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

[welshdean]

Read svenax's post above.

Now, can you give the quote from the Book of Genesis where it states the name of it's author? Please don't ignore this question, an honest reply is required for the sake of my opinion of your credibility.

Oh maaaaaaaaaaan. You'll learn.





Sorry! Welcome aboard mate.



ETA:
Aberhaten, are those bingo cards handy? I gots a feeling we'll be needing them soon.

 

[DOC]

Actually looking to the article text provides some clues. To start with, the researchers did not go to Lebanon at this time, since the fossils where already in museums:

The fossils were not radiometrically dated, instead the age was assumed from similarity to other specimens, and from the fact that the strata where they were found had been thoroughly dated previously.

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

And if the actual fossils were not dated then they could very likely be younger than the strata if they were covered by the strata during a volcano or the churning up of the sea bed and the ground soil during a 150 day flood.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Oh maaaaaaaaaaan. You'll learn.

What?
I'm simply making the reasonable assumption that his credibility is important to him... otherwise he wouldn't be here attempting to argue his case.

Sorry! Welcome aboard mate.

Cheers bud.

 

[svenax]

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

Didn't I already provide a list of more than 10 independent datings of the strata? You can follow them all to the primary source if you are interested.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

And if the actual fossils were not dated then they could very likely be younger than the strata if they were covered by the strata during a volcano or the churning up of the sea bed and the ground soil during a 150 day flood.

Can we take it that you are avoiding my question about who the Book of Genesis quotes as it's author and therefore don't care about your own credibility?

And speaking of avoiding questions....

I'll get to this as time permits, there is an explanation.

Why not now? 'No time like the present' as the saying goes. If you know the explanation, why not simply give it to me? Or is it something that you're not actualy sure if there's an explanation for it or not and you need to go and look it up?

If that's the case, what makes you so sure that 'there is an explanation'?

 

[DOC]

Can we take it that you are avoiding my question about who the Book of Genesis quotes as it's author:

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses.

From the article "In the Beginning God" By Dr. Hal Harless

"{Norman} Geisler explains the lines of evidence for this conclusion:

There are several lines of evidence to indicate that Moses, the
great lawgiver and deliverer of Israel who wrote the other four books of the
law, was the author of Genesis. (1) The earliest and continual tradition of
'the Jewish people, as recorded in the Talmud, attributes this book to
Moses. (2) Moses is the only person we know of from this early time peri
od who had the ability to write this book. The rest of the Israelites were a
nation of uneducated slaves, whereas Moses was a highly educated son
of the king (Acts 7:22). (3) Moses was the only one who had both the in
terest and information to write Genesis. Being Jewish Moses would have
had access to the family records of his ancestors (cf. Gen. 5:1; 10:1;
25:19; etc.) which were no doubt brought down to Egypt by Jacob (Gen.
46). Since Moses was bent on delivering his people from Egypt, it is nat
ural to assume that he was familiar with the promises of God passed down
by his forefathers that God would indeed deliver them (cf. Gen. 46:3–4;
Exod. 2:24). (4) Citations from Genesis show that the rest of the Old Test
ament regards it as part of the Law of Moses (Deut. 1:8; II Kings 13:23; I
Chron. 1:1ff.). Since Moses was the author of the other "books of Moses,"
as we will see later, it is reasonable to attribute the first book of Moses to
him as well..."

http://ffgreenville.org/notes/books/gen_2013/2013-01-27-gen-001-001.pdf

 

[SlackerBabbath]

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses.

From the article "In the Beginning God" By Dr. Hal Harless

"{Norman} Geisler explains the lines of evidence for this conclusion:

