Sure, the possibilities are endless. I have one. The originator thought that an apocalyptic flood narrative would be a captivating vehicle to tell a story about a man and his faith.

(July 20, 2014 at 5:52 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I think that even suggesting this is so is a stretch. Why? People couldn't have written about a flood that never happened? I doubt JK Rowling ever saw a magical car whisk kids of to fairy school.

I think it could've been based on a real event; because of our limited sense of scope we tend to hit the hyperbole button pretty hard when things get a bit crazy. I can recall any number of times when people caught in a real-life disaster (like a tornado or hurricane) would later claim that it "felt like the end of the world." Pretty heavy stuff, for an event that might only have affected 1/100th of 1 percent of the world's population.

All you needed was for a few people to talk about a small local flood that nearly wiped out their village (all seven clay huts!) and for the cro-magnon version of Michael Bay to overhear it as he was sitting at his clay tablet, short on ideas that day.

I'd rather give the credit to Bay (as opposed to a flood, or a 7 hut flood narrative that he cribbed from), in that case, obviously.

(July 20, 2014 at 2:52 pm)Stimbo Wrote: We're not looking for biblical evidence, snowflake; at least I'm not. We already know what your book says. I, for one, would settle for the tiniest bit of physical evidence. Got any?

since there is little or no physical evidence for global flood, there would be even less for a localized flood (but still comparatively enormous to other alluvial floods. although massive it only lasted a mere year. a major flood of such a brief duration typically doesn't leave substantial deposits to be positively identified approx. 40 th's. years ago.
But from a geographically perspective other indicators for noah's flood's timing, location and extent go exist. evidence of a thriving civilization developed in the middle east gulf area. from a geographical perspective the region makes sense as the region were the flood occurred --- high mountains surround it, huge aquifers reside under it. ice covered north America, Europe, etc making the global sea lower leaving much of the Persian gulf and red sea dry.
there are some scientific provocative data that makes the case using genetic data that traces the migration pattern around the world, the beginning of that migration has a nexus in that region at that time.

Um ??????????????????????? Did you suddenly lose the ability to capitalize, punctuate and use grammar?

(July 23, 2014 at 1:05 am)snowtracks Wrote: since there is little or no physical evidence for global flood, there would be even less for a localized flood (but still comparatively enormous to other alluvial floods. although massive it only lasted a mere year. a major flood of such a brief duration typically doesn't leave substantial deposits to be positively identified approx. 40 th's. years ago.
But from a geographically perspective other indicators for noah's flood's timing, location and extent go exist. evidence of a thriving civilization developed in the middle east gulf area. from a geographical perspective the region makes sense as the region were the flood occurred --- high mountains surround it, huge aquifers reside under it. ice covered north America, Europe, etc making the global sea lower leaving much of the Persian gulf and red sea dry.
there are some scientific provocative data that makes the case using genetic data that traces the migration pattern around the world, the beginning of that migration has a nexus in that region at that time.

Sorry, I've recently been accused of being overly polite, but WTF? I can't even figure out what you mean. What you have here is a bad case of word salad. But from what little I can glean from the incoherence I can say:

1) There is no evidence that life spread out from the Middle East, provocative or otherwise.

2) There is evidence that human life spread out of Africa and not the Middle East.

Everything else is incoherent. Come back sober and try again.

(July 23, 2014 at 1:05 am)snowtracks Wrote: since there is little or no physical evidence for global flood,

Ding ding ding!

Quote: there would be even less for a localized flood

oh, for fucks sake.....

Quote: (but still comparatively enormous to other alluvial floods. although massive it only lasted a mere year. a major flood of such a brief duration typically doesn't leave substantial deposits to be positively identified approx. 40 th's. years ago.
But from a geographically perspective other indicators for noah's flood's timing, location and extent go exist. evidence of a thriving civilization developed in the middle east gulf area. from a geographical perspective the region makes sense as the region were the flood occurred --- high mountains surround it, huge aquifers reside under it. ice covered north America, Europe, etc making the global sea lower leaving much of the Persian gulf and red sea dry. there are some scientific provocative data that makes the case using genetic data that traces the migration pattern around the world, the beginning of that migration has a nexus in that region at that time.

Don't tell us that there is "scientific provocative data" - present it, you disingenuous twit.

(For the record...am I reading this right...is that 40 thousand years ago? Are you actually proposing a 40k year old wooden supertanker? Please...please for the love of christ, tell me I'm reading that wrong.)

So he begins by saying there's no evidence for his claims, and then continues to speculate wildly about his claims for another few paragraphs. Snowy, you stopped saying meaningful things, at least to those of us who are rational, with the admission that you have no evidence.

@snowtracks
-there are some scientific provocative data that makes the case using genetic data that traces the migration pattern around the world, the beginning of that migration has a nexus in that region at that time.
Yet there is no fossil out of place. Find me a, let's say, koala-like fossil somewhere between the Middle East and Australia, then we'll talk.

(July 23, 2014 at 1:05 am)snowtracks Wrote:

(July 20, 2014 at 2:52 pm)Stimbo Wrote: We're not looking for biblical evidence, snowflake; at least I'm not. We already know what your book says. I, for one, would settle for the tiniest bit of physical evidence. Got any?

since there is little or no physical evidence for global flood, there would be even less for a localized flood (but still comparatively enormous to other alluvial floods. although massive it only lasted a mere year. a major flood of such a brief duration typically doesn't leave substantial deposits to be positively identified ..

Here you go. Lots of evidence for this flood.

http://youtu.be/ePbXONL1PF4

The release of water from the ancient lake Missoula near present day Yellowstone National Park created a torrent ten times greater than the combined flow of all the world's rivers. So evidence is certainly there for flooding and it was huge by any measure .. except fanciful biblical ones.

OMFG Snowy! Citation needed!