Great Flood

I understand that threads of religion can get heated very quickly, but I'm hoping this one can stay civil, much like some of our past Evolution threads.

I noticed one of the claims that was constantly repeated in the recent (short lived) Evolution... Fact or Fiction? thread was that the fossil record and rock layers are better explained by a global flood, my ancient civ. class also recently had a debate on this.

The question is simple: Was there a world-wide flood as written in the book of Genesis? I personally feel that there was some local flooding in the Mesopotamian area, which eventually got written down as being far larger then it actually was. The secondary part of this debate will be on Noah, did he exist, did he actually fit two of every single animal on his ark, complete with food, and is it now resting on top of mount Ararat? My position on this is simple, Noah may have lived, he may have built an ark, but he didn't get two of every animal on it, and that ark is not currently anywhere.

Please post your opinion (backed up with fact, of course, please cite sources for everything, I intend to.), and keep this civil. Wholesale copying of wepages is forbidden, paraphrase please.

It's a plausible theory, I'll give you that. With such a large (right?) portion of the Bible devoted to the description of a flood, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out there had been large-scale flooding around that time.

An ark? Maybe. It wouldn't be too hard to believe a man called Noah built an ark. Weirder stuff has happened.

Two of every animal? No, that's a story. Nothing more. I won't even begin to describe what's wrong with believing that actually happened.

So I guess I agree with your POV, GDwarf. And that's the first time I've heard the Ark is still meant to exist. Where did you hear that?

Originally Posted by Moobl

It's a plausible theory, I'll give you that. With such a large (right?) portion of the Bible devoted to the description of a flood, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out there had been large-scale flooding around that time.

Noah's story gets a couple of pages in Genesis, a very small portion of the Bible. You'd also be arguing that the Bible is historically accurate, which some (myself included) would dispute.

An ark? Maybe. It wouldn't be too hard to believe a man called Noah built an ark. Weirder stuff has happened.

Two of every animal? No, that's a story. Nothing more. I won't even begin to describe what's wrong with believing that actually happened.

So I guess I agree with your POV, GDwarf. And that's the first time I've heard the Ark is still meant to exist. Where did you hear that?

There are many that claim that the ark is still on top of Mt. Ararat, people even claim to have touched it and brought back wood, although the wood is too young to have been from the ark and none of htese people ever bothered to take a picture.

You'd also be arguing that the Bible is historically accurate, which some (myself included) would dispute.

I'd be arguing that parts of it are based on fact. Most historians agree, for example, that Jesus himself existed.

My opinion is that the Bible grew from actual events as did folk tales -- there is a theory that stories of elves and goblins originated from accounts of people with certain disfiguring conditions that still exist today.

Originally Posted by Moobl

I'd be arguing that parts of it are based on fact. Most historians agree, for example, that Jesus himself existed.

My opinion is that the Bible grew from actual events as did folk tales -- there is a theory that stories of elves and goblins originated from accounts of people with certain disfiguring conditions that still exist today.

On this we do agree, parts of it are quite clearly based on fact, however, I don't know if I'd use it as eivdence of a world-wide flood.

Considering the structure of the rock layers and their fossil contents, I don't think it's possible for a flood to create it. Cross-bedding and things of the sort only work in very small layers that resemble ripples. It makes no sense that we could have a layer that's high in limestone content really low, and then another high in limestone content near the top. Can anyone explain this? Mars also has rock layers similar to Earth's, and it didn't have a worldwide flood.

If there were a flood, the fossil record would be arranged differently. Why would the biggest fossils for land creatures (dinosaurs) be found 65 million years ago? We go from small creatures to large creatures to medium-sized ones. If we go by the densities of the bones, this just doesn't make sense. Birds and other flying creatures should only appear in the top of the top rock layer, since they would have floated to the top.

Flooding? It's definitely happened at some point. World-wide flooding? Less likely.

I do believe that there was a Noah and an ark, and a lot of animals that were sheltered in it, but not two of EVERY SINGLE animal. That would be ridiculous. Besides, a flooding of the whole world wouldn't be necessary, because, as far as we know, most of the rest of the world wasn't populated at that time.

There are many that claim that the ark is still on top of Mt. Ararat, people even claim to have touched it and brought back wood, although the wood is too young to have been from the ark and none of htese people ever bothered to take a picture.

