Scientific Evidence of a Global Flood

originally posted by: Aural
Its easy to disprove a global flood. Just look at fresh water versus salt water. You would have only salt water if there was a global flood.

I think a large flood may have happened at one time or another, large enough some people could not see safe land so they felt it was the whole world. A literal world flood just is highly unlikely. People who believe there was a global flood will think any evidence for any old flood is evidence for a global flood even if the times do not match up between floods and this is a major mistake of interpretation of information.

Good points, all around. Sorry, I called you a buttclown in my previous post. You have my official non-buttclown award.

originally posted by: glitchinthematrix

originally posted by: jjkenobi
a reply to: glitchinthematrix

I'm not asking for evidence of a Biblical flood. I'm not presenting evidence of such. I'm saying there is evidence in SOME locations where RECENT study has taken place that indicates some pretty extensive flooding around the same time period. Does anyone know of other locations BESIDES the ones in the articles I presented?

Im sorry you feel attacked. Its not nice at all.

But sometimes isnt this why you posted the thread for answers. Mine for the Flooding in many areas at the same time.....Seasons All of the Med floods the same time of year.

This is like the Creationist museum. It may be a fantastic museum but most people won't visit it to decide for themselves.

These topics with facts and interesting sources is what brought me to ATS. Ty

originally posted by: glitchinthematrix
That's the problem with ATS. You can't be honest without someone slamming you. You can't share a belief...no matter what it is, and not get slammed. You can't write ANY post and not expect a boatload of jerks to show up and try and put you in your place because you must deserve it somehow. ATS should stand for A$$holes To Slam you.

No one slammed you. There hasn't been a SINGLE ad hominem attack against you in this entire thread. Can't say the same about you though since you just indirectly called me a butt clown. Very mature.

Refuting your argument isn't an attack against you. Learn how to debate. Learn how to take criticism as well.

I'll return to my silent corner now. I wasn't prepared for spending the next 3+ days totally avoiding the topic of my apparently ill-titled thread with people who can't lay down their own beliefs long enough to have a discussion about evidence of flooding from a few thousand years back or more.

So what, you expected an echo chamber? A bunch of people saying "Ya I agree there was a global flood, here's my evidence!" This is a discussion forum and I am free to come in and point out that your premise (that a global flood happened and that there is evidence of such) is untrue.

I'm not asking for evidence of a Biblical flood. I'm not presenting evidence of such. I'm saying there is evidence in SOME locations where RECENT study has taken place that indicates some pretty extensive flooding around the same time period. Does anyone know of other locations BESIDES the ones in the articles I presented?

There isn't ANY evidence of a global flood. It isn't there. It's all just localized floods. We've pointed that out to you, but you are insisting on plugging your ears now. You clearly never wanted a real discussion.

a reply to: glitchinthematrix

Sorry for not getting back to this thread earlier. I only have access at work these days, so not so easy to post as regularly these days......

You asked if anyone had more areas that flooded......in short, most places have suffered over the millenia. The Gulf of Arabia suffered a deluge event (probably tectonic in origin) - that is one you may find very interesting.

As to serious research, this is actually ongoing. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute have some research papers on this but i will warn you that access to their library is fee based. If you can be bothered to pay, you will find data on various ancient shorelines and their dates from various parts of the world. They have evidenced, for example, that when the levels started to rise in the Caribbean they were very stable elsewhere. And so on at various points around the world. Heck, even the Black Sea Region has various submerged ancient shorelines, showing numerous events rather than one big flood.

In short though, these all occurred over a time frame of many millenia, rather at once. I would honestly recommend accessing Woods Hole though for anyone interested in this topic. They are very amenable and happy to help - and no, i have absolutely no association with them whatsoever - despite the love in!

OP: They just want to rile you up and make you act out. A very well known tactic.