There are several lines of evidence to indicate that Moses, the
great lawgiver and deliverer of Israel who wrote the other four books of the
law, was the author of Genesis. (1) The earliest and continual tradition of
'the Jewish people, as recorded in the Talmud, attributes this book to
Moses. (2) Moses is the only person we know of from this early time peri
od who had the ability to write this book. The rest of the Israelites were a
nation of uneducated slaves, whereas Moses was a highly educated son
of the king (Acts 7:22). (3) Moses was the only one who had both the in
terest and information to write Genesis. Being Jewish Moses would have
had access to the family records of his ancestors (cf. Gen. 5:1; 10:1;
25:19; etc.) which were no doubt brought down to Egypt by Jacob (Gen.
46). Since Moses was bent on delivering his people from Egypt, it is nat
ural to assume that he was familiar with the promises of God passed down
by his forefathers that God would indeed deliver them (cf. Gen. 46:3–4;
Exod. 2:24). (4) Citations from Genesis show that the rest of the Old Test
ament regards it as part of the Law of Moses (Deut. 1:8; II Kings 13:23; I
Chron. 1:1ff.). Since Moses was the author of the other "books of Moses,"
as we will see later, it is reasonable to attribute the first book of Moses to
him as well..."

http://ffgreenville.org/notes/books/gen_2013/2013-01-27-gen-001-001.pdf

Yes, Moses is considered as the author of Genesis, according to Jewish 'tradition', infact he's traditionaly considered as the author of the Torah, which is the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, made up of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.... but, ignoring the fact that Biblical scholars date Genesis' authorship to over 500 years after the Bible says that Moses died for a moment, (which would obviously make Moses' authorship of Genesis impossible) I believe that I actualy asked you for the "quote" in the Book of Genesis itself that names it's author. Now, no more avoiding the actual question that I asked, who does the Book of Genesis itself quote as it's author?

 

[pakeha]

Yeah, but we still don't know who the "actual person" was who estimated the fossils to be 95 million years old. ...

Yes we do.

The article that it is sourced from quite clearly states that a 'Dr. Dirk Fuchs' was the 'lead author' of the report which was made by 'scientists' (plural) so obviously it would appear that the dating was actualy a 'group effort' rather than being carried out by a single person.

Y'see, that's the beauty of science, it's peer reviewed, so you don't have to just take one person's word for it.

DOC, do you remember what fossils are?

Actually looking to the article text provides some clues. To start with, the researchers did not go to Lebanon at this time, since the fossils where already in museums:



The fossils were not radiometrically dated, instead the age was assumed from similarity to other specimens, and from the fact that the strata where they were found had been thoroughly dated previously.



For reference, the Cenomanian^WP age spans the time between 99.6 ± 0.9 Ma and 93.5 ± 0.8 Ma.

Sorry if this is too much information. I just found it interesting myself.

Never too much. I haunt the DOC threads to learn from the wealth of responses to their posts.

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

And if the actual fossils were not dated then they could very likely be younger than the strata if they were covered by the strata during a volcano or the churning up of the sea bed and the ground soil during a 150 day flood.

Didn't I already provide a list of more than 10 independent datings of the strata? You can follow them all to the primary source if you are interested.

I have the impression DOC has forgotten what a fossil is.

The story is of course a part of the Book of Genesis which is traditionaly credited to God, via Moses who wrote it down for him, although that said, it's writing is dated by Biblical scholars to around 500 BC, which is over 500 years after Moses' is said to have died, so yeah, we don't know who wrote the Biblical version of the flood story, or indeed who wrote the original versions that it was based upon but in which the name of the deity was changed, (possibly to protect the innocent??? )

Welcome to the forum!

Ahh, looks fun, I shall have to read it.

While your at it, you may want to check the thread: Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Enjoy!

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses. ...

No, DOC.
Firstly because we don't even know when Moses lived, if at all.
Secondly because the authorship of Genesis is generally considered to be post-Exile.

 

[joobz]

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses.

From the article "In the Beginning God" By Dr. Hal Harless

"{Norman} Geisler explains the lines of evidence for this conclusion:

There are several lines of evidence to indicate that Moses, the
great lawgiver and deliverer of Israel who wrote the other four books of the
law, was the author of Genesis. (1) The earliest and continual tradition of
'the Jewish people, as recorded in the Talmud, attributes this book to
Moses. (2) Moses is the only person we know of from this early time peri
od who had the ability to write this book. The rest of the Israelites were a
nation of uneducated slaves, whereas Moses was a highly educated son
of the king (Acts 7:22). (3) Moses was the only one who had both the in
terest and information to write Genesis. Being Jewish Moses would have
had access to the family records of his ancestors (cf. Gen. 5:1; 10:1;
25:19; etc.) which were no doubt brought down to Egypt by Jacob (Gen.
46). Since Moses was bent on delivering his people from Egypt, it is nat
ural to assume that he was familiar with the promises of God passed down
by his forefathers that God would indeed deliver them (cf. Gen. 46:3–4;
Exod. 2:24). (4) Citations from Genesis show that the rest of the Old Test
ament regards it as part of the Law of Moses (Deut. 1:8; II Kings 13:23; I
Chron. 1:1ff.). Since Moses was the author of the other "books of Moses,"
as we will see later, it is reasonable to attribute the first book of Moses to
him as well..."

