The Post-Noah's Flood Period is Explained by Evolution

So all these other scientist who present evidence of a global flood, are in your opinion...what...morons? Idiots? Scientist have plied up an immense amount of evidence that a global flood HAPPENED and those who oppose (notice that I am not singling you out here) shrug it off as a “worldview” problem.Again, Coyote, I am saying ARCHEOLOGIST and SCIENTIST have shown evidence of a GLOBAL FLOOD. Im not just making things up. Careful here Coyote, “science” follows a lot of “beliefs” as well. There are plenty of topics where there is not irrefutable proof, only assumptions.

Hi, DbaF. Welcome to EvC! I beg your pardon: I'm an entomologist, and, not only is this a complete non sequitur of an argument, but it's downright offensive. Insects are made of "flesh" too: in fact, the average insect has more muscles in its body than you do. The only difference is that their skeleton is external (and, note, their skeleton is made of organic materials, which are more akin to flesh than your calcified, mineral bones are).Furthermore, insects--which are animals--are much more similar to you in behavior, makeup and appearance than they are to viruses and bacteria, so lumping them together as if they belong to the same category (I assume you mean the category "pests" or "bugs") shows a complete lack of knowledge about biology.Granted, given other things that are said about animals in the Bible, I'm willing to submit that the God of the Old Testament (or, at least, His scribes) did not know much about insects, anyway. See Leviticus 11, which features a nice description of insects as "four-legged fowls" in the KJV (insects are not birds, nor do they have four legs; NIV and NKJ correct the "fowls" to "insects," but leave in the four legs). Note that, if God makes no distinction between birds, bats and insects (KJV), or that they are discussed among other animals in the kosher laws (all versions), I don't see how you can defend the notion that insects aren't "flesh" from even a biblical perspective.And, where do you think all the insects and viruses and bacteria went during the Flood? The Bible specifically says that all living things that were not on the Ark died (Genesis 7:23)--and I don't know how you could support any notion that insects are not living things. Therefore, if the Bible is literally true, everything that is alive today either was onboard the Ark or descended from something onboard the Ark.Edited by Bluejay, : I said "...insects are living things" when I obviously meant the opposite.

---

I'm Thylacosmilus.Darwin loves you.

I can't speak for Coyote, but my answer is yes. More specifically, all "these other scientist who present evidence of a global flood", as you put it, are not motivated by an interest in science, but by superstition. They have a fixation that Jewish mythology must be true, then they try to shoehorn what they see around them into that bizarre delusion.There is no scientific evidence for a global flood within the last ten thousand years, there never has been, and there never will be.But evidence for the capacity of hillbilly Christian America to delude itself? Oh, yes, there's plenty of that.

Thanks for the welcome!
I did not intend to offend you Bluejay! I happen to love insects! When Im channel surfing, trust me, if Animal Planet or Discovery are showing anything on insects...Im there!! Please accept my apologies!I have run out of time today, but would love to dig a bit deeper on the scripture so that it is clear on whether or not insects were included in the term "all flesh". There is a reason I say that, I just cant think of it right now. I usually site my sources and have things ready, but, time is always a factor. I will post back later on when I have a bit more time and the proper references.

And I'd love for you to do that digging - remembering, of course, that locusts, bald locusts, crickets, and grasshoppers are "clean" and edible critters, according to Leviticus.And you still have the problem of where today's fleas, lice, Guinea worms, and liver flukes cam from if they all missed the boat.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Do a bit of research, there are far more flood stories that just the "Jewish" or Biblical one. Over 500 others are found, the Babylonians, and Aztecs have them as well.Legends of the Flood - Apologetics PressThis goes back to worldview. I could say that scientist that are convinced that there is no God, would try to shoehorn any evidence that may point to even the slightest possibility that there was a flood, because if there was a flood, there is the possibility of a God. Again, you are arguing with many experts in this field that say the contrary. Go to the links I provided, read their evidence, refute it yourself. Well, I have to go with on this one. I’ve known a lot of these types. However, I’m not a hillbilly Christian. I read, study, take in all I can and interpret evidence to the best of my ability. I’m not a PHD, but I am a thinker.

