Bible vs History

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:34 pm

Noah was supposed to live around 4000 years ago, and his flood.

Which means that the entire population of the globe should have begun repopulating about then.
Why is there no evidence of this?

I mean we have great historic not only evidence, but histories of peoples living before, during and after the flood. Even the Americas.

And though dramatic, this is true of other Biblical events. We have the Sumerians positively ignoring Biblical events as if they didn't occur. The Egyptians not seeming to notice plagues and genocide and so on.

One could go through and notice all manner of things that didn't happen from the Bible, Sodom and Gomorrah, and so on. We can even get good dates for when these things were supposed to occur, by how long people lived for these occurrences.

We can also note that these stories did occur in other people's fairy tales.

How do we rectify these three elements - no one noticed these epic events, the dates they failed to occur and they are other people's fairy tales, together with the truth?

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:41 pm

[Replying to post 78 by 1213]

Walking. Vegetation grows fast, if they have water, CO2 and sun, as it was after flood. Many insects can survive in water conditions. I think there is no scientific reason to assume disease spreading rapidly.

Only some vegetation grows fast. Animals with specific plant diets would not necessarily be able to eat what was available. The water would be brackish and prevent many plants from growing. it would also be unsuitable for animals to drink. Many insects may not survive aquatic conditions. If you have any knowledge of floods causing massive death tolls, you will also be aware that disease is most certainly going to be a consequence. There is no question that widespread death and destruction would lead to widespread disease.

1213 · Post by **1213** » Mon Dec 10, 2018 12:51 pm

brunumb wrote: I was not wrong. Pandas only eat very fresh bamboo.

The source I quoted told that they eat also other things than only fresh bamboo.

brunumb wrote: If they were originally just ordinary bears (which?), what caused the bears to make their long journey to China, changing on the way into pandas that eat predominantly bamboo?

Maybe they wanted more room and liked fresh bamboo.

brunumb wrote:What did they eat on the ark? How did they get to Australia after the flood? What did they eat before they got to Australia?

They probably ate something that was as good as what they nowadays eat. I think they just gradually moved by walking to there.

brunumb wrote:The distribution of the world's fauna, as well as flora, is testament to the fact that the great biblical flood story makes no sense.

To me it makes sense. Unfortunate, if you dont understand it.

brunumb wrote: Where is the evidence for the broken up, sunken continent?

The evidence is all over our planet. Especially for example the Mid-Atlantic ridge and all the edges of modern continents.

brunumb wrote:When plates slide against each other even by a few centimetres the result is catastrophic earthquakes. A massive continent breaking up and sinking would involve massive amounts of energy and the destruction would be unprecedented. Watching model plates sink in a fish tank is in no way indicative of something happening on the scale of the planet.

If there is lot of water, it would soften the moves. They would be more plastic and the result would be for example orogenic mountains.

brunumb wrote:The oldest continuous ice core records to date extend 123,000 years in Greenland and 800,000 years in Antarctica.

I think that is not true. There may be that many layers, but it is possible that they are not years, but for example rainy days.

brunumb wrote: Only some vegetation grows fast. Animals with specific plant diets would not necessarily be able to eat what was available. The water would be brackish and prevent many plants from growing. it would also be unsuitable for animals to drink. Many insects may not survive aquatic conditions. If you have any knowledge of floods causing massive death tolls, you will also be aware that disease is most certainly going to be a consequence. There is no question that widespread death and destruction would lead to widespread disease.

It is possible that not all water was brackish, because of the heavy rain, it is possible that there were large sweet water areas.

But, obviously you can make all kind of assumptions, to revoke the flood story. Your opinions are not enough to change my mind. You would have to give solid evidence and reasoning, which you dont have.

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:59 pm

[Replying to post 82 by 1213]

But, obviously you can make all kind of assumptions, to revoke the flood story. Your opinions are not enough to change my mind. You would have to give solid evidence and reasoning, which you dont have.

Your endless "maybes" are totally unscientific and unsupported. You do not appear to give due consideration to actual evidence and reasoning from credible sources.

When a belief comes first, usually through indoctrination, evidence and reasoning are nowhere in sight. At a later time it becomes a matter of trying to support that belief somehow. Defending proven false events like the flood or the exodus with fanciful theories made up in creationist think tanks is not enough to overcome the wealth of contradictory evidence. But, for many believers, it doesn't matter.

