions a warning from gods that a great flood would be brought on the earth because of mans wickedness, so I disagree with you there.The Indians have a flood story so I disagree with you there. The Egyptians have a flood record, but it differs from the biblical one, so I disagree with you there. The Chinese " Fa-Ha" is a flood story so I disagree with you there.
What? That those various stories cover a total global inundation of well over 28,000 feet ASL? Or just that there was some hint of typical and predictable annual or 1 in 10/100/100-year LOCAL or even REGIONAL floods? And most importantly, that the possibly written down historical records certainly do not happen all at the same time?
You wanna bet, Mickiel? Even on paper? Let's say an honest apology from you or I?
PS: just FYI: You continue to ignore that those dang pyramids would have been totally inundated WHILE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. From an engineering standpoint, that sure makes things a bit.. well... muddy, wouldn't you suppose?
Plus, you didn't cover the absence of any notations from the right-next-door Romans, Greeks, Aussie Abo's, Japanese, Tibetans, Apaches, etc.
Hmmm.. the rank denialism never ends.
But still, being open, I'm gonna look up what you noted and see exactly what they said. I'm going to make that bet, even if you surely won't, that there is no contemporaneous (or even "out of phase", for that matter..) documentation of a total global flood and annihilation.
35 different cultures that didn't drown in the global flood that killed all but 8 human beings. Utterly amazing, that they took the time to document a global flood (not sure how they knew it was global) while their fields and homes were being swept away in the flood water.
I never thought of that, but it is a good point...By pointing out all the cultures that recorded a flood, they are proving that it wasn't a global flood...There would be nobody to record these if it were global....Hung by their own petards....That IS hilarious!
Its academic; the question is was there a worldwide flood? Part of the answer is who recorded it.
These are some of the cultures that recorded it as humans did back then; by stories; both written and verbal;
Australia
Babylon
Bolivia
Borneo
Burma
Canada
China
Cuba
East Africa
Egypt
Figi
French Polynesia
Greece
Guyana
Iceland
India
Iran
Italy
Malay
Mexico
New Zealand
Peru
Ruissia
Vietnam
Wales
Its academic, all these cultures and more have recorded worldwide flood data in their history.
1. No mention on the net of any Chinese or any other "Fa-Ha" story. Please provide a link. Unless you mis-interpreted som "Lah-Dee-Dah, Fah-Dee-Hah!" phrase?
2. No mention by the Egyptians of any contemporaneous global event, esp. in or around 2500 years ago. (Their pyramids were constructed right htrough any possible flood chronology:
"The earliest known Egyptian pyramids are found at Saqqara, northwest of Memphis. The earliest among these is the Pyramid of Djoser (constructed 2630 BCE–2611 BCE) which was built during the third dynasty. This pyramid and its surrounding complex were designed by the architect Imhotep, and are generally considered to be the world's oldest monumental structures constructed of dressed masonry.[6]")
And especially some flood that completely covered up their grand works of art and godliness. (i.e.: their pyramids..) The Mediterranean was, for sure, hit by by several earthuake or volcano-caused tsunamis (that would have certainly shocked the locals, if it were anything like last year's Japanese event. A 15m high wall of high velocity water comin' round the bend!). But a total global inundation for 18 months? Not frickin' likely!
2. Greek mythology mentions a regional flood, but that has been variously and rationally explained as being local riverine or tsunami-based, and again, the timing is entirely off, these region-based stories being of 8 -6k years BCE, about 3500 years too early. And NOT global. Simply this from an admitted book of old myths that also oh-oh, completely preceded the biblical account.
Timing is everything, Mickiel, "when one seeks but to deceive". Remember now, you, not I, have to fully account for >> 18 mo. of flood and aftermath, coupled with a globe-wide remnant of stagnant sewage-filled water and dead plants and animals.
Now, as for our Greek friends & nearby neighbors to the biblical prophet-authors: "Lycaon, the king of Arcadia, had sacrificed a boy to Zeus, who was appalled by this savage offering. Zeus loosed a deluge, so that the rivers ran in torrents and the sea flooded the coastal plain, engulfed the foothills with spray, and washed everything clean."
What, not covering Mt. Everest? Why... the very impertinence of them durned but so-observant Greeks, huh?
But after all, how would the Greeks, or anyone else for that matter back then, know about some massive flood, even a hundred miles away, since they didn't even know there was a "globe"?
Thus No Supporting Documentation there either. (Hmmm... Things aren't looking too good for your made-up & assumptive version, Mickiel!)
