Implausibility of the flood tale

[Zzyzx]

.
In a thread discussing the different lengths of time Genesis assigns to the Earth being flooded, mention was made of other implausibilities of the flood tale -- including:

1) A wooden boat much larger that any known to exist and built by a 500 year old man
2) Millions of animals gathered from all over the world and redistributed afterward
3) A billion cubic miles of water sudden appearing -- then disappearing afterward
4) Eight people providing for millions of diverse animals (some carnivores) for a year
5) Repopulating all the continents with humans and other animals in a few thousand years (and producing the great genetic diversity known to exist).

Are those (and other) implausibilities sufficient grounds to conclude that in all likelihood the flood tale is fable, legend, myth, folklore or fiction?

If not, why not? What rational explanation can be made for them?

[Zzyzx]

.

There was a great diluge and it has been recorded in many different cultures (see Velikovsky's first book). In direct interview with Navaho I have heard their version of the great flood. It is also known in Aztec legend. The Sumarians mention the man who survived the great flood. In digs in Iraq, they found 7 ft of silt between different stratta, both with signs of civilization.

There are MANY great deluges all over the world – frequently. Those occur in lowlands, coastal areas and river valleys. It is not surprising that legends and stories develop based on some of the major floods affecting various cultures.

However, is there ONE verifiable example of the tops of mountains being covered?

The only problem with the Bible version was that they exaggerated it.

Exactly. A local or regional flood with survivors and animals in a boat was transformed into a tale about one of the gods flooding the entire Earth and killing all life.

I suspect that there was in fact a great diluge which affected probably about 20% of the world's land area (which unfortunately include many inhabited regions).

If one proposes a worldwide flood, a massive amount of water is required worldwide – which poses the question "Where did the water come from?" (and where did it go after the flood?).

I also suspect that Noah was a real person (probably not so old) who actually built an ark. He put only those domesticated animals needed for human survival into the ark.

There were probably MANY people who survived a local flood by using a boat and perhaps taking domestic animals with them. In fact, wouldn't people be foolish to NOT get in a boat (if available) during rising water – and take a few animals if possible?

Other than that...the Biblical story is spot on.

The Bible tale contains quite a number of very questionable claims.

(oh..and he was not the only survivor. The Aztec ancestors survived in a cave in a mountain...and some groups were not affected at all.)

If anyone other than those aboard the ark survived that belies the Genesis account.

1) God supposed said that all life would be destroyed
2) The biblical flood supposedly covered the tops of mountains so a cave would be flooded if the account was accurate.

[atheist buddy]

.
In a thread discussing the different lengths of time Genesis assigns to the Earth being flooded, mention was made of other implausibilities of the flood tale -- including:

1) A wooden boat much larger that any known to exist and built by a 500 year old man

It is very unlikely that Noah did all the word himself

Whenever I see these kinds of absurd statements, I'm reminded that to this day there are people in the world who believe the earth is flat. Just google "Flat earth documentary" if you don't believe me.

What you have to ask yourself is: Are the statements in defense of the great flood any more thoughtful and correct than the statements in defense of the flat earth? If they are not, if there is no more substance and evidentiary support to the latter than there is for the former, you can be reasonably certain of the absurdity of both.

Take the statement above that "It's unlikely that Noah did all the work himself".

How fundamentally thoughtless and absurd such a statement is.

It takes a team of hundreds of professionals years to build, say, a skyscraper.

To think that Noah, a 500 year old man (hello???? 500 year old man???) and, say, a dozen helpers a fraction of that time, to build a floating structure of greater square footage requiring much much more complex engineering, without ANY modern technology - not even iron nails - is so laughable, so absurd, that it boggles the mind that anybody could entertain the notion for more than a few seconds.

How is such a belief deserving of any less ridicule than the belief that the earth is flat?

2) Millions of animals gathered from all over the world and redistributed afterward

The number of animals was much smaller than that. God told Noah to bring two of each kind. Here is an article that discusses the question of how many animals were on the ark:

https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/ ... ft-behind/

He wouldn't have had to go all over the world to gather them. He could have found some of every kind near where he lived.

You would imagine that ANYBODY would know that there are no penguins, polar bears cangaroos, etc, etc, etc in the middle east.

