"The flood" vs. science?

Question

Now days, we have all this technology to tell us when something millions of years ago, was under water or not. Why is there no evidence that noah's ark and the flood that killed evil or whatever, Even existed? hmmm? fact? fiction?me and my boyfriend are puzzled.

Answer 1

Don't be. There is no uniform layer of sedimentary rock, so there was no flood.

The supposed pieces. First one dated to the middle ages. The new on is an outcropping of possible petrified wood. They haven't decided for sure about it and it is a far far cry from being able to say it is A boat, let alone THE boat. But that won't stop them from jumping to conclusions.

Answer 2

There is no evidence because none exists. It is really quite simple.

--------------------------

Jason M

Why don’t you put that much energy into the pursuit of real knowledge? Actually, the truth is easier because you do not have to spend all you time trying to rationalize and justify things that are demonstrably false.

Really, don’t you find it odd in the least that you have to accept some seriously weird, unlikely, and even impossible things, situations, circumstances, and occurrences just to convince yourself, not to mention someone else that this crap is real?

Look at you first point. – This supports the contention that the flood is myth and not historical fact. Yes, every primitive group has a flood myth.

I mean, how many different kinds of natural disasters are there that people would have been afraid of? There are only a handful. Therefore, the same ones keep turning up again and again. Now, there had been a nuclear disaster or B-52 bombing run (or anything that wasn’t exactly the same as every other myth by every other group of people), or something out of their life experience – that would be interesting.

And, at least don’t be disingenuous and dishonest.

1.There is no uniform sedimentary layer all over the world.
2.‘Bent’ stratigraphy is best explained by tectonics and volcanics
3.Sea fossils are formed in the sea – below sea level – when the land itself was at the bottom of some ocean. Moreover, that land was not even at the same latitude and longitude when the fossils formed.


Why are the Rocky and Sierra Nevada Mountain ranges so less eroded than the Appalachians?

I ‘know’ (because I am one of the scientists who over the last 50 years have worked to develop it) that there are annual resolution proxy climate records that account for each and every year (precisely, accurately and without any margin of error [i.e., the is no +/- issue on any date – for example, I can look at the year 4004 BC and know that it is not 4003 BC or 4005 BC – although I have each of them also]) back to 6700 BC. (I have most of the next 3000 years also, but I can’t prove (yet) that each of those years is accurately dated to the exact year.)

There is no evidence of the flood in this, or any geophysical, data set.

People don’t the believe in the flood because it did not happen. Your refusal to accept the possibility of the null hypothesis automatically removes all integrity from your analysis.

Oh yeah, where did the water go?

---------------------------------

mrfame101... --

If you think that is impressive, you should check out the reality-based world sometime - it's really wild. Or, at least go see Penn & Teller. Their show is much more impressive than anything the Christian God can do.

You skipped every one of those science classes, didn't you?

Answer 3

While I agree in principle that there are some things that science might never explain, in full or in part, there is NEVER a reason to take the ultimate cop-out of "Goddidit." That is the non-answer to end all non-answers. (Which is actually what the religious types want - to end discussion that might reveal how poor their own explanations really are.) You have a factual error in your point #2. Nobody who follows the Big Bang theory in depth would ever say that something came from nothing. They would say that a singularity expanded extremely quickly. But "singularity" is just physicist-speak for "black hole." If you start with the premise of a prior universe going through a "Big Crunch" to shrink into a black hole, which then underwent the destabilization called the "Big Bang" - then you know where all the matter came from that is now in the current universe. Therefore, I disagree with your statement "it is scientifically impossible to explain how something could have came (sic) from nothing" - because nobody seriously claims that the universe did that. I will also point out that your point #1 is conjectural, not absolute. "there is no scientific reason for this connection, nor can there be." I specifically take exception to that last clause. Sorry that you are such a pessimist, but your prejudices are speaking. We don't know that we will never explain consciousness. But then, 500 years ago we didn't know we would understand lightning, either. Finally, your point #3 - I have to agree that sometimes the relationship between reality and some equations can be a bit abstract. But you might want to stop to think that physics is based on mathematical models that describe reality. We rarely claim anything more than that a particular set of equations does or does not adequately explain something. We then look at the equations to see if they tell us something useful. As to why a given equation holds true? Because we TEST it to see if it DOES hold true before we publish the silly thing. We don't publish the failed equations. Of course, if such a standard had been used when publishing the Bible, there would have been no answer such as "Goddidit" anyway.