A trademark of religious artifacts is how little they age over time.

Of course, that doesn't automatically make this one credible.

Well most West Asian religions contend that there was some form of flood. Many historians and theologians have theorized that there was once a large overflooding of the Euphrates. News of this flood spread and may have evolved into the flood. Afterall the ancestors of the hebrew originate in Ur and that along with the fact that the Euphrates was the most important part of west asia likely created the myth that there was once a flood.

Originally Posted by LINK OF HYRUE

There no way Noah flood could have happend just look at the Ancient Egypt they never mentioned it and there civilation pre dates the flood.

Though there never was a worldwide flood, the reason they never mntioned it was ecause they are hamitic. Hamitic people lied in north africa. The myth of he flood orginated around the euprates which was spread across west asia by certain semites livig in mesopotamia.

Originally Posted by GDwarf

I understand that threads of religion can get heated very quickly, but I'm hoping this one can stay civil, much like some of our past Evolution threads.

I noticed one of the claims that was constantly repeated in the recent (short lived) Evolution... Fact or Fiction? thread was that the fossil record and rock layers are better explained by a global flood, my ancient civ. class also recently had a debate on this.

The question is simple: Was there a world-wide flood as written in the book of Genesis? I personally feel that there was some local flooding in the Mesopotamian area, which eventually got written down as being far larger then it actually was. The secondary part of this debate will be on Noah, did he exist, did he actually fit two of every single animal on his ark, complete with food, and is it now resting on top of mount Ararat? My position on this is simple, Noah may have lived, he may have built an ark, but he didn't get two of every animal on it, and that ark is not currently anywhere.

Please post your opinion (backed up with fact, of course, please cite sources for everything, I intend to.), and keep this civil. Wholesale copying of wepages is forbidden, paraphrase please.

Noah could fit two of ever animal on the ark, especially if there weren't as many kinds of animals around back then. For instance, Ligers might not have existed back then, so Noah didn't have to have two of them. The ark was also actually a pretty big boat, being 450 ft. long, 75 ft. wide, and 45 ft. high. The ark also had 1,396,000 cubic ft. of usable space. If that still doesn't sound like it is enough to you, also remember that these creatures were probably not full grown adults. Chances are the were small babies. Big dinosaurs like the rex would take up barely any room in this state. As for the ark not currently being anywhere, there are supposedly photos of it on Mount Ararat, and there was going to be an expedition to find it, though that failed to get started due to the Turkish government failing to give the explorers the permission to search that mountain. National Geographic says however that it is highly unlikely that the wood from the boat would still be preserved, thousands of years after the event.

Originally Posted by TXgamer

Noah could fit two of ever animal on the ark, especially if there weren't as many kinds of animals around back then. For instance, Ligers might not have existed back then, so Noah didn't have to have two of them. The ark was also actually a pretty big boat, being 450 ft. long, 75 ft. wide, and 45 ft. high. The ark also had 1,396,000 cubic ft. of usable space. If that still doesn't sound like it is enough to you, also remember that these creatures were probably not full grown adults. Chances are the were small babies. Big dinosaurs like the rex would take up barely any room in this state. As for the ark not currently being anywhere, there are supposedly photos of it on Mount Ararat, and there was going to be an expedition to find it, though that failed to get started due to the Turkish government failing to give the explorers the permission to search that mountain. National Geographic says however that it is highly unlikely that the wood from the boat would still be preserved, thousands of years after the event.

TXgamer, the flood was supposedly 4000 years ago. Ligers and other hybrid species are rare (in terms of diversity. There are plenty of mules, though) and are not a viable species themselves. They are infertile, and can't pass on their genes. So while they wouldn't need to fit them on the ark, that would reduce the space needed only by a tiny bit.

Even if you believed in evolution, 4000 years is not enough time for much speciation to occur. So the number of animals back then would be pretty similar to the current number.

I don't think you're considering how diverse the animal kingdom is. We have about 5500 mammal species, 10 000 bird species, 8000 reptile species (plus dinosaurs), and over a million species of arthropods. Most arthropods also need constant air currents, or they'll die. Of course, they can't fly around outside because it's raining. Well, and most of them can't even fly.

Not only do we need space to hold them, but we also need space for them to survive for 40 days. That means we also need food for them to survive over 40 days. I don't think 2 million square feet could even hold the necessary food.