But OK, let's press on.
3. The East Indians? OK:: Let's read together, aloud, shall we?
"This river was supposed to have been flowing down the Malaya Mountains in his land of Dravida. The little Fish asked the king to save Him, and out of compassion, he put it in a water jar. It kept growing bigger and bigger until King Manu first put Him in a bigger pitcher, and then deposited Him in a well.
When the well also proved insufficient for the ever-growing Fish the King placed Him in a tank.
As it grew further King Manu had to put the fish in a river, and when even the river proved insufficient he placed it in the ocean, after which it nearly filled the vast expanse of the great ocean.
It was then that He (Lord Matsya) informed the King of a deluge which would be coming very soon. The King built a huge boat which housed his family, 9 types of seeds, and animals to repopulate the earth, after the deluge would end and the oceans and seas would recede. At the time of deluge, Vishnu appeared as a horned fish and Shesha appeared as a rope, with which Vaivasvata Manu fastened the boat to horn of the fish."
Ah yes; a fish that had enough volume to fill... which ocean again? Why, the Indian Ocean of course! But uhmmmm... what about the unknown Pacific, Atlantic, Arctic, etc, etc, etc.? So.. did this macro-fishee fill those as well?
So now, this one's even more "believable" [) than the Judeo-Christian version, eh? A massive ocean-filling horned fish, tied to a boat. And who was really Vishnu? OK: I get it.... (<chuckle...>)
Why sure; that definitely coincides with Noah's version, to be sure! And Manu's boat-bound children? What, did they eventually compete with Noah's kids for "hooking up with the hottest girlfriend"? You know, to mak-ah alla'dem procreatin' babeezzz?? A sort of evolution-style "Winner takes All" event, so to speak?
Excuse me; I have to go visit the restroom for a moment...
There; that's better. To press on...
The Native Americans: (via European interpretations of course, with no other cave-art or song & dance versions...)
"Adrienne Mayor's The First Fossil Hunters and Fossil Legends of the First Americans promoted the hypothesis that flood stories were inspired by ancient observations of seashells and fish fossils inland and on mountains.
(riflmn intercedes here: Hey! Just like what a Creationsts still firmly but errantly believe today, that there's some sort of unified global fossil stratum. Well, no there's actually not (PS: I'm also a geologist, Mickiel, and uhmmm, sorry to tell you this, but uhmmm... I gotz way more education in it than you do, nyah nyah!).
Specifically, though you'd truly love it to be so, fossils don't form in only 2500 years! FACT: We have actual hairy remains of Alaskan mammoths, 13k yrs old. In fact, I am looking at a tooth from same that I found myself in Alaska, that is C14 AND Pott-Argon-dated @ 13,500k yrs right now, in front of me!
These non-fossilized remnants come complete with greenery in their stomachs, from well over 13,000 - 18,000 years ago! But oddly, at odds with any YEC/Creationist's vaporous ideas, there's still no 13k old dinos, not to mention some from a mere 2500 years past, that somehow then went biblcally unrecorded and unfound coincident with any human cultural remains. But hey: again, let's just conveniently skip that little detail shall we? OK. Conveniently skipped for now.)
"The ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, and Chinese all wrote about finding such remains in these locations, and the Greeks hypothesized that Earth had been covered by water several times, noting seashells and fish fossils found on mountain tops as evidence. Native Americans also expressed this belief in their early encounters with Europeans, though they had not written it".
rflmn: Sounds reasonable to me: you present a myth to some gullible & trembling tribes (esp. when you killed one of their members with a musket a few hours previous, and are thus a murderous God to them...) who have literally no education or thinking skills as such, and you throw in some appropriate threats about sin and evil and disbeliefs and whaddahyah getz? Why, true trembling, frightened believers, that's what!
4. The Japanese? Let's go look, shall we lets?
"Long ago all the elements were mixed together with one germ of life. This germ began to mix things around and around until the heavier part sank and the lighter part rose. A muddy sea that covered the entire earth was created.
rflmn: Hmmm... there it is, huh? But wait: let's see how it developed from there on. I mean, if you demand that this part is literally true (<snort...>), then we have to also HAVE TO accept all the rest. Right? Am I right? You betcha I'm right! That is, unless you want to be Highly and Conveniently Selective in your interpretations...) So let's continue with the Japanese version....
From this ocean grew a green shoot. It grew and grew until it reached the clouds and there it was tranformed into a god. Soon this god grew lonely and it began to create other gods. The last two gods it made, Izanagi anf Izanami, were the most remarkable.
