Biblical Flood? Fish, squid, and shrimp fossils in the mountains of Lebanon and Peru

[Akhenaten]

"We can't date things that are too old. After about 10 half lifes, there is very little C-14 left to measure."

Perhaps when you get around to answering this post you'll be so good as to indicate which of the events is older and which is younger than 10 half lifes:

Your intimation that Pangea was one continent as recently as 6K years ago seems to indicate otherwise.

Suppose you lay out a chronology:

In your opinion, when did 'god' create the world?

In your opinion, when was Pangea last a single continent?

In your opinion, when did the "global flood" happen?

In your opinion, when did the orogeny of the Himalayas happen?

Please to put those 4 events in the order you want to be able to claim that they happened, with the dates you want to wish for them.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Nothing in Genesis states that snakes had legs.

To be fair, in Genesis 3:14 God curses the serpent to 'crawl on it's belly and eat dust', which suggests that it didn't beforehand, which itself suggests that the serpent previously had legs before it was cursed.

 

[Akhenaten]

Yeah, but from your post we still don't know who is the person who estimated the fossil to be 95 million years old. That part is not footnoted.

And from your posts we still don't know what is the nature of the claimed relationship between the fossils you mentioned in the OP and the flood story in Genesis.

Not only is that part not footnoted, but so far you've refused to even acknowledge the question.

 

[Akhenaten]

So I assume then you don't believe the tempter was an actual snake based on the bible passage?

I assume you're happy to endure the consequences of yet another attempted derail?​

 

[Akhenaten]

The Wiki site I brought in has 9 footnotes. Mojo talks of 95,000,000 years but that part is not footnoted so we don't know where it came from or who estimated it.

Then those of us who are interested might have to dig a bit deeper, as it were.

What does your research into the relationship between the fossils in Lebanon and the flood story in Genesis tell you?

If a specific thing I brought in is not footnoted then you are welcome to mention that fact.

The Forum internet doesn't have that much bandwidth.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

I don't know if the flood was global or local. Either way I don't know when Noah was born so I don't know. There are gaps in other places in the bible regarding genealogies so there could be gaps in the biblical genealogies from the first human to Noah. Some believe those gaps are hundreds of thousands of years. In that case it wouldn't make much sense to list thousands of ancestors between the first human and Noah.

Well according to the original Sumerian version of the story in which a king called Atra-Hasis is warned by a god called 'Enki' about the other gods plans to kill humanity with a flood and instructs him to build a boat to save himself and his loved ones, it was a localised flood, apparently through a vally that contained all of humanity at the time. This version was later changed slightly in the version found in the Babylonian 'Epic of Gilgamesh' in which a commoner called Utnapishtim is given the same warning and boat building instructions by the same god and the flood is also changed to a global flood. This version also contains several things that are used in the final Biblical narrative. For example;

"The dove went out and returned" (Gilgamesh XI,147)
"sent forth the dove and the dove came back to him" (Genesis 8:10b-11)

"I sent forth a raven" (Gilgamesh XI,152)
"Noah... sent forth a raven" (Genesis 8:7)

"The gods smelled the sweet savor" (Gilgamesh XI,160)
"And the Lord smelled the sweet savor..." (Genesis 8:21)

"On Mount Nisir the boat grounded" (Gilgamesh XI,140)
"the ark came to rest upon the mountains" (Genesis 8:4)

"The cattle of the field, the beast of the plain" (Gilgamesh XI,85)
"clean animals and of animals that are not clean" (Genesis 7:8)

"into the ship all my family and relatives" (Gilgamesh XI,84)
"Go into the ark, you and all your household" (Genesis 7:1)

"pitch I poured into the inside" (Gilgamesh XI,66)
"cover it inside and out with pitch" (Genesis 6:14)

"And offered a sacrifice" (Gilgamesh XI,155)
"offered burnt offerings on the altar" (Genesis 8:20)

"he touched our foreheads to bless us" (Gilgamesh XI,192)
"And God blessed Noah" (Genesis 9:1)

So the Biblical account is pretty obviously based upon the earlier Gilgamesh version then, (which in turn is based upon the much earlier Sumerian version) infact if all of the authors were still alive, the author of Gilgamesh would have no problem suing the author of the Genesis version for plagiarism.
But this raises an interesting point, I take it from your posts (and please forgive me if I'm wrong about this) that you are a Christian? If that's the case then you must obviously consider the Sumerian gods to be mythological, true? So if the flood story in the Bible is based upon mythology, then doesn't that make the Biblical story itself mythological? After all, you cannot base truth upon mythology. You can base mythology upon truth, but not the other way around.

 

[Akhenaten]

I don't know if the flood was global or local.

You don't know if there was a flood at all.

Either way I don't know when Noah was born so I don't know.

You don't know if the Noah in the story even existed.

There are gaps in other places in the bible regarding genealogies so there could be gaps in the biblical genealogies from the first human to Noah.

Given that the authors of the Bible had no idea that there was no such thing as a "first human", this would seem to be a pretty safe assumption.