Flooding is an extremely common event. It is not surprising in the least to find flood myths in various regions all over the world. An actual global flood being the source of these mythis is, however, both an extraordinart and a testable claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.The physical evidence does not agree with a global flood. At all.There is no global sediment layer. Fossils are found sorted not by body density and swimming capability, but ratehr in a fashion that agrees with radiometric dating, models of the fossilization process, and geological dating to suggest that the fossil record was built up over eons as opposed to in a sudden global flood. Metal tools, which presumeably do not float and cannot swim, are always found above various species of plants and animals that could either float or swim and would be sorted in higher layers than dense inanimate objects. There is insufficient water on the planet to cause a global flood (unless you suggest catastrophic geological events that cause more problems for the flood position than they solve). There is much, much more, but for the sake of brevity, the flood myth has been thoroughly disproven across multiple disciplines.The extraordinary claims of the Biblical flood myth do not match up with the physical evidence we see today any more than the claims of the Norse creation myth. The flood never happened. 1) Bare links are discouraged here. A quote of the relevant information you are linking to, as well as an argument in your own words is much preferred.2) "Apologetics" is essentailly the practice of smashing, bending, and distorting evidence to fit into a preconceived conclusion rather than following the evidence to whatever conclusion it leads. This is an extremely biased approach that leaves little or no connection between the pre-established conclusion and reality. In other words, apologetics is for idiots who would rather protect a sacred cow than live in the real world. Bullshit. Most scientists believe in God.But the real point is that scientists, by virtue of the scientific method which is designe specifically to avoid apologetics and maintain objectivity, do not begin with any sort of conclusion. They begin with evidence, establish a hypothesis to explain that evidence, and then test the hypothesis to ensure accuracy. Conclusions come last, whether about a deity or anything else.You're just projecting what you do onto science, trying to say "yeah, but you do it too." The problem is that science does not begin with the conclusion - science ends with the conclusion. Make your argument in your own words, and quote the relevant portions of your support. Do not provide bare links. It is not our job to do your homework for you.ABE: Having skimmed over your apologetics website, your argument is nothing more than the ridiculous assertion that "since many cultures have global flood myths, and many of these involve a single family taking all of their animals onto a boat, the global flood must have been a true event." This amounts to nothing more than many bare assertions rather than just one. Such an argument is overridden by the complete and total lack of any physical evidence suggesting that a global flood ever happened, and the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And any "thinker" who follows apologetics is not a very objective thinker.Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.

Yes, all in areas that normally have floods but not from areas such as the himalayas, the rockies or the alps.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

But, none of the "scientists" take the other stories seriously, as Rrhain has been adamantly pointing out in many discussions here on EvC. Like bluegenes said, their reason for looking for a Flood is a fixation on Jewish mythology, and they do indeed try to force the square-shaped evidence into their round-shaped theory. Well, it doesn't work as well this way: science always follows the data, regardless of preconceptions. Take this article about a recent study, for instance, which overturned our idea that sponges are the basalmost living animal on the planet. Science didn't cram the data into its worldview, but allowed its worldview to change to fit the evidence. The allowance of change in the scientific worldview is what makes science able to learn and grow, and is, in fact, its greatest power.Intelligent Design does not do this, but insists upon a preconceived notion of the way things work, and refuses to let the evidence lead away from that presupposition.

---

I'm Thylacosmilus.Darwin loves you.

I know about the flood myths. Massive floods happen all over the world, and many a primitive tribe would have found their known "world" flooded. They could also have observed fossils of shellfish on high ground and, not knowing about uplift, a super flood would be the only apparent possible explanation. It's also possible that our ancestral group were all in one very large flood event in eastern Africa tens of thousands of years ago.There are also conflicting creation myths from all over the world, and conflicting Gods that have been invented by many different cultures. There's no reason to believe in any of the stories of these ancient myth making cultures. Learn some history of science. The old earth view started to be established by (Christian) scientists (mainly geologists) in the late 18th century, and this view became the predominant one amongst educated Christians in the 19th century.One of the many reasons that we know there was no worldwide flood is that there are uninterrupted records of annual events that go back through the entire period. I've read the superstitious mumbo-jumbo on sites like Answers in Genesis. Let me explain something. The rate of serious mental illness runs at about 1% of the population. If 200 geologists say "ancient earth" for every one who says "6300" year old earth, I am ignoring religious nutters, not experts. If people are still presenting easily explainable stuff like polystrate tree fossils as flood evidence, then they must be deliberately trying to fool a gullible public, or are seriously deluded themselves.Not one sane, thinking scientist thinks this planet is less than 10,000 years old. If you are a thinker, and you've looked at the evidence, you certainly would not be arguing for a world wide flood. Edited by bluegenes, : missing word