One day as they were walking along they looked down on the ocean and wondered what was beneath it. Izanagi thrust his staff into the waters and as he pulled it back up some clumps of mud fell back into the sea. They began to harden and grow until they became the islands of Japan.
The two descended to these islands and began to explore, each going in different directions. They created all kinds of plants. When they met again they decided to marry and have children to inhabit the land. The first child Izanami bore was a girl of radiant beauty.
The gods decided she was too beautiful to live in Japan, so they put her up in the sky and she became the sun. Their second daughter, Tsuki-yami, became the moon and their third and unruly son, Sosano-wo, was sentenced to the sea, where he creates storms.
Later, their first child, Amaterasu, bore a son who became the emperor of Japan and all the emperors since then have claimed descent from him."
BTW, many Japanese still believe his today. That their emperor is in fact a direct godly descendant. It's just the wrong God...
__________________________________________________
Well, I could go on, but I have much better other things to do besides to educate the determinedly immature and intransigent. And while I spent a lot of time looking up your stuff, you won't even give it more than a minute or two, with a short-sentence quippy non-answer. That response clearly shows you don't really care about the real truth here, just your precious belief system.
Well, nonetheless, this has been a lot of fun, easily dismantling your out-of-synch, incoherent and non-contemporaneous but also vastly differing and undated myths, all rolled up into the "frightened shepherd" mentality of one ancient Middle Eastern story.
Oh yeah, and one that's also stubbornly believed, literally, by some of today's supposedly educated adults! Wow! Can you imagine that?
But sadly, in much more brief language, you Failed to "Prove" anything, Mickiel, let alone a unified global inundating flood event. That doesn't even cover the obvious ecological impossibilities, not to mention the population dynamics issues that off-loading a mere two of any speices on a frozen mountain-top, absent any food, fresh water or shelter, and no ride back home problems, to Australia, the Amazonian jungles, the Arctic and Antarctic, the plains of N. America, the African Veldt, and so on, that this situation would pose.
All such utter tripe-o-loon stuff! Unless one stiffly claims Pure Godly Magic. Which, if that is your only game-plan, you should just make that statement and we'll all go home. Just don't try to use scientific logic, 'cause that'll bite'cha in the Butt! And HARD!
So. I'll await your formal apology. [For sure, I certainly don't owe you one, given what I do honestly found here.]
Its academic; the question is was there a worldwide flood? Part of the answer is who recorded it.
These are some of the cultures that recorded it as humans did back then; by stories; both written and verbal;
Australia
Babylon
Bolivia
Borneo
Burma
Canada
China
Cuba
East Africa
Egypt
Figi
French Polynesia
Greece
Guyana
Iceland
India
Iran
Italy
Malay
Mexico
New Zealand
Peru
Ruissia
Vietnam
Wales
Its academic, all these cultures and more have recorded worldwide flood data in their history.
LOL...Reveal to me how they could have recorded it if they were all drowned in this so called global flood? Don't you know that the myth says the only people to survive were Noah's family....You have just added more evidence AGAINST such a flood...Thank you.
LOL...Reveal to me how they could have recorded it if they were all drowned in this so called global flood? Don't you know that the myth says the only people to survive were Noah's family....You have just added more evidence AGAINST such a flood...Thank you.
It took only two humans to produce all of existing civilization prior to the flood, and it took only Noahs family to reproduce all of civilization since. Noahs knowledge was passed down to all of this generate; this is how it was recorded, and its relatively simple in my view.
Now if we had an Ark full of dem bunnies, then perhaps the world would be a different place (genetically speaking, I mean..), huh, cousin Bugs?
Remember this from the C34 days?
Noah's Bunnies
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekerSA
The Earth can't possibly be more than about 6,000 years old, because if people had been around for a million or more years, as the evolutionists claim, there would be way more people than there are now. The Earth would have been totally overpopulated long ago, and we wouldn't even be here, because our ancestors would have died of starvation after 10,000 years or so of normal human reproduction. So there. That proves that evolution isn't true.
As a matter of fact, if you begin at the time of the biblical Flood (as calculated by most creationists), and figure a steady reproduction rate and the resulting geometric growth of the human population, you can end up with a figure for this year in the several-billions. With just a little fiddling with average number of kids per couple, average lifespan, etc., it's not difficult to end up with a population figure for this year that's right on the money. How much more proof could anyone want that humans have only been populating the Earth for a few thousand years?