Some believe those gaps are hundreds of thousands of years.

What "some believe" is hardly evidence. Have you learned nothing at all in your time here?

In that case it wouldn't make much sense to list thousands of ancestors between the first human and Noah.

Nothing about the whole poorly thought out fairytale horror story makes any sense at all.

That's why you can't answer even the most basic questions about it.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

You don't know if there was a flood at all.

The story is more than likely based upon a real event.
Remember, as I stated above, the flood narrative originates with the Sumerians, who lived in Mesopotamia, which is now called 'Iraq'.

As it happens, archeologicaly, we know that where the Persian Gulf is today was definately once an entirely dry basin (apart from several rivers that flowed through it that were connected to the Euphrates and Tigris river systems) about 15,000 years ago and that sometime after the last glaciation period ended, which was around 12,000 years ago, when the glaciers started melting and sea levels started to gradualy rise, it looks like some sort of natural dam once existed where the Straits of Hormuz are today which eventualy gave way, allowing the Arabian sea to suddenly spill over it creating the Persian Gulf as we see it today in a very short time.

There's also evidence of relatively more recent extended local flooding in this part of the world. Excavations in Iraq have shown evidence of a flood at Shuruppak just under 5000 years ago. So archeologicaly it looks like two flooding events happened, one that formed the Persian Gulf, possibly about 10,000 years ago, and a later one that extended it about 5000 years ago. That places this later flooding event at just before the beginning of the Sumerian civilisation, at the very end of the Ubaid period, so it's hardly surprising that the Sumerians would write about it, and that makes this the best known candidate for the event that the story of Noah's flood would eventualy be based upon after a few thousand years of exaggeration had been added to the story.

 

[Akhenaten]

Oh, he can mention it but I just pointed out we don't know where it came from. And we still don't know who exactly is the scientist who went to Lebanon and gave an estimate of what the age of the fossils are.

Refresh my memory. Who brought up the fossils in Lebanon first?

Wait. It's coming back to me. It was this post:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257225

My thoughts exactly.

DOC's post above is virtually asking "What the dickens was the intention of the OP in creating this thread"?

It's bizarre.

 

[Mojo]

DOC, {Carbon} dating is a science...

A relatively young science that has problems.

From the article: Problems with Radiometric and Carbon-14 Dating -- From the website
The California Institute for Ancient Studies

"Are there things that can't be carbon dated?

The method doesn't work on things that didn't get their carbon from the air. This leaves out aquatic creatures since their carbon might originate from dissolved carbonate rocks limestone. This in turn causes problems in dating animals that eat sea food.

We can't date things that are too old. After about 10 half lifes, there is very little C-14 left to measure."

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html

Here's the post by Gawdzilla that you were replying to:

DOC, dating is a science, so trying to AIG the issue just doesn't work.

You deliberately added the word "Carbon" [which doesn't require a capital letter, BTW] to it in order to have a strawman to attack.

Naughty DOC.

 

[Akhenaten]

You don't know if there was a flood at all.

The story is more than likely based upon a real event.

<snip>

No, the story (in Genesis) is more than likely based upon an earlier story, which is in turn likely based on an earlier story again ad infinitum.

Whether the original story, if such a thing could be said to exist, was based on a real flood or not is anyone's guess, but the fact remains that neither DOC nor anyone else knows that the Noachian flood (the one that's the topic of the thread) ever occurred.

However . . .

Given the number of ridiculously unlikely things that we would need to assume, such as < 6,000-year-old fossils, mountain ranges that grow at a visible rate and continents zooming around the world's oceans like ginormous speedboats, I think we can make an educated guess about it.

 

[Mojo]

Yeah, but from your post we still don't know who is the person who estimated the fossil to be 95 million years old. That part is not footnoted.

The Wiki site I brought in has 9 footnotes. Mojo talks of 95,000,000 years but that part is not footnoted so we don't know where it came from or who estimated it. If a specific thing I brought in is not footnoted then you are welcome to mention that fact.

Actually, it is footnoted; see the little ^[9]. And if you had bothered to follow the link, you would have found that the information about the fossil octopus, including the date, is sourced from this article, which in turn cites an academic journal as its source.

 

[Akhenaten]

I don't know if the flood was global or local. Either way I don't know when Noah was born so I don't know. There are gaps in other places in the bible regarding genealogies so there could be gaps in the biblical genealogies from the first human to Noah. Some believe those gaps are hundreds of thousands of years. In that case it wouldn't make much sense to list thousands of ancestors between the first human and Noah.

So this thread is just speculation about things that may or may not relate to a story that may or may not be literal?

 

[SlackerBabbath]

No, the story (in Genesis) is more than likely based upon an earlier story, which is in turn likely based on an earlier story again ad infinitum.

Whether the original story, if such a thing could be said to exist, was based on a real flood or not is anyone's guess, but the fact remains that neither DOC nor anyone else knows that the Noachian flood (the one that's the topic of the thread) ever occurred.