Even if he had enough space to hold all of the animals, it would be impossible to find every animal. Noah would have had to travel all around the world before the flood.

I don't think many people realize how far-fetched this story is. I only gave a tiny fraction of the problems with it. If you're still not convinced, I'll give some more.

In order for animal population to be restablished quickly, the animals would of had to be of breeding age or already pregnant so their goes part of your arguement TXgamer so no space saved there. TheCurrent scientific theory indicates that the flood was probably the refilling of the black sea after the last ice age. A process that was repeated the world over on the various land bridges. Including the english channel and the land bridge between papau new guenia and Austrailia. So it was global to some extent. However the idea of Noah is proposterious as wouldn't their be kangroo and playtapus mixed in with the various fossils of europe if it where true. Consider it, the world at that time was aready the shape it is today, give or take a millimetre. If you were to build an ark today using all the tools noah had the first problem you run into is gettting the animals. No Kangaroo's in the middle east is there, today or in the fossil record, yet they made it through the world wide flood okay. So once you some how solve the logistic problem of gathering the animals (god didn't help in this bit in the bible either) You then have to face the problem of the insects alone taken up that space. So my Idea is if Noah existed, he was a farmer who built a boat for his family and some animals to esacpe the approaching flood waters

I don't believe in the Great Flood. In other words, I really doubt that whole world was ever flooded and even when I was a devout believer I thought that story was false.

There are too many animal species to try and save and it's difficult to differentiate gender for many (including insects, microorganism, etc). Also having just one of each gender doesn't ensure they'll reproduce.

Secondly, I do think there may have been some flood since I believe multiple cultures or religious text mentions a flood but I watched a documentary on the History Channel or something about how in a popular city a flood occured that sunk the entire city. Word of this flood spread among the survivors as they traveled to other lands and eventually rumors became exaggerated and thus is the story of the "Great Flood".

Originally Posted by TXgamer

Noah could fit two of ever animal on the ark, especially if there weren't as many kinds of animals around back then. For instance, Ligers might not have existed back then, so Noah didn't have to have two of them.

Why would there be fewer animals? If the flood did happen did it did so 4 000 years ago, which doesn't give the animals much (if any) time to create new species, in fact, there is no possible way they could.

The ark was also actually a pretty big boat, being 450 ft. long, 75 ft. wide, and 45 ft. high. The ark also had 1,396,000 cubic ft. of usable space. If that still doesn't sound like it is enough to you, also remember that these creatures were probably not full grown adults. Chances are the were small babies. Big dinosaurs like the rex would take up barely any room in this state.

Why are there no 4 000 year old fossils of the T-Rex? Why did it die out after the flood? Why did every single dinosaur die out after the flood? Why are there no records of anyone seeing a dinosaur? How could he (Noah) fit thousands of animals, food and water for them in only 1 396 000 ft^3?

As for the ark not currently being anywhere, there are supposedly photos of it on Mount Ararat, and there was going to be an expedition to find it, though that failed to get started due to the Turkish government failing to give the explorers the permission to search that mountain.

There are no photos, most people just claim that they forgot their camera, something close to 200 people have (according to them, them being the 'documentary' we watched on it in History.) seen the ark, yet none of them ever took one photo.

Some other questions:
Where did all that water come from? Where did it go?
To flood the entire world above the peak of Mt. Everest would take water 8 840m deeper then it is currently, since the surface area of the Earth is 510 065 284 000 m^2, if my calculations are correct, it would take 4 508 977 110 560 000L (4 509 trillion Litres) of water.

How does one explain the fact that 4 000 years ago there is every sign of civilization flourishing, no sign of flooding anywhere (Aside from the usual small, local floods.)

The flood lasted for 3/4 of a year, how did they keep the meat fresh for the carnivorous animals?

Well, if I may venture some info.

The Bible clearly states the dimensions of this Ark. It was immense, to say the least. Just look up the dimensions and you'll see. But also clearly stated is the fact that every kind of animal was on the Ark. They came two by two of each kind, not species. A kind is very like a family, such as canis. So really, they could have the smallest of all dinosaurs, the smallest elephants, the smallest birds... literally.

So really, after they got out of the Ark, evolution would have another foot-hold in the Bible. Horses may have evolved from that tiny original horse, just in a much shorter time than believed. That's my opinion anyway.