http://ffgreenville.org/notes/books/gen_2013/2013-01-27-gen-001-001.pdf

Where was Geisler when he made this conclusion?
It is strange that this information isn't provided.

 

[Rincewind]

Yeah, but we still don't know who the "actual person" was who estimated the fossils to be 95 million years old. There must be a name, but we don't have one. And it's already been mentioned about the problems with carbon dating marine life and very old material.

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

And even if the fossil was millions of years old, those fossils could have been ejected during the "breaking up of the fountains of the great deep" {possible volcanoes} which also happened during the flood according to the bible.

Remember, marine life was created before humans in the Bible.

DOC - if the fossil was millions of years old - or in fact "is" millions of years old - then how can you force Noah into the story?

I'm curious...

 

[Craig B]

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses.

From the article "In the Beginning God" By Dr. Hal Harless

"{Norman} Geisler explains the lines of evidence for this conclusion:

There are several lines of evidence to indicate that Moses, the
great lawgiver and deliverer of Israel who wrote the other four books of the
law, was the author of Genesis. (1) The earliest and continual tradition of
'the Jewish people, as recorded in the Talmud, attributes this book to
Moses. (2) Moses is the only person we know of from this early time peri
od who had the ability to write this book. The rest of the Israelites were a
nation of uneducated slaves, whereas Moses was a highly educated son
of the king (Acts 7:22). (3) Moses was the only one who had both the in
terest and information to write Genesis. Being Jewish Moses would have
had access to the family records of his ancestors (cf. Gen. 5:1; 10:1;
25:19; etc.) which were no doubt brought down to Egypt by Jacob (Gen.
46). Since Moses was bent on delivering his people from Egypt, it is nat
ural to assume that he was familiar with the promises of God passed down
by his forefathers that God would indeed deliver them (cf. Gen. 46:3–4;
Exod. 2:24). (4) Citations from Genesis show that the rest of the Old Test
ament regards it as part of the Law of Moses (Deut. 1:8; II Kings 13:23; I
Chron. 1:1ff.). Since Moses was the author of the other "books of Moses,"
as we will see later, it is reasonable to attribute the first book of Moses to
him as well..."

http://ffgreenville.org/notes/books/gen_2013/2013-01-27-gen-001-001.pdf

Well, have a look at this, in http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/authormoses.html which I commend to your attention, along with works any authors as early as Voltaire and Paine (not to mention the opinions of all rational modern scholars). Did Moses write this, then?

Deuteronomy 34:5-8. So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD, and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-pe'or; but no man knows the place of his burial to this day. Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died; his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated. And the people of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days; then the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.

 

[pakeha]

Well, have a look at this, in http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/authormoses.html which I commend to your attention, along with works any authors as early as Voltaire and Paine (not to mention the opinions of all rational modern scholars). ...

Thanks for the link- I'd lost it back in the day.

 

[Akhenaten]

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

Are you hoping that if you just continue to pretend that svenax' post containing the quotes from the article that you refuse to read doesn't exist then eventually it will disappear?

Four of the studied specimens are housed in the palaeontological collection of the Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano: those from Hâqel are labelled MSNM i26321 and MSNM i26323, those from Hâdjoula MSNM i26320 and MSNM i26742. The fifth specimen belongs to the Musée national d’histoire naturelle de Luxembourg and is labelled MnhnL-CRE045.