Can we just be nice and not resort to schoolground bully tactics? OP, has beliefs, so do you. You are in no way better, or more informed than the OP is and it's the same for OP. We each have our beliefs and our timelines of what happened to the universe and when and why but if we're ever going to evolve and grow as a whole petty disagreements can and will set us back.

a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

Yes lets just stop discussing stuff and close the site down.

Kumbyah anyone?

Just adding this link to a vid speaking about the flood www.youtube.com...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Video isn't playing my end. However, "Northwest Creation Network" doesn't exactly instill me with confidence regarding intellectual honesty and scientific accuracy.

a reply to: jjkenobi

I've heard of evidence in Egypt for a flood around that area but I never looked into it beyond hearing about it on TV before.

Topics like this are always funny in the end, as even if you could explain huge amount water needed for world-wide flood, what about endemic flora and fauna? Just as Dr. Dawkins used to ask - even if Kangaroo were picked by Noah, how in he world did they know how to return back to Australia, witch route they took. Why penguins decide to go to south hemisphere rather then to north that is equally inhospitable...

And sure, for someone living 4-5 thousands years ago latest rain and floods would seem like 'all world flood' just because it was all the world they knew about... simple... multiply that with parrot repetition and as nice story to scare kids in night... and you got another myth... that still carries just because too many people believe in rest of folklore stories from Bible... or Qur'an... some we all outgrow, like St. Claus or Tooth Fairy, but some of them certain groups of people keep living and believing into...

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
OP: They just want to rile you up and make you act out. A very well known tactic.

Can we just be nice and not resort to schoolground bully tactics? OP, has beliefs, so do you. You are in no way better, or more informed than the OP is and it's the same for OP. We each have our beliefs and our timelines of what happened to the universe and when and why but if we're ever going to evolve and grow as a whole petty disagreements can and will set us back.

It's not about beliefs, it is about evidence. We can scientifically PROVE that a global flood never happened. So believing that one happened is just lying in the face of reality. That's like going around saying that dogs can fly. You can believe it all you want, but you are 100% wrong about it.

I tried to embed but it didn't work that is why I left the YT link but if anyone associated with them is at issue with you then don't waist your time watching . Like other debates weather climate ,or the electrical universe you will find differing opinions of what the data is saying .Kind of reminds me of how even within Christianity we see many denominations making differing claims about what the book is saying . I think it would be very naive to think that people looking at rocks and dirt over millions of years would come up with a unified assessment of that data .But in order to maintain our own bias's we have many sources to choose from . a reply to: GetHyped

I do find ancient flooding quite interesting, and although others have rightly put the global picture, there has been some massive local flooding events probably within the ancient past. The last ice age was 6,500 BC and Britain was joined to the Europe this time via Doggerland. So the North Sea made the UK an island when the ice receded and it is difficult to know how quickly this happened. I have seen other programs suggesting that the Black Sea also came about at the same time (5800 BC) with various dated villages flooded around this time. And then there is the tsunami from Santorini volcano in approx. 2,500 BC which is a good candidate for the Atlantis Myth.

These floods suggest to me that the bible was probably referencing a local (more like very large but non global event) within living memory. And it could quite well be another event that was not the above.

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
OP: They just want to rile you up and make you act out. A very well known tactic.

Can we just be nice and not resort to schoolground bully tactics? OP, has beliefs, so do you. You are in no way better, or more informed than the OP is and it's the same for OP. We each have our beliefs and our timelines of what happened to the universe and when and why but if we're ever going to evolve and grow as a whole petty disagreements can and will set us back.

Read the title of this thread.

Scientific evidence has nothing to do with beliefs. These threads are impossible to participate in with hopes of real discussion, because people raised up believing certain stories are not generally receptive to any real evidence that is contrary to their beliefs.

It kind of just depends on your definition of global then. To the Sumerians (from whom the bible story descends, via captivity in Babylon) the flooding would have been a global flood - the known world.