Would you care to provide a secular piece of evidence that supports a world wide flood?

Im so diggin' the Boba Fett!If worldview doesn’t matter, why do you need secular sources? According to Rahvin, MOST scientist believe in God. Whatever . .Anyway, here are a couple I found. I wouldn’t call it proof, but evidence.Explorer Robert Ballard who discovered the Titanic says he believes there is evidence of a global flood in his latest research expedition to the Black Sea.National Geographic - 404National Geographic has interesting evidence of what they call “massive” flooding, however do not say “global”. Interesting, nevertheless.http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...0528_sunkencities.html

Think harder DBaF.The first link pertains to the increase in sea levels following the end of the last Ice Age.Did you know that the North Sea was once land? Did you know that mammoth bones are often dredged up in this locale?This is not evidence of a global flood is it?Your second link is equally silent on the 'global flood hypothesis' so can I conclude there is no evidence at all that you can bring here?I guess it is true that world view should not matter but it does.If ones believes that religious texts are inerrant, ones ability to learn and understand is curtailed because evidence contrary to the bible (for example) will be ignored out of hand.This leads to the intellectual dead end called 'goddidit'.A universal panacea against learning.

Becasue the Creationist sources tend to argue either from ignorance (talking about things they don't even remotely understand becasue they aren't scientists, surprise surprise) or outright propose falsehoods, directly "lying for Christ."Creationist sources are universally unreliable when it comes to a connection to anything real. They fabricate evidence, pretend that science supports their "theories" when it does not even in the slightest, and generally embarrass themselves when examined by anyone who remembers middle-school level science classes. It's unfortunate that the majority of Americans do not remember them. As a percentage, more scientists believe in a deity of some sort than do not. Very, very few believe the Bible is literally true,but a very large percentage would even identify themselves as "Christian." We have several right here on this board. Did you read your article? Ballard's "theory" is a massive local Flood, one which flooded the area surrounding the Black Sea. This does not fit with the literal Biblical account. It's not even close, as he's not even seriously suggesting even a local version of a "total killer" event.If it's not the literal version of the Biblical Flood story, where the entire Earth is covered, including the mountains, to a depth of 15 cubits from 40 days of rain (and the "fountains of the deep") with the water persisting for 150 days before beginning to subside, then this cannot be reasonably considered "support" for the Biblical Flood myth.All it is is a real-world potential explanation for the event that the Flood myth was based on. If Ballard is correct, then the Bible is completely wrong.

If you had read my original post, you would have realized that I stated my opinions based on my research and then cited my sources. Obviously you chimed in without reading. I say again, I showed sources and made arguments In my first post. I said: “Do a bit of research, there are far more flood stories that just the "Jewish" or Biblical one. Over 500 others are found, the Babylonians, and Aztecs have them as well.”Then I sited ONE source to show some of the 500 flood stories. If you READ THE WHOLE THREAD, perhaps you wouldn’t have went on a wild rant against apologetics. "The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic “~ Charles Darwin“The cosmos is all there is or ever was or ever will be. Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy.” ~ Carl Sagan"You say you have experienced God directly? Well, some people have experienced a pink elephant, but that probably doesn't impress you. "~Richard Dawkins"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religion than it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." ~Albert Einstein"I don't think we're here for anything, we're just products of evolution. You can say 'Gee, your life must be pretty bleak if you don't think there's a purpose' but I'm anticipating a good lunch."~ Dr. James Watson