It's so simple, it's stunning. Understanding the absurdity of the proposition above takes no more wits than what is necessary for a 5 year old to pass the exam to be admitted into primary school: "If cangaroos live in Australia, 7000 miles from the Middle East, and Noah travels at 5 miles per day, how long will it take Noah to travel to Australia from the Middle East and back with two cangaroos?"

The answer is more than 7 years.

That's for cangaroos alone. Then he's gotta turn around and go get the penguins. Then the buffalos.

Let's not forget that Noah would then have to build a huge water tank inside the Ark, to house the whales, sharks, dolphins, etc, and all other large sea dwellers who would not survive in the highly diluted and desalinated water gushing from the heavens.

It's so laughable that anybody would believe this, that I truly dispare of humanity. If people can believe THIS, is there ANYTHING they cannot be made to believe?

[1213]

If the story was true it would require extremely rapid "differentiation" (evolution) for a few thousand years and then a slowing of evolution more recently.

Is there any substantiation for that actually occurring?

Speed is relative. I don’t see any reason to think those differences that we can see couldn’t’ have occurred in relatively short time period. And actually by what I have read about degeneration of genes, it is more likely that time is short.

There are presently quite a few "kinds" (genera) of bears
...
...
Did those all develop in a few thousand years from a pair on board the ark? Notice that several of the bears are restricted to very narrow habitats.

I think it is possible. The differences are not so great that it wouldn’t be possible. If there would have to be for example development of an eyes, then I think it would be impossible, but in this case, it could be relatively easy process.

Geologists and geophysicists (people who actually study such things – and perhaps are better informed than ancient story tellers) indicate that the breakup occurred about 200 MILLION years ago.

Shall we dismiss modern knowledge in favor of ancient tales?

Modern knowledge is ok, but circular reasoning or bedrock assumptions are not real knowledge.

A single super-continent had to be tens of thousands of miles across. Even walking, crawling, swimming or flying VERY rapidly would require a lot longer than the seven days Noah had to get animals aboard according to Genesis 2

If we assume that there were ancestors of all species that lately “evolved� slightly as in the bear example, it could be possible that the required animals were near.

Kindly cite supporting evidence for land sinking a few thousand years ago – and then presumably rising again a few months later.

I don’t suggest that land rose few months later. It is more probably that water level lower because it was collected in to ice fields (ice age) that were quite large. Temperatures dropped probably, because there were not animals and plants to increase the green house effect. Also heavy rain could have cooled planet.

Hypothetical illustrations do not constitute evidence.

Please understand, the point is not making you to believe, but to understand that there are other options than what you like to provide. If understood correctly, the great flood is possible and all evidence that can be seen seems to support great flood (continents, fossils, great sediment formations, oil and gas fields etc.)

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 13 by 1213]

If we assume that there were ancestors of all species that lately “evolved� slightly as in the bear example, it could be possible that the required animals were near.

Then I challenge you to show me these creatures. Show me a fossil of a penguin or a penguin ancestor in the Middle East.

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 2 by Elijah John]

First lets address the attempt to measure the record of "supernatural" events contained in scripture by applying the known laws of natural physics.....its impossible unless someone has developed a method of "quantifying" that which is not measurable by natural law...or...there is no miraculous event taking place in the first place. A true miracle cannot be explained any more than it can be "debunked" by application of natural laws. But....there are places where the Bible is quite explicit and unambiguous in detailing the events of Noah and the flood were the supernatural does not apply.

1. God directed Noah (a miracle, an unnatural event that can't be quantified by natural physics) to build an ark with specific dimensions. As with all things God must have had a reason for directing Noah to build the ark exactly 300x50x30 cubits or approximately 438x73x48 feet. Why? Because history actual details the fact that these dimensions turned out to be the perfect shape for very large cargo ships....to handle long journeys on the open seas. Until 1858 the ark was the largest ship of record to have sailed the open seas....in that year a man (I.K. BRUNNEL) using the exact same measurements constructed a boat (THE GREAT BRITAIN). As it turns out the design was so successful that it was used during the 2nd world war to build large cargo transports like SS JEREMIAH O'BRIEN....the design turned out to be PERFECT for hauling large cargo at slow speed across often violent stretches of open water.

2. Addressing how Noah COULD HAVE gathered up so many animals. The record shows that Noah did not gather up a single animal.....the animals were sent by God over a 120 year period (The Biblical Record of how long it took Noah to build the Ark) from all over the world -- Genesis 6:2- details how the "...animals will COME TO YOU".