Sorry, but it just ain't so. The math may be all right, but the basic assumptions behind it are totally wrong. The creationist date for the beginning of humanity works out only if we assume that the population has been growing steadily from a small beginning a few thousand years ago. Fine. Let's assume that. That would be true for other animals as well, wouldn't it? Their populations would have steadily grown since those rescued pairs walked, flew, or slithered off the Ark, just like the human population. No fair to start throwing in all sorts of qualifications to limit the growth of an animal population, because we didn't do that for people--did we?
Try rabbits. Let's work up a few numbers. We'll be very conservative (since creationists seem to have taken up the "conservative" banner). Start with the one pair that hopped off the Ark (not seven, since, if I'm not mistaken, rabbits are "unclean"). Assume that pair had only four kits in the first year (very conservative for rabbits). It's been a long time since I raised bunnies, but I think it would be fair to say that by one year of age, each pair of kits has produced a 4-kit litter of its own. Continue adding rabbits at that rate each year. Rabbits do die, though, so assume every pair of rabbits dies after its third year, after having produced three litters of four, for a total of 12 offspring. Conservative enough so far? At this ludicrously slow rate of reproduction (for rabbits), one year after the waters receded there would be six: the original pair that Ham, Shem, or Japheth herded in, plus four kits (we're even assuming Mr. Rabbit did not "know" his wife, in the King James Version sense, while aboard the Ark). Those six pair up, male and female, and populate the Earth after their kind, and a year later we have eighteen. And so on. The simplest computer spreadsheet will do all the math for us in a snap. We'll even remember to have all rabbits die after reaching three years of age. Keep this up for a few years. After five years we have 432 rabbits (nothing to worry about, right?). After ten years we're up to 85,512. By the twentieth year we're up to 3,349,845,900 -- a lot of bunnies, but hey, it's a big world. And let's throw in another astoundingly conservative assumption: that they only weigh a pound each.
Time to cut to the bottom line -- and we reach it in a hurry: at this very modest rate of rabbits' being fruitful and multiplying, by the fifty-third year there would be 1.669619x1024 rabbits, more or less, and they would outweigh the entire Earth (1.32x1024 lbs.)! That's after a mere fifty-three years of the same kind of reproduction the creationist assumes when he calculates the human population to be just about right for growth since the Flood! (Feel free to check my math.)
The rest of the article has been removed.
Point is, with the WWFludd, a pair of bunnies would out breed their natural predators and this holds true for other animals.
The conundrum here is if they were eated up before they could breed then we would have no bunnies. Bunnies exist, ergo, they escaped unscathed.
There is also recent evidence of a bunny plague in AUS as the natural predators were not of that land and the few that were able to eated the bunnies were too few. Read the linky. This was 1950ish.
The appeal to majick has to exceed the deluge or flood.
Bunnies breed at much higher rates than the proposition above.
I could do the effort to look up the natural predators of teh bunnies and their annual breeding rates but the average sane person can see that the ark barge myth has a serious problem when taking a "kind" and applying known breeding habits and comparing it to another "kind" that eateth the former "kind"
Other than Aus, there is not a global bunny plague. This "kind" has been kept in check cause other "kinds" of critters were in abundance all over teh earfs that eated them bunnies.
The only way this ark barge story has any credence, Captain Noah would have had to release the other "kinds" first and allow them to repopulate to significant number while providing Mr Bunny, bunny condoms. But the problem here is the other "kinds" of critters would not survive w/o their bunny chow. A catch 22 no?
Rats and mice are even worse and we know what the black plague did to humans due to the rat fleas. (theories differ but any imbalance in nature causes problems for us humans)
Ashurbanipals Library, The Gilgamesh record, The Polynesian account, The Sumerian Prism, 35 individual historical cultures history records, the bible, Utnapishtim's account, all tells us this fludd did happen.
Come on, some people need to stop taking scripture so literally. It's supposed to be about the teachings behind the stories.
Arguing about the historical accuracy of mythological stories is a pointless exercise.
The archaeology is not a myth, espically when it proves your own beliefs; It proves the flood was no myth. Your going to have to prove the Sumerian Prism is a myth, that Ashurbanipals Library is a myth, that the Gilgamesh account is a myth, that the Polynesian account is a myth; your going to have to prove the Babylonian account is a myth, your going to have to discredit the Aztecs of Mexicos account and the Incas of Peru.
So lets have your proof that these accounts are myths.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) than the Judeo-Christian version, eh? A massive ocean-filling horned fish, tied to a boat. And who was really Vishnu? OK: I get it.... (<chuckle...>) 