Answer 4

No Ark, or pieces of the ark, has ever been found, its a great urban legend/myth.

"Unfortunately, return visits to proposed sites have produced no further evidence, the whereabouts of all photographs are presently unknown, and different sightings do not suggest the same location on the mountain. Furthermore, Astronaut James Irwin has since died, a purported eyewitness has recently recanted publicly, and there have been few new expeditions up the mountain in the 1990s. Further expeditions have taken place in the new millennium, but no proof of the Ark has yet been found."

"Due to a popular Hollywood movie released in theaters in 1976 ("In Search of Noah's Ark"), many people remain under the impression that Noah's Ark has definitely been found. Particularly memorable to many people was a fuzzy telephoto photograph of what some thought might be the Ark. Later expeditions proved that the object was simply a large rock formation."

from www.CHRISTIANANSWERS.net

Answer 5

Simple, if you believe the Flood occurred then the explanation for evidence suggesting seas covering North America, similar sediments at certain levels, the change in the Earth's magnetic poles, and other events of the past may be explained by the Flood.

If you do not believe other explanations are formed, such as meteors, plate tectonics, the age of the Earth, etc.

The reality is outside of the realm of history everything is simply hypothetical. However, since the Flood is recorded history by more sources than just the Bible and supported by many religions not just Abrahamic religions, the Flood is a logical occurrence.

Answer 6

I am SHOCKED to hear people say that they have found pieces of the Ark. As all other Theories and Urban Legend's they have found particle's of a wooden boat in the area where Noah's Arc was believed to have been. GIVE ME A BREAK! Look at these people and there thumbs up! Thumbs down! Going around judging everybody and their answers! SHAME! SHAME!

Yeah Saddam and Gomora downtown, guess how I know this? Pulease!

Answer 7

Are you kidding?

There's plenty of evidence for large floods happening in the past.

I wouldn't go so far to say a global flood, but as you can see from the Tsunami that hit Asia a few years back, periodically, due to tectonic activity, large amounts of water can be unleashed on parts of the planet.

I think the global flood tales are an exaggeration of events like this. To a small coastal village, if the village next to you got flooded, and the one on the other side of you as well, that's the "entire planet".

Answer 8

Didn't you know that the ark has been found? It has been found in about a dozen different places and you can even ( for a small fee ) see a piece of it.
In that part of the world you will find that every where there is a mountain there is also a scam artist that has claimed to have found the one and only, honest to god Ark that Noah built.

Answer 9

1. Part of the ark was found.
2. There has been evidence of the flood.
3. It didn't need to be a worldwide flood since the known world at that time was a much smaller area.
4. Tsunamis and floods continue to occur to this day.
Even atheists know that some parts of the bible are historically true.

Jason wow that's impressive.

Answer 10

There is tremendous evidence. Scientist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in creation have the very same evidence to observe. They interpret it with pre-conceived ideas of origins. No scientist that believes in evolution concludes that from the evidence. he already believes in evolution before he sees the evidence. His mind is already made up from his world view. He does not believe in God. So he sees the Grand Canyon as errosion from millions of years. The Creationist will see the same Grand Canyon as flood run-off of a few days or weeks.
Most every mountian top all across this world, except for volcanic lava build up , has the skeletal remains of marine life on them. How did it get there??? Every square inch of the earth was at one time under water. No one can dispute this. No one knows what the geography of pre-flood earth was like either.