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?

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 20 by Chuck_G]

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 20 by Chuck_G]

Deflect much in an attempt to ignore applied science? First....I would suggest a proper debate concerning that which is "measurable"....your accusation that Noah had to gather up the animals when the evidence exist for both you and I informing us that God sent the animals to Noah over a 120 year period. Again....all the evidence available is that which is written as the miracle itself is beyond the ability of man to measure.....but, why address that which can neither be proven or disproved when over 95% of the Bible can be tested for truth by the evidence available today?

Its a tactic used by many....since it cannot be measured for truth it cannot be true. The real kicker? The origins of the universe cannot be measured...but it still exists. All the philosophers can say is, "The Universe MUST HAVE created itself from nothing"....just ask S. Hawking.

[Chuck_G]

[Replying to post 21 by bluedog]

First off it wasn't my argument that Noah gathered the animals.

Anyways, your argument was that God directed the animals to the ark, correct? And then alluded to we cannot test the supernatural. It appears you are new to the forum and it may be prudent to take a look at the C&A sub forum rules.

In particular:

"4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book."

IOW saying that God directed the animals to the boat because the bible says so doesn't carry much weight.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 22 by bluedog]

Its a tactic used by many....since it cannot be measured for truth it cannot be true.

I don't know about anyone else, but what I would say is
"Since it cannot be measured for truth, it cannot be considered true. It might be true, but I have no reason to think of it as true, if it cannot be measured (or if it can be measured and the measurements indicated that the thing is in fact false)"

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 19 by bluedog]

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?

I suggest you find a physics teacher, someone with knowledge of plate tectonics. Ask them what would be the result of the continents moving in such a fashion, in so short a period of time?
Ask them what would be the result of South America separating from Africa violently in just over a year, instead of millions of years?

[H.sapiens]

.
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.

'cept a wooden hull that size would work and let water in.

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.

Then explain marsupial distribution, past and current.

3) A billion cubic miles of water sudden appearing -- then disappearing afterward

The water didn't just appear. It came from two sources.

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.
(Genesis 7:11 ESV)

Neither exist, there are no fountains of the great deep, there are no windows of the heavens ... superstitious clap trap authored by bronze age peoples who lacked geological and meteorological knowledge.

And the water didn't just disappear after the flood. It is still here in the oceans. After the flood land rose up out of the oceans to form the continents that exist today.

You covered it with the deep as with a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.
At your rebuke they fled;
at the sound of your thunder they took to flight.
The mountains rose, the valleys sank down
to the place that you appointed for them.
You set a boundary that they may not pass,
so that they might not again cover the earth.
(Psalm 104:6-9 ESV)

The island I stand on (Hawaii) falsifies that.

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

No. They only appear to be implausible because you don't really understand what the Bible says on the subject. Flood stories similar to those in the Bible are found in many other cultures in all parts of the world. Doesn't this show that the flood actually occurred? Here is a good place to find out more information about the flood:

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/

'cept there's no "real facts" in that web site, none what-do-ever.

[1213]

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

I have no reason to expect that there should be penguin ancestor fossils in Middle East. Fossilization is rare event; it is easily possible that no penguin was caught so that it could have become fossils in Middle East.

[Zzyzx]

.

I have no reason to expect that there should be penguin ancestor fossils in Middle East. Fossilization is rare event; it is easily possible that no penguin was caught so that it could have become fossils in Middle East.

Is this to suggest (and expect to be taken seriously?) that penguins made their way to the Mediterranean area?

We are all aware that penguins are Antarctic dwellers adapted to cold climates and are not hot desert inhabitants, aren't we?

The thought of a pair of penguins waddling across the desert to get to an ark is quite amusing. Wonder what they ate along the way and how they avoided dehydration and overheating.

[H.sapiens]

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

I have no reason to expect that there should be penguin ancestor fossils in Middle East. Fossilization is rare event; it is easily possible that no penguin was caught so that it could have become fossils in Middle East.

Then show me any sign of a marsupial, any marsupial, between Turkey and Australia.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 27 by 1213]

Then what reason do you give to convince us that there were indeed penguins in the Middle East just a few thousand years ago?
There is much evidence against what you say, and any possible evidence that might vindicate you is mysteriously absent.
Why is it that we can find fossils for creatures but only in areas where they live, areas they are adapted to survive in, but curiously none for areas where they could not possibly survive?