There is a difference between evidence of a big flood and evidence of a global flood. Neither of those are evidence for a global flood. Tons of different things can cause flooding. The end of the last glacial period around 10,000 years ago, an asteroid impact, a big earthquake, etc etc. A global flood would leave behind more signs than a few isolated areas. There would be obvious evidence worldwide and this evidence does not exist. Yes, there were definitely lots of isolated floods during the end of the last glacial period and other probable impact events / natural disasters but a global flood is a completely different beast and would have killed virtually every land animal on earth.

The articles I posted support evidence of flooding from Oregon to Connecticut to the Black Sea region. That's pretty global if you ask me. I am limited by my time to research the topic and by the amount of exploration that's being done where.

You have evidence that a flood went from Oregon to the Black Sea region? Or are you talking about 2 different floods in 2 different regions?

Howdy,

I seem to have showed up late to the party on this thread, but I hope that I can perhaps... discuss some things?

Yes, large scale "flooding" of coastal areas is quite common in geologic history. Most often, a geologist would look at such an event and think of transgression/regression cycles. Seeing as most sediment is deposited in watery environments, and the kind of sediment (size of grain/chemical precipitates) is dependent upon the speed of the water (faster water carries larger grains), these cycles are easily recognized by the change of sedimentary rocks in a vertical column. So, sandstone is beach, limestone(very few limestones are made purely of fossil shells, and no geologist would ever make that claim) is shallow tropical marine, black shale is deep marine. This represents a rising of sea level in one location over time. So, shale, limestone, sandstone layers in that order above the strata that show deepening would show regression, sea level fall. Usually, one will find several over these zig-zagging units stacked on top of one another, indicating multiple transgressions and regressions.
en.wikipedia.org...

Now, why this happens is not an increase in water, not usually. Usually it is a response to isostatic readjustment of lithospheric blocks. Essentially, think of these blocks as ships on an ocean. You add weight (heavy sediment accumulation in a delta or perhaps folding/smashing of crust together) and the boat/lithospheric block sinks. When you take weight away, (de-glaciate an area, erode+weather sediment) the boat/block rises. This doesn't "change" the sea level, but the sea will respond to the changes.
en.wikipedia.org...

Basically, this means that coastal flooding is a poor place to look if you want to find evidence of a global flood.

Now, to complicate matters, you need to involve plate tectonics, as the continents and coasts have not always remained in one place at all times throughout Earth history. For example, there are tropical marine deposits in Oklohoma (such as the Haragan formation) but Oklohoma is not tropical today, is it?
www.trilobites.info...

In fact, they geology of the Haragan is quite like that of the Onondaga in New York and Pennsylvania, which are quite like the Devonian rocks of the Atlas Mountains in Morocco, as evidenced by similar trilobite fossils. Flooding does not account for this faunal isolation, but tropical location and relatively similar ages of rock do. To make matters worse for a global flood, the trilobites found in later rock units in Morocco are very dissimilar to the trilobites found in later rock units in Pennsylvania, so there is faunal succession which fits with these plate tectonic proposals.

So what evidence is necessary for someone to claim a global flood, as per the biblical proposal? One continuous layer of strata with a jumbled flood arrangement of organisms. Now, I'm not saying continuous everywhere, as erosional unconformities likely even erase the iridium anomaly, but there should be a nearly continuous layer of jumbled fossils across the world with the fossils being of roughly the same age and the rocks being roughly the same flood deposit (and flood deposits are usually easy to spot in the geologic record...). This simply does not exist in the geologic record. If you want to claim a more recent flood than geologic conditions can lithify, then we would need to find a thick layer of floodplain-like sediment with the remains of large populations of humans, animals, plants, and other remains jumbled together in some kind of catastrophic burial, and this would need to be nearly continuous across the world. This again is not the case.

Basically, if the biblical flood were true, it was a localized event, not global. In that sense, yes, your title is misleading, as you have not given evidence to support the claim of a global flood. You have given evidence of coastal transgressions and one flood event.

However, I greatly appreciate your use of unbiased sources. It is refreshing to see that kind of intellectual honesty in a person of opposing view.

Sincere regards,
Hydeman