Originally Posted by Hostis of Angelus

Well, if I may venture some info.

The Bible clearly states the dimensions of this Ark. It was immense, to say the least. Just look up the dimensions and you'll see. But also clearly stated is the fact that every kind of animal was on the Ark. They came two by two of each kind, not species. A kind is very like a family, such as canis. So really, they could have the smallest of all dinosaurs, the smallest elephants, the smallest birds... literally.

So really, after they got out of the Ark, evolution would have another foot-hold in the Bible. Horses may have evolved from that tiny original horse, just in a much shorter time than believed. That's my opinion anyway.

The fossil record would disagree with you, coupled with the fact that Evolution takes millions, not thousands, of years. Besides which, the scientific separation of animals into kinds and species wasn't developed until long after the Pentateuch (First five books of the Bible) was written down.

Even if the Ark did exist, how did the animals spread out over the globe that fast? How did Kangaroos reach Australia from Turkey? How is there anything living in North America at all? And where did that water go, as I mentioned previously, that is a lot of water, 4 509 trillion litres of water doesn't just vanish into thin air.
To put it into perspective, the volume of all the water in the Earth's oceans is (approx.) 1 347 000 000 km^3, the volume of water in this flood is about 4 508 977 100 000m^3. So the flood had about 3 300 times as much water as Earth's oceans do now, that's quite a lot.

Edit: To simply get water to the peak of Mt. Ararat would take 1900 times the volume of water in the Earth's oceans, still a bit much.

Originally Posted by GDwarf

The fossil record would disagree with you, coupled with the fact that Evolution takes millions, not thousands, of years. Besides which, the scientific separation of animals into kinds and species wasn't developed until long after the Pentateuch (First five books of the Bible) was written down.

Actually natural selection can happen quite quickly, just look at all the different types of dog we have now compaired to 200 years ago, or look at corn, or wheat, etc... These all changed quite drasticaly in a reletively short amount of time.

I believe in the flood, but I do not believe that it can be totaly scientificaly explained. But I do believe that two of every animal and more could fit on the ark, I have a belief that their was base animals for todays modern animals, their was a base type of dog with enough genetic variation to make all the breeds of dog we have today, their was a base horse, a base elephant, ect. That would make it way more physicaly possible, after the flood, natural selection just took its course.

Besides which, the scientific separation of animals into kinds and species wasn't developed until long after the Pentateuch (First five books of the Bible) was written down.

And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds--livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
(Genesis 1:24-25)

Even if the Ark did exist, how did the animals spread out over the globe that fast? How did Kangaroos reach Australia from Turkey? How is there anything living in North America at all?

Perhaps the Pangea can explain. There could have been land bridges, or ice bridges across continents during the "ice age." More explanations are listed here.

And where did that water go, as I mentioned previously, that is a lot of water, 4 509 trillion litres of water doesn't just vanish into thin air.
To put it into perspective, the volume of all the water in the Earth's oceans is (approx.) 1 347 000 000 km^3, the volume of water in this flood is about 4 508 977 100 000m^3. So the flood had about 3 300 times as much water as Earth's oceans do now, that's quite a lot.

True, that is quite a lot of water. However, the mountains we know today may not yet have been formed. (Psalm 104)

Originally Posted by Christian Answers

The catastrophic plate tectonics model gives a mechanism for the deepening of the oceans and the rising of mountains at the end of the flood.

As the new ocean floors cooled, they would have become denser and sunk, allowing water to flow off the continents. Movement of the water off the continents and into the oceans would have weighed down the ocean floor and lightened the continents, resulting in the further sinking of the ocean floor, as well as upward movement of the continents.[2] The deepening of the ocean basins and the rising of the continents would have resulted in more water running off the land.

The collision of the tectonic plates would have pushed up mountain ranges also, especially toward the end of the flood.

Actually natural selection can happen quite quickly, just look at all the different types of dog we have now compaired to 200 years ago, or look at corn, or wheat, etc... These all changed quite drasticaly in a reletively short amount of time.

That is also true. Despite this being a bit off-topic (though I have addressed what I intended to), I would like to briefly touch on this as well. 200 years did give us more and different types of dogs, corn, wheat, etc. However, the dogs are still dogs. Interbreeding and such does not give us new species. I don't believe I have ever heard anyone say that they mixed a collie and a poodle and got a duck.