3. How could the Ark hold the animals and enough food? The Bible is quite clear. the total volume of the ark comes out to 1,400,000 cubic feet given the height, length and width. The scriptures says there where 3 levels.....enough space to equal about 522 live stock rail cars when extrapolated for today's cargo potential.

Two of every species (not every kind of animal within a species....the hundreds of different examples of the K-9 family....just 2 within that species)....would come to Noah Genesis 6:2. One male, one female.

Seven animals of every "clean" species were placed into the ark (meaning domesticated animals like cows, sheep, etc.) This provided 3 pairs of each animal species plus ONE EXTRA to be used for Sacrifice -- Genesis 8:20.

It can be estimated that the ark was capable of holding some 75K animals while leaving one deck to store food and provide housing for the people on board. Remember.....not all the animals were ADULTS....it would be much better to accept only infant example of some the most dangerous animals and limit the size of the cargo....while some the animals were the type that went into deep sleep or hibernation. (would it not have been simple for a God that could direct the animals to come to Noah to direct some of the animals to sleep while on board?

4. The word "flood" translated from the Hebrew word Mabbul is used only in the Old Testament in Genesis and Psalms....in the New Testament the event is described as a "cataclysm" or in the Greek "Kataklusmos"

The Bible tells us that the flood started 7 days after the ark was entered and the doors sealed by God Himself. The flood took place in Noah's 600 year of life in the 2 month, on the 17th day of that year. A world wide rain storm began....up until the time of the flood there is no record of RAIN ever mentioned in the Bible....as the Bible explains that the plants were watered on a daily basis by a mist.

5. The Bible also addresses the geology of the earth....during the time of the flooding event. The bible describes the Mountains as rising and the valleys sinking (PS. 104:6-9). This would explain how there is evidence of sea life having existed at even the highest points on earth (if the mountains rose up from the sea floor during the flood) and just where all the water receded to after the event....into valleys that did not exist prior to the flood.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 15 by bluedog]

I'll address just one of your points for now – more perhaps later.

1. God directed Noah (a miracle, an unnatural event that can't be quantified by natural physics) to build an ark with specific dimensions. As with all things God must have had a reason for directing Noah to build the ark exactly 300x50x30 cubits or approximately 438x73x48 feet. Why? Because history actual details the fact that these dimensions turned out to be the perfect shape for very large cargo ships....to handle long journeys on the open seas. Until 1858 the ark was the largest ship of record to have sailed the open seas....in that year a man (I.K. BRUNNEL) using the exact same measurements constructed a boat (THE GREAT BRITAIN). As it turns out the design was so successful that it was used during the 2nd world war to build large cargo transports like SS JEREMIAH O'BRIEN....the design turned out to be PERFECT for hauling large cargo at slow speed across often violent stretches of open water.

When one makes assertions in debate it is prudent to check for accuracy before posting.

Neither the Great Britain nor the Jeremiah O'Brien use the "magical" dimensions or "perfect shape" claimed for the ark. The only point of similarity was the latter's length.

SS Great Britain – 322 ft (98 m) in length and with a 3,400-ton displacement, more than 100 ft (30 m) longer and 1,000 tons larger than any ship previously built. Her beam was 50 ft 6 in (15.39 m) and her height from keel to main deck, 32 ft 6 in (9.91 m). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_ ... escription

Thus:

Ark (hypothetical) 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high http://www.creationtips.com/arksize.html
vs.
SS Great Britain (built) – 322 feet long, 50 feet wide, 32 feet high https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_ ... escription

SS JEREMIAH O'BRIEN (built) 441' long, 57' wide, height not specified but draft 27' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Jeremiah_O'Brien

The proposed ark was said to be 40% longer, 50% wider, and 50% higher than the Great Britain and similar length but 30% wider than the O'Brien. Notice also that the latter two were built of iron – NOT wood.

The largest wooden ships known to have been actually constructed and sailed / used were far smaller than the proposed ark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_l ... oden_ships Notice in the descriptions provided that most of the larger ships were NOT seaworthy (even though some used steel bracing).

[bluedog]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

The "ratio" of the Ark was presented in "general" terms since "Cubits" are not accepted as an exact measurement...the best approximate dimension in today's standard would result with a formula as such 1 cubit = 18 inches or a ratio of 1 cubit = 1 ft. 6 in.