The debate about a precise stratigraphical age of the exposed limestones in the Hâqel and Hâdjoula quarries is long. Geological studies on the Cretaceous outcrops in Lebanon started with Botta (1833), who investigated the lithology of the sediments in the Hâqel area. Lewis (1878) and Fraas (1878) postulated a Turonian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula. Patterson (1967) and Hückel (1970) later recognized a Cenomanian age of these localities. Patterson (1967) estimated a Mid-Cenomanian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula on the basis of fish fauna, whereas Hückel (1970) placed the beds at Hâqel as Early Cenomanian based on the record of the foraminifer Orbitolina concava concava and the index ammonite Mantelliceras mantelli already reported by Zumoffen (1926).

Biostratigraphical studies of Dubertret (1959, 1966) and Saint-Marc (1974) determined the sequences at Hâqel and Hâdjoula to be Early Cenomanian. Hemleben (1977), on the other hand, again dated them as Late Cenomanian in view of the assemblage of the planktonic foraminifera Praeglobotruncana stephani, Rotalipora cushmani and Rotalipora greenhornensis. More recently, Wippich and Lehmann (2004) confirmed a Late Cenomanian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula owing to the presence of the ammonite Allocrioceras cf. annulatum, which is a member of the lower Upper Cenomanian Sciponoceras gracile Zone in the Western Interior of USA and the Metoicoceras geslinianum Zone of the international standard.

Doesn't seem likely.

And if the actual fossils were not dated . . .

But they were, your refusal to accept this notwithstanding.

. . . then they could very likely be younger than the strata if they were covered by the strata during a volcano or the churning up of the sea bed and the ground soil during a 150 day flood.

The volcano and the churning up of the sea bed that you made up based on your limited understanding of the very farytale for which you're desperately scrabbling to establish a factual basis?

Are you serious?

​

What an idiotic argument. You excel yourself.

 

[Akhenaten]

Do you know what person dated the strata; is there an article somewhere on that?

Didn't I already provide a list of more than 10 independent datings of the strata? You can follow them all to the primary source if you are interested.

You're talking to a person who has so far refused to acknowledge the existence of the modern city of Tyre for no other reason than that to do so would falsify an ancient prophecy.

 

[Akhenaten]

The author of Genesis is generally considered to be Moses.

No, it is not.

This statement alone stands as testimony to an abject ignorance of the subject that you are here pretending to debate.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Yeah, but we still don't know who the "actual person" was who estimated the fossils to be 95 million years old. There must be a name, but we don't have one.

If we don't have his signature and we can't find him in a tomb, does that mean he's the son of a god? We should ask Sir Ehrman.

And it's already been mentioned about the problems with carbon dating marine life and very old material.

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

And even if the fossil was millions of years old, those fossils could have been ejected during the "breaking up of the fountains of the great deep" {possible volcanoes} which also happened during the flood according to the bible.

It's healthy for you to admit that the Bible is incorrect about the flood myth. Thank you for that.

Remember, marine life was created before humans in the Bible.

Which of the objectively mutually exclusive versions of creation are you referring to? And what things were created after humans, according to the Bible?

 

[svenax]

You're talking to a person who has so far refused to acknowledge the existence of the modern city of Tyre for no other reason than that to do so would falsify an ancient prophecy.

Yes, I realise that DOC lives in an alternate reality. Me asking him questions is just rhetorical.

 

[Correa Neto]

You're talking to a person who has so far refused to acknowledge the existence of the modern city of Tyre for no other reason than that to do so would falsify an ancient prophecy.

U r joking, right?

'cos I was about to write something about how relative and absolute dating are made and the hows n' whys you don't need to actually perform isotope assays to find out the age of a given rock... If u r not jokin', then it would be a waste of my time...

 

[Mojo]

I'll get to this as time permits, there is an explanation.

Why do you need time? If there's an explanation, post it now.

The apologetics website he needs to mine for copy pasta is probably down.

It's Thursday. He has nearly a week to wait:

I wish I had more time but I should get to this by next Wednesday at the latest.

I've noticed someone's analysis of an alleged failed prophecy (in here) has omitted a very important verse that was in the same chapter. I should get to it by next Wednesday.

I believe I've responded to all of his points except the one dealing with Babylon. I should get to that by Wednesday.

I'll try by next Wednesday to give some of Billy Graham's comments on the prophetic Book of Revelation.

I should get to this by Wednesday.

 

[Mojo]

U r joking, right?

He's not joking.