But yes, Noah only took two unclean (or seven clean) of each species onto the Ark. Not a wolf, collie, labrador, pit bull, etc. That frees up a lot of room for other species.

Originally Posted by dr_osprey

Actually natural selection can happen quite quickly, just look at all the different types of dog we have now compaired to 200 years ago, or look at corn, or wheat, etc... These all changed quite drasticaly in a reletively short amount of time.

via selective breeding of animals/crops that already had the desired traits.
So, if you wanted a dog with long ears and a thin body you'd breed a dog with long ears with a dog that had a thin body, that isn't natural selection. For natural Evolution (which would've had to occur) to happen to diversify the species that much, you'd need billions of years, not thousands.

I believe in the flood, but I do not believe that it can be totaly scientificaly explained.

Why believe in it then? It has no evidence, it has Quadrillions of litres of water appearing and disappearing from nowhere, it has two of every single living animal fitting into a boat smaller then the titanic, smaller then any modern tanker boat, it has all of civilization wiped out, despite concrete proof that it flourished before and after, it has the fossil layers created by sediment, which is impossible, it has the fossil record created in half a year, which is equally impossible.

But I do believe that two of every animal and more could fit on the ark, I have a belief that their was base animals for todays modern animals, their was a base type of dog with enough genetic variation to make all the breeds of dog we have today, their was a base horse, a base elephant, ect. That would make it way more physicaly possible, after the flood, natural selection just took its course.

This cannot be the case, if you have two dogs, no matter how different they look, you can't end up with all modern breeds unless you breed them specifically, which Noah and family would've had to do for every single pair of animal that they brought onboard, coupled with the fact that (as many IDers are so fond of pointing out) animals have changed very little in the past thousand, or even two thousand years, giving you 2 000 years in which every single variation of every single kind of animal arose and spread all over the world, and then suddenly stopped changing.

Originally Posted by D3PyroGS

And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds--livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
(Genesis 1:24-25)

You miss my point, it could mean species, or kind, as at the time it was written no distinction was made between the two, rather like 'man' and 'human'

Perhaps the Pangea can explain. There could have been land bridges, or ice bridges across continents during the "ice age." More explanations are listed here.

If it was Pangaia then the rate of tectonic shifting is many orders of magnitude higher then we currently suspect, North America should be somewhere in the middle of Asia, and Europe should be meeting it going the opposite direction.

True, that is quite a lot of water. However, the mountains we know today may not yet have been formed. (Psalm 104)

The only mention of mountains there mentions nothing of them being raised drastically higher then they are now.

That is also true. Despite this being a bit off-topic (though I have addressed what I intended to), I would like to briefly touch on this as well. 200 years did give us more and different types of dogs, corn, wheat, etc. However, the dogs are still dogs. Interbreeding and such does not give us new species. I don't believe I have ever heard anyone say that they mixed a collie and a poodle and got a duck.

Ugh. Please drop the Evolutionary comments, if you must make them then don't make them about straw men and make false claims, no one has ever said that dogs would evolve into ducks, or change species in one generation.

But yes, Noah only took two unclean (or seven clean) of each species onto the Ark. Not a wolf, collie, labrador, pit bull, etc. That frees up a lot of room for other species.

That still doesn't give you enough time for the animals to change to the point they have now.

Originally Posted by GDwarf

This cannot be the case, if you have two dogs, no matter how different they look, you can't end up with all modern breeds unless you breed them specifically, which Noah and family would've had to do for every single pair of animal that they brought onboard, coupled with the fact that (as many IDers are so fond of pointing out) animals have changed very little in the past thousand, or even two thousand years, giving you 2 000 years in which every single variation of every single kind of animal arose and spread all over the world, and then suddenly stopped changing.

No, you are mistaken. An animal can breed many times with the same mate and none of their offspring will be the same. The have enough genetic variation to produce offspring with long ears, short ears, shaggy hair, fine hair, etc. Those genes are just resesive, they are still their even if you do not see a shaggy do, that dog may have shaggy genes. Animals have changed quite a bit in the last thousand years, they just haven't changed species, which is impossible.

Originally Posted by GDwarf

Why believe in it then? It has no evidence,

Because I believe the whole part of the story including God, which is all that really matters.