|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Apr 12, 2019 4:32:35 GMT 5
I do not have time ATM to read through the very complex posts, so I'd just like to say this:
I do not believe in the Ark, but could be open to evidence
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Apr 12, 2019 19:16:29 GMT 5
Well well, I forgot we even had this thread. Since most people who believe in a literal interpretation of the myth of Noah's ark are probably also young earth creationists who don't believe in evolution, the fact that without evolution (even if only within that vague, definitionless kind-thingy) there is no way all extant biodiversity could have descended from animals saved on a boat from a global flood is certainly a pertinent criticism. Nobody is saying nobody in prehistory ever built a boat and loaded it with supplies to escape a flood, heck perhaps even living biodiversity was on board. But a global flood within the time humans have been existing (as well as basically the entire phanerozoic) is simply a geological and biological impossibility. On a side note, I'd be careful about those esrimates of total species numbers. How far the numbers diverge tells us something about reliability, the value can easily be off several-fold. Besides, biblical literalists would probably just deny the existence of any undiscovered species. The number of species already known is easily high enough anyway to maks the biblical myth impossible without accepting what is essentially macroevolution (just at a crazy pace). Would the sheer number of even only the known land-dependent animal species still be a problem in and of itself (as in, fitting them all on board)? Or do you mean the number of animals taking up space+food and water storage+maintenance of so many animals? |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Apr 12, 2019 23:17:39 GMT 5
Would the sheer number of even only the known land-dependent animal species still be a problem in and of itself (as in, fitting them all on board)? Or do you mean the number of animals taking up space+food and water storage+maintenance of so many animals? Both I would imagine. It is both entirely unfeasible for a single person, Noah, to collect breeding pairs of that many species (Even the described terrestrial animals number well above one million), and entirely unfeasible to store them all on a boat, let alone feed them or keep them from eating each other. Apart from the fact that A: two animals aren’t sufficient genetic diversity to build a viable population out of (let alone diversity into many different species) and B: a global flood did not happen, at least not during the phanerozoic. Also consider that there are almost as many species of freshwater fish as there are saltwater fish. Around a quarter of all vertebrates are freshwater fish. That would have had to be one huge aquarium on that ark. |
|
|
|
Post by Life on Oct 28, 2021 15:53:23 GMT 5
Research article: Noah’s Flood—Probing an Ancient Narrative Using GeoscienceAbstractThis article sheds new light on the narrative of Noah’s Flood (Genesis Flood, Great Deluge) from a geoscientific point of view. It outlines the four most popular hypotheses: (i) the postglacial–early Holocene flooding of the Persian/Arabian Gulf which fell dry during the last glacial lowstand of the sea; (ii) a cosmic impact by a meteorite ca. 10,000 years ago, which triggered tsunami waves worldwide; (iii) the rapid re-filling of the Black Sea basin when the early Holocene rise of the Mediterranean Sea surpassed the Bosphorus sill about 8400 years ago; and (iv) the occurrence of one or several mega-floods in Central and Lower Mesopotamia, which left imprints in and around ancient settlement mounds (tells) such as Ur and Uruk. The pros and cons of these scenarios are discussed. Based on geological and sedimentological evidence the authors argue for the latter theory and describe future research venues. Citation: Brückner, H., & Engel, M. (2020). Noah’s Flood—Probing an Ancient Narrative Using Geoscience. In Palaeohydrology (pp. 135-151). Springer, Cham. LINK: link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-23315-0_7---- Conclusion:Out of the four hypotheses discussed above, the fourth one is the most reasonable geoscientific explanation. It seems that Central and Lower Mesopotamia was subject to a mega-flood, possibly before or around 3000 BC. Most probably the Gilgamesh Epic and the biblical flood story draw their essence from the same (written?) source.3 A unique rise in the water table of the Euphrates and Tigris, e.g. caused by extraordinary and long-lasting rains and/or snow melt in their source areas, in combination with a southern wind blocking the drainage into the Arabian Gulf, may have drowned the extremely flat Central and Lower Mesopotamia completely (Woolley 1955; Brückner 2003; Engel and Brückner 2018) 4. 4This kind of catastrophic scenario had already been favoured by Woolley. He ends his comment about the Flood layer: …. (a riverine) “flood eight metres deep may well have spread over what was for the farmers of the Mesopotamian valley the whole world” (Woolley 1955:19).
|
|