Well the evidence would seem to suggest that the original story (and yes, such a thing can be said to exist if we consider the 'original' to be the earliest version that we know about) written by the Sumerians about a localised flooding of a river vally was possibly based upon a real event around 5000 years ago which caused the flooding of the Euphrates river vally, and the evidence also suggests that we can link this story to the writing of the Noachian versian via the Babylonian 'Gilgamesh' version.

However . . .

Given the number of ridiculously unlikely things that we would need to assume, such as < 6,000-year-old fossils, mountain ranges that grow at a visible rate and continents zooming around the world's oceans like ginormous speedboats, I think we can make an educated guess about it.

I'm with you all the way on that score.

 

[pakeha]

When (in your opinion) did the fludde happen, DOC?

Yeah, but from your post we still don't know who is the person who estimated the fossil to be 95 million years old. That part is not footnoted.

The Wiki site I brought in has 9 footnotes. Mojo talks of 95,000,000 years but that part is not footnoted so we don't know where it came from or who estimated it. If a specific thing I brought in is not footnoted then you are welcome to mention that fact.

Oh, he can mention it but I just pointed out we don't know where it came from. And we still don't know who exactly is the scientist who went to Lebanon and gave an estimate of what the age of the fossils are.

Find the name of the formation. Type it into Google Scholar. Read the first paper you come across until you get to a reference saying something like "...defined by (Smith, 1965)". Go to the references, and find that citation. Find that paper, and read it. That will tell you who, what, why, and how.

Also, as X said, please apply the same levels of criticism to all positions, even yours. At least someone bothered to give an estimate. You've been satisfied thus far with "Some flooding occurred, the animals were involved, that's about all we know."

When did you stop beating your wife?

Or easier yet

Actually, it is footnoted; see the little ^[9]. And if you had bothered to follow the link, you would have found that the information about the fossil octopus, including the date, is sourced from this article, which in turn cites an academic journal as its source.

Ouch.

 

[smartcooky]

Well according to the original Sumerian version of the story in which a king called Atra-Hasis is warned by a god called 'Enki' about the other gods plans to kill humanity with a flood and instructs him to build a boat to save himself and his loved ones, it was a localised flood, apparently through a valley that contained all of humanity at the time.

It would seem likely that this earlier version would be the more accurate account. The suggestion that it was a localised flood at least makes the story more plausible, although even this may have been a conflation of several even earlier accounts.

The Sumerian account dates from about 1600 BC, but it refers to much earlier events. Atra-Hasis means "exceedingly wise"; this was more likely to be a description of the King of Shurrappak rather than his actual name, which according to Sumerian history, was Ubara-Tutu. Excavations in Iraq show evidence of localized flooding at the site of Shuruppak and various other Sumerian cities.

"A layer of riverine sediments, radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BC, interrupts the continuity of settlement, extending as far north as the city of Kish. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (3000-2900 BC) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum."

ref: Crawford, Harriet (1991). Sumer and the Sumerians. Cambridge University Press. pp. 19.

On this map, Shurrappak was situated near Bismaya; right slap-bang in the middle of the flood plain between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.

 

[wollery]

All in all, a disapointing attempt. You can do better.

Evidence?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This reboot was very poorly done. The omnipotent, omniscient Yahweh could have just snapped his fingers and the Noahcounts would have been the only humans on the planet. "Kill EVERYTHING" is a goat-herder's solution, not very godlike.

 

[Hellbound]

This reboot was very poorly done. The omnipotent, omniscient Yahweh could have just snapped his fingers and the Noahcounts would have been the only humans on the planet. "Kill EVERYTHING" is a goat-herder's solution, not very godlike.

I like the goat herder idea. It makes sense of so much.

I can imagine some ancient tribesman scribbling chiselling the "revalations from God" onto a tablet.

"Make me watch the goat herds on a weekend! Well, we'll see about that. "Unclean" Yeah, cloven hoofs, can't eat 'em! Hah!

You know, even better idea. Let's make 'em sacrifice one of the little ******** every now and then. Smelly, ill-tempered things.

Oh, I got an even better one! Let's associate the goat with the personification of evil! Hah! No more goat herding for me!"

 

[Dinwar]

The suggestion that it was a localised flood at least makes the story more plausible, although even this may have been a conflation of several even earlier accounts.

To paraphrase Patrick McManus, the most fertile grazing areas for deer are the minds of hunters.

Atra-Hasis means "exceedingly wise"; this was more likely to be a description of the King of Shurrappak rather than his actual name, which according to Sumerian history, was Ubara-Tutu

A common enough thing to happen. In the SCA the Black Prince has some notoriaty, despite the fact that few of us can remember his name (he was an English prince in the Middle Ages). Dracula's real name was Vlad (his castles were made of brick, and look really weird). It's common for humans to give each other nicknames, and sometimes those stick better than the real one.

And let's be honest, Altra-Hasis sounds more kingly than any name including "tutu". (I know, I know--it was just a bad joke that made my caffien-deprived brain smile.)