Global Flood explains Oil Deposits and Geological layers

originally posted by: purplemer
l agree with the OPs narrative. "The flood happened...

...according to how it is described in the bible" is the full narrative.

Do you still agree?

a reply to: cooperton

really what a great thread.. look at all the conversation you have generated. A lot of peeps here not very good when you challenge their beliefs.. but would like to thank you for the thought provoking thread..

i might not see it all the way u do. that how we learn..

happy days

a reply to: daskakik

according to how it is described in the bible" is the full narrative. Do you still agree?

i can share an archtypal narrative. i am sure you can too.. never said it was the full narrative.. i prefer to look at all versions of the the myth, its found everywhere.. expand your thinking.. or you wont get far with this..

Flood happened.. Younger Dryas...lots of evidence to support this...

originally posted by: cooperton
Geography was probably remarkably different before the flood

NO ... it wasn't. The flood would have been in 2400bc. The continents were just the same. NO connecting bridge for Australia to other continents and absolutely no way, even if there were, for Koalas to walk all the way from Australia to the Middle East.

you are wrong. So again - how did the Koalas get from Australia to the Middle East?

In terms of the eucalyptus, you have to stop asking it, it's very well known that koalas eat other foods:

What Do Koalas Eat
Britannica Koalas
Save the Koala

Their main diet is Eucalyptus. They can not live without it. One to two pounds of eucalyptus leaves per day. On occasion they will nibble on bark, but that is not their diet. You have no idea how to take care of a koala. You'd kill them. They'd die of hunger.

a reply to: purplemer

Good grief. Science is based on empirical evidence.

Whoo whoo, not so much. I'm in the minority?

At least I'm not full of talking fish.

a reply to: purplemer
OP's own words, bolding mine:

I like the idea that the Bible puts forth because it insists we are children of this super-consciousness that has a plan for the perpetuity of our existence into the deep frontiers of the mind. Evolutionary narrative implies we're just mutated fish that return to oblivion. I am admittedly biased to the former being true, and am happy to have found what I believe is enough evidence to confirm it to be true.

It is the OP's narrative. Do you agree with them or not. It's a simple yes or no question and from what you have posted it seems the answer is no.

I don't recall anyone saying they didn't believe big floods and mass extinctions never happened.

a reply to: FlyersFan

NO ... it wasn't. The flood would have been in 2400bc

The summerain version of the myth v similar.. so similar infact that many scholars think it copied.. It smashed your 2400 bc right out the water.. go back further..

originally posted by: cooperton
No i do not buy into theories blindly,

Proven science isn't blind theory.

I assess empirical data and make my decisions based on that.

So you don't believe experts and reality ... but instead make up your own theories.

It so happened to have verified what our ancestors said about history.

No. You haven't.

Now let's hear how you "do science", lemme guess, you just believe whatever they tell you?

No. That would be you. You believe in Noahs Ark literally ... cuz' that' is whatever they tell you in an old book.

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

Why might I bother? You don't do science, just beliefs.

And what's that got to do with the topic anyway?

I do science.. younger dryas...mass flood event.

prove me wrong..

none of u can...

Sweet! Getting interglacial up in this thread!

I like fish and barrels.



Meltwater Pulse 1A and IB. The Younger Dryas was bookended by these. MWP1A melted at a blistering 2.4 inches a year, 1B closer to 2.2 inches a year.

People in low lying areas may note the rise over generations, but it would be too progressive and gradual to do much. Or follow any flood narrative. While 28 meters in 500 years (1B) is a lot, it's still too gradual to notice.

The oceans have risen 120 meters in the last 20 k years from last glacial maximum overall.

As a slight drift:

I am of the opinion you don't need a "global flood" to explain pervasive flood myths.

They ARE ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANIZED if you look at it from an unbias perspective.

They all have a similar variation. But the thing about ALL THESE VARIATIONS is they ONLY came to light through transculturation, after contact with Christians, who traditionally shared the Bible first.

One of the few to escape this is the Pacific Northwest myth. The Thunderbird is part of their flood myth. With the Thunderbird comes the water's receding, then it returns. It overflows the river valley, and sends families running uphill with children en tow.

Not saying the Cascadia subduction zone but....

But most these "similar stories" came to light after Christian missionaries worked their way through..

1) I don't believe flood stories are really ubiquitous.
2) Where they do exist, they can be explained by natural processes like River Floods and Tsunamis.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Science is a philosophy.. you might not get that. i understand.. Spent much time learning its limitations when training as a scientist.. but ofc you know best..limitations we all have them..

big bang eh.. or evolution.. beliefs..rabbits out of hats as cs lewis put it...

originally posted by: purplemer
The summerain version of the myth v similar.. so similar infact that many scholars think it copied.. It smashed your 2400 bc right out the water.. go back further..

DUDE .. I'm freak'n agreeing with you. READ WHAT I POST.

I've said that the Noahs Ark story is stolen by the Hebrews from other cultures. It was changed to fit their own culture. THEIR flood story says it happened in 2400BC. That's impossible. There are other regional floods from the 10,000 - 12,000 time period, but they aren't the Noahs Ark story. There was no NOAH.

a reply to: purplemer

"I prefer to look at all versions of the the myth".

You believe in myths. Good for you. I'll stick with the real World, if you don't mind.

a reply to: daskakik

It is the OP's narrative. Do you agree with them or not. It's a simple yes or no question and from what you have posted it seems the answer is no. I don't recall anyone saying they didn't believe big floods and mass extinctions never happened.

wth are you some kinda medium.. open your mouth and share your own thoughts and opinions instead of putting shields up to hide yourself.. add something of value..

What do you think...

originally posted by: purplemer
The summerain version of the myth v similar.. so similar infact that many scholars think it copied.

Derp! OP has been arguing against that the whole thread.

originally posted by: cooperton
The global flood account is not contingent on the Jewish account of it.

OH YES IT IS.

Don't go moving the goalposts now.

That is what you have been arguing for .. for 65 freak'n pages.

a reply to: FlyersFan

DUDE .. I'm freak'n agreeing with you. READ WHAT I POST. I've said that the Noahs Ark story is stolen by the Hebrews from other cultures. It was changed to fit their own culture. THEIR flood story says it happened in 2400BC. That's impossible. There are other regional floods from the 10,000 - 12,000 time period, but they aren't the Noahs Ark story. There was no NOAH.

lol and now we all believe in miracles eh.. you and me sitting on the same page in the same book... next to each other..

a reply to: purplemer
I have throughout this thread, that you probably didn't read before picking the side you don't even agree with.

a reply to: daskakik

open you mouth.. i can read what the OP has said.. shame you cant formulate a view though eh..

what do you think

a reply to: purplemer
What are you talking about, the OP believes the Noah story literally, we have all been arguing that it was a rehashed story and/or just a myth, which happens to be the same thing you are saying, so what are you arguing against?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

I didn't bring any of that up.

Who is "they"?

Insults now, is it?

Good day to you, good day to you sir.

You can't make libelous claims about someone and then not expect a response lol.