Talk:Global flood

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon flood.svg

This global flood related article has been awarded GOLD status for quality. Please keep this in mind when editing the article. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Goldenbrain.png
Information icon.svg Cover Story
This article is, among others, randomly included on the Main Page.
Please keep this in mind and be sure that your edits are of the quality that this implies.
Its front-page abstract can be found here and its editnotice here.
This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>

Fresh-water fish and amphibians[edit]

The survival of fresh water fish and amphibians would have required Noah to build and fill an aquarium. Such would have of course required the creation of glass and metal. But think of all the difficulties that would entail.

It is still impossible (as of 2015) to build a self-contained aquatic ecosystem. And that is before I even discuss rounding up the necessary fish, amphibians, etc.Pbrower2a (talk) 06:08, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

plant world[edit]

what about plants? grasses? trees?

I have read the bible thrice but I did not ponder on it, search on it for details. Was NOah commanded to take seeds of any and every plant, vegetable and fruit as well? did he take? does the "word of god" mention something about it?

if not, trees or plant world can also not survive the flood. this also must be one of the issues that need to be clarified by bible believers. --Sir artur (talk) 05:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

No, the Bible never commands Noah to take seeds with him, as there would be no need for seeds because there was no plant life. No rainbows means no rain, and no rain means drought. Even if you give the plants a liberal amount of dew ever morning, that's hardly enough to keep a plant alive. Not to mention, if you subscribe to the canopy theory (the only semi-plausible way to have no rain, though how the canopy managed to stay up is anyone's guess. Not to mention, the canopy theory has so many latent problems that even AiG has left it for dead), you have yourself living in a hyperbaric chamber (this is how creationists like to explain the very long life of the population of the Bible), meaning your plants will grow quite large and need far more water than even very liberal amounts of dew every morning.
So now that we have no plants due to a drought, it's certainly a good question as to how Noah and his family even lived at all. I mean, I don't know about you guys, but for me, food is a preeetty important thing to eat regular amounts of. No rain means no plants means no food. And if there was no food and Noah couldn't have even survived childhood (or have been born at all as his parents wouldn't have had food either), well, how could Moses have written the Torah? Moses wouldn't have even been alive. Anim (Carfa) 01:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Goodpost.gif And regarding canopy theory — that's all been adressed in Hovind theory! I invite everyone to drop whatever they're doing for just a moment and (re)watch the following classic YouTube video on the subject. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Also, while the relative level of oxygen in the atmosphere does play a role in determining the maximal sustainable physical size of certain species (e.g. depending on their breathing apparatuses), one thing that more oxygen would not facilitate is biblical longevity. In fact, longevity in homo sapiens is impaired by exposure to too much oxygen, for the simple reason that oxygen is a highly reactive gas. Guess why it plays such a prominent role in fires and explosions, never mind why certain metals rust? As such, excess oxidation wouldn't exactly enhance the lifespan of any member of homo sapiens. Facepalm.png Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:27, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

AronRa delivers[edit]

Check out this excellent playlist! Four short Global Flood videos by AronRa and already the first one had both novel points, and provided a few laughs (AronRa's the man)!

Sounds like the playlist will keep growing as he adds to it, but for now, it's four videos on how the following sciences disprove Noah's flood (respectively):

  • Meteorology
  • Geology
  • Paleontology
  • Dendrochronology

There's bound to be great quotes in the videos, and the video summaries contain citable articles! Dig in. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

If you wonder where all the water went[edit]

The answer possibly involves this. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 16:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I like how they assume conventional planetary science can't answer seemingly impossible questions (by the way, those "difficulties" don't seem impossible to me unlike that the article is implying), not like those questions are stupid, like the rust one (Pluto's appearance is close to Io's and I didn't read anywhere that the surface is actually made of rust). Finally, that hydroplate theory has a ton of its own problems that I won't begin to dwell on. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
And a touch of 'moon envy.'
Anyone who believes in what could be called Solar System Marbles has lost their marbles. (Early solar system amalgamations and more recent meteorite and comet strikes are rather different) 86.134.53.32 (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Historical Flooding[edit]

I am new here never wiki'd before. There were it seems floods; namely, due to global warming, glaciers melt, raising sea levels by tens of meters. The doggger banks, e.g. now the North Sea was once dry land, and inhabited. Likewise all of Manitoba used to be a fresh water lake: the glacier holding it all in melted, and it drained into the ocean, causing floods. I've no idea whether or where historical flooding should figure in this myth though, shocking but true, there is at least *some* truth to the various flooding myths found in many different cultures. Obviously the entire world didn't flood, but all the coastal areas -- which is where 90% of people live indeed flooded circa 10000-12000 years ago.

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you. Add talk topics to the end of the talk page, not the top. ClickerClock (talk) 08:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
To respond to your point. Sure there have been loads of local floods around the world. It's a very frequent occurrence. There are also folk stories of floods around the world. These folk tales were probably inspired by the real floods. So that's really no great surprise.
But, on quickly re-reading the article, I'm surprised to note that we don't actually make any reference to this. The existence of multiple flood myths is something which YEC's often refer to and so we probably should make some reference to it.--Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Most people will be aware that 'flooding occurs' (especially after 'more rain than seems reasonable') and occasionally '(very) large flooding happens and will assume that the various 'global floods of the ancient world' will be based on real events. However the difference between 'the present' and 'the ancient world' is that we now have global information networks #and# agreed calendars that are used around the world so events can be arranged in a sequence. In 'the ancient world' communications networks were more limited and calendars were not synchronised - so it would not necessarily be possible to confirm that 'the great floods our grandparents were told about by their grandparents' were actually separate events at different times rather than a single event in which individual families/clans etc survived. So, reversing the story of the blind men and the elephant - each part of the story #is# correct - but they are fused into something bigger that did not actually happen. Anna Livia (talk) 11:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

My two cents[edit]

I wonder what will be worse: if taking today as real a Bronze Age history imagined by people who clearly did not know how large is the world, much less the shipbuilding capacities required to build something that realistically would be very different of the Biblical accounts in terms of size (not to mention those other technologies required), plus ignoring the Noah drunk part and other questions about divine omni*** and the like and adding PIDOOMA arguments (several thousand couples of animals embarked, the Ark having three decks...), simply because "the Book" says so, or those attempts to justify it by saying that "the remains of the Ark have been found, scientists are baffled after that discovery (PIDOOMA again)" or especially the Baraminology and the like thing. --Panzerfaust (talk) 13:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)