On the issue of the pandas, you are still ignoring what I said. Pandas only eat bamboo that is FRESH. That was my point. I am not wrong. As I find the explanations you are providing exceedingly implausible and frankly quite laughable, I consider it a waste of time addressing this topic any further.

rikuoamero · Post by **rikuoamero** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:41 am

[Replying to post 82 by 1213]

brunumb

How did they get to Australia after the flood?

1213

I think they just gradually moved by walking to there.

So 1213 is of the opinion that two bears WALKED the 12,434 km from Turkey to Australia, somehow traversing across the many different environments, avoiding any and all dangers and predators, swam across the ocean(s) to end up where they are now.

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:41 am

[Replying to post 84 by rikuoamero]

Hey, so I know this is a stupid question, but in cases where two of the same animals occupy to geographically separated areas, how did they get there?

Were there four of some animals?

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:42 am

[Replying to post 84 by rikuoamero]

So 1213 is of the opinion that two bears WALKED the 12,434 km from Turkey to Australia, somehow traversing across the many different environments, avoiding any and all dangers and predators, swam across the ocean(s) to end up where they are now.

And somewhere along the way they evolved into koalas, which are not bears, leaving no intermediaries anywhere. They also had to change their digestive system for some reason so that when they eventually made it to Australia they would be able to eat specific gum leaves.

One huge issue that 1213 has not confronted is that 2 is not a viable population for animals to survive out in the great wide world.

Minimum Viable Population
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_population

StuartJ · Post by **StuartJ** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:54 am

brunumb wrote: [Replying to post 84 by rikuoamero]

So 1213 is of the opinion that two bears WALKED the 12,434 km from Turkey to Australia, somehow traversing across the many different environments, avoiding any and all dangers and predators, swam across the ocean(s) to end up where they are now.
And somewhere along the way they evolved into koalas, which are not bears, leaving no intermediaries anywhere. They also had to change their digestive system for some reason so that when they eventually made it to Australia they would be able to eat specific gum leaves.

One huge issue that 1213 has not confronted is that 2 is not a viable population for animals to survive out in the great wide world.

Minimum Viable Population
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_population

In Flood Myth One, the Elohim asked for two of everything.

In Flood Myth Two, Yahweh pokes his nose in - just like he did in the Creation Myths - and asks for seven of the "clean" and two of the "unclean" critters.

I don't think koalaburgers were big on the Israelite diet: so we may only have two of them.

I hypothesise the cultural writings were rewritten by the followers of Yahweh.

A simple reason for much of the jumble and contradiction for what NOT A SOUL ever offers a jot of evidence for as having come from "God".

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:50 am

[Replying to post 87 by StuartJ]

I don't think koalaburgers were big on the Israelite diet: so we may only have two of them.

You have to feel sorry for some of the animals. After months spent on a terrifying journey buffeted by churning waters and torrential rain, they finally breathe a sigh of relief as they step off the ark only to hear Noah call for the 'spares' to be burnt as an offering to Yahweh.

StuartJ · Post by **StuartJ** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:16 am

brunumb wrote: [Replying to post 87 by StuartJ]

I don't think koalaburgers were big on the Israelite diet: so we may only have two of them.
You have to feel sorry for some of the animals. After months spent on a terrifying journey buffeted by churning waters and torrential rain, they finally breathe a sigh of relief as they step off the ark only to hear Noah call for the 'spares' to be burnt as an offering to Yahweh.

Yes ...

It was a tranquilising smoke to settle him down.

And because the mythological Yahweh live near the top of the Dome of Heaven he had just closed the windows on, he could smell the burning flesh.

Yahweh loves flesh sacrifices to mollify him ...

Even his only begotten son came to the floor of the Dome with the specific intent of becoming a human sacrifice to Yahweh.

And we also know why we have rainbows in the sky.

Just in case Yahweh gets all genocidally wrathful again.

We have to wait for Jesus for the next round of global genocide.

Amazing that people actually pretend this stuff is real ...!

Post by **Tcg** » Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:45 am

StuartJ wrote:
Amazing that people actually pretend this stuff is real ...!

It has to be real.

In Genesis 6, before the flood, God stated, "every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time."

In Genesis 8, after the flood, God states, "every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood."

How can you explain this miraculous change if the flood wasn't real?