(January 11, 2016 at 2:39 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(January 11, 2016 at 2:33 pm)athrock Wrote: Oh, I get it. The absence of evidence...an argument from silence, really...proves the Bible wrong?
Is that actually the best you can come up with?
Are you hanging your argument on the fact that a wooden boat has NOT survived the ravages of 3,000 of scavenging and weather-related rot?
Hoo-boy.
No, what is missing is evidence of a global flood and the rest of the Noah story. But that wouldn't work as a meme, so you get the ark instead.
Got any evidence that a global flood occurred?
Not personally, no. And I'm not a fan of Noah's Ark claims, so I don't pay much attention to people who think they found it.
However, I also think it is possible that the writer of that account in Genesis may have ASSUMED that flood waters covered the entire earth because a flood of some magnitude may have covered a significant but local portion of it. For example, the Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927 covered 27,000 square miles to a depth of up to 30 feet. That would probably seem like the whole world to someone in Noah's day.
Alternatively, he may have been speaking metaphorically when he stated that the waters covered the whole earth.
Neither scenario undermines the possibility that Noah built an Ark and rode out a local flood, does it?