As far as today's ship's being made with iron and "suggesting" that a Wood Ship with the dimensions given in the Bible would not work because man had not created a ship of wood with the "exact" dimensions....prohibits the ARK from actually existing is all but laughable. Its like suggesting that because you have never ran a 4 minute mile...no one in history was capable of running a 4 minute mile. Its called a negative argument...because something has not been accomplished IT WAS NOT and CAN NEVER BE ACCOMPLISHED....and then presenting this "negative" as objective evidence is simply absurd.

Sure when METAL is used the height had to be lowered....wonder why? Because metal does not have the "buoyancy" of wood, its heavier than wood. But....the basic design is the same with adjustments made due to the material being used, plus there have been scientific tests on wooden ships with the same dimensions presented in Genesis...tests in a wave pool proving the design given to Noah was the Best to use with the material's available to Noah. Proving that Noah's Ark could safely navigate conditions with waves as high as 30 meters. www.creation.com/safety-investigation-o ... n-a-seaway

Thus....suggesting that IT NEVER HAPPENED because its not used today does not stand up to the OBJECTIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE presented.

Now....shall we discuss the accusation that Noah had to gather up the animals and it was impossible....when the unambiguous writing reveals that Noah did not gather the animals but they were "sent" to Noah. Just what formula was used when making that accusation....a "super-natural-o-meter"?

Again...it must be pointed out....logically speaking, that I can no more PROVE and EXPLAIN a miracle (that which cannot be quantified by natural physics) than you can DEBUNK IT by using natural physics. Like the Age of Noah (but it has been suggested that life span were longer then because there was a vapor bearer blocking the most dangerous sun rays as rain was never mentioned prior to the flood event).....or God giving Noah instructions....or God directing the animals to come to Noah over a 120 year period.

I cannot and will not debate subjective "ideas" that cannot be quantified by natural means...I will the miracles to God and use the tools made available to us, Free Will, Common Sense, and the ability to have FAITH....faith constructed by the Word of God. I will debate anyone on that which can be "measured" by history actual or applied science (I refuse to accept theory as science...its more philosophy....than application). The vast majority of the writings contained in the Holy Bible is quite capable of being measured for TRUTH by using the application of what is available today...I will debate anyone on those portions of scripture but I will refuse to opine about anything that can not be proven or disproved by application of the objective evidence available....like acts of the miraculous...that can neither be proven or disproved by application of natural science.

[Chuck_G]

[Replying to post 17 by bluedog]

The "objective scientific evidence" you have provided is as following:

Wood is more buoyant than metal. Yeah, so what

And SCALE MODELS were used in experiments.

Scale models of boats cannot predict the engineering required of full scale.

But the crux of your argument is "magic" did it. If one is going to provide "objective scientific evidence" for some points of an argument and elude to the supernatural for other points that they cannot explain, where does that leave them?

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 18 by Chuck_G]

Thus....you have nothing but "subjective opinion" to use in an attempt to dismiss the actual applied scientific tests? Again....presenting a negative argument...that which cannot be measured for truth is useless. Again....shall we debate the accusations concerning Noah having to gather the animals, as it seems the Impossibility of the Ark holding, storing, feeding the animals while being safe....has been addressed, as well as the answer to where the water drained to, how the Ark floated above the highest mountain tops...etc., since the Bible clearly explains that geographical changes were taking place during the flood event....I believe the Theoretical Scientists..i.e., the modern day philosophers called it CONTINENTAL DRIFT?

And NO....magic would be suggesting that the universe created itself from nothing and biological life evolved from 2 gases due to the nuclear characteristics of the stars in being capable of transforming the elements...that would be magic...since APPLIED SCIENCE informs us of the fact that if "nothing" existed in the beginning nothing would be all that exists today. All I can conclude by the available evidence is that something SUPERIOR TO NATURE had to create NATURE in order for nature and the laws that govern it to exist today....concluding anything else cannot be measured by SCIENCE.

[Chuck_G]

[Replying to post 19 by bluedog]

I could waste my time reading through the pseudoscience provided from the creationist website provided but what's the point?

Did you elude to miracles and the supernatural already?

If I bother to debunk said "scientific evidence" can I be assured that you won't come back with God did it (the anything is possible argument)?