1. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 00:14
    The Biblical Flood Explained

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=X16SE-N-8ys

    Evidences of Noah's Flood

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=q8ZKglfPdS0
  2. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    03 Nov '12 01:15
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    The Biblical Flood Explained

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=X16SE-N-8ys

    Evidences of Noah's Flood

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=q8ZKglfPdS0
    myth
  3. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 02:48
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    myth
    I don't think so. There is too much physical evidence to support that it did happen.
  4. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140197
    03 Nov '12 07:421 edit
    I've read and heard rumors of the Ark being seen on Mt. Ararat in Turkey in modern times but it's all inconclusive. I think it's kinda like the Shroud and even if it is found for the world to see it will not change mankinds stance. Jesus said even if a man comes back from the dead you will not believe and for some this is the case. The Ark would be approx 4500-5000 years old so what would preserve it ? What I remember reading is that it's buried in a glacier and occasionally the glacier melts just enough to expose parts of the Ark. You have to remember this was a boat the size of a modern tanker ship give or take a bit.

    Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger, because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

    Manny
  5. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140197
    03 Nov '12 07:57
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/ark-been-found




    Manny

    PS: Nothing Conclusive
  6. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    03 Nov '12 08:11
    Originally posted by menace71
    I've read and heard rumors of the Ark being seen on Mt. Ararat in Turkey in modern times but it's all inconclusive.
    Its not 'inconclusive'. If it had really been seen there would be a museum set up around it and it would be all over the news.
  7. Standard membercaissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    San Antonio, Texas
    Joined
    08 Mar '04
    Moves
    615453
    03 Nov '12 08:28
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I don't think so. There is too much physical evidence to support that it did happen.
    I don't think so. There is too much evidence showing that the "flood myth" is just a myth. Ut-Napishtm for one. That is a Babylonian flood story carved in stone before the Noah fantasy was even invented. 😛
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 09:37
    Originally posted by caissad4
    I don't think so. There is too much evidence showing that the "flood myth" is just a myth. Ut-Napishtm for one. That is a Babylonian flood story carved in stone before the Noah fantasy was even invented. 😛
    These distorted stories seems to me like more proof it did happen, regardless of the supposed dates of the stories.
  9. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 09:43
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Its not 'inconclusive'. If it had really been seen there would be a museum set up around it and it would be all over the news.
    Artifacts from Noah's Ark will be on display in a planned new archaeological museum called "Noah's Village" near the mighty Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey.

    http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/5272670737.html
  10. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    03 Nov '12 16:171 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    These distorted stories seems to me like more proof it did happen, regardless of the supposed dates of the stories.
    That is because you have no concept of what the words 'evidence' or 'proof' actually mean.


    First due to the problem of hard solipsism (the how can you tell if you're in the matrix problem)
    there is no such thing as absolute 100% proof of anything outside of logic and mathematics.

    If you are discussing anything about the world/reality we live in you must accept that there is
    at least a possibility that it's an illusion and that it might not be anything like we observe it to be.

    Proof is thus extremely strong evidence that pushes the likelihood of being wrong below the threshold
    of reasonable doubt.

    For physics we have put a number on it (the 5 sigma certainty level needed for a discovery).

    However the level of certainty required for a claim will be dependent on the claim being made.


    So proof is very strong evidence.... So what is evidence?



    Evidence is a fact/observation that alters the likelihood of an explanation/hypothesis one way or
    another.

    Evidence for something thus increases the likelihood of an explanation relative to alternative explanations.

    Evidence against something thus reduces the likelihood of an explanation relative to alternative explanations


    The "relative to alternative explanations" part is important.



    In this instance we have (basically) two competing hypotheses...

    Hypothesis 1, [H1] is that there was a massive worldwide flood in recorded history (the last 4~5k years)

    Hypothesis 2, [H2] is that there have been many smaller localized floods but no massive global drowning.


    The posited 'evidence' is that there are 'flood myths' in many different cultures and civilizations throughout the world.



    You seem to think that this constitutes evidence/proof that the flood did happen.


    This is because you think that if there was a global flood and that everyone alive today is descended from the few who survived it
    that there would be many flood myths in civilizations around the world.


    And you might be right in that expectation (although I would expect them to be more similar and less 'distorted' under your hypothesis [H1]).

    But what you are missing in claiming this as evidence for your hypothesis [H1] is that you would also expect to see flood myths in
    civilizations around the world under the alternative hypothesis [H2] as well.

    Both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 predict that there would be civilizations around the world with flood myths.

    Thus the fact that there are flood myths around the world is not evidence of or proof of either hypothesis as both predict the same thing.

    To tell them apart you need something that the two hypothesis disagree on.


    You need to find an observation that would be different under one hypothesis than it would be under the other.

    THEN you have something that differentiates the two hypothesis.



    As both hypotheses predict that there would be flood myths around the world, the fact that such flood myths exist is not evidence
    for or against either hypothesis.



    Now I personally would refine that to say that your hypothesis [H1] would predict a greater similarity between myths than is observed
    which is evidence FOR [H2] as the observation matches the predictions of [H2] better than [H1].




    So.... Do you now understand that evidence or proof of a hypothesis must be and observation/fact only or best explained/predicted by
    that hypothesis and not it's competitors?

    And that any observation/fact that is explained/predicted equally by the competing hypothesis does nothing to distinguish between them
    and is thus not evidence or proof of either/any of them?
  11. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140197
    03 Nov '12 17:30
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Its not 'inconclusive'. If it had really been seen there would be a museum set up around it and it would be all over the news.
    In my mind it's inconclusive.....because we have people who say they've seen it but as you have said you think it would be in a museum if it were found without a doubt. Hearsay while not being solid still has some validity until proven false. Another thing if if is up there it's above 10, 000 ft. In elevation no easy feat to get up there. The thing would not be easy to move that's assuming it's in one piece. I remember reading that Noah probably used some of the material from the ark for wood and the like. Also I remember reading that all of the skepticism is a modern phenomena. The ancient cultures in that area just wrote as if it was there. I will have to verify but Joesephus I believe mentions the ark just matter of factly being on tbe mountain of Ararat. This however will not change a sceptics mind even if they who ever they maybe find this boat. I also believe that the Babylonian account does nothing to refute the Noahian account if anything it is a corporate account of the same event. Like the 200+ flood stories from all over the world. Some are whacky but truth always turns into legend and myth.
  12. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140197
    03 Nov '12 18:10
    http://www.grmi.org/Richard_Riss/evidences2/08ark.html

    may be biased but Josephus does indeed mention the Ark



    Manny
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 21:181 edit
    I believe atheist do not want to know the truth about creation or Noah's flood. They want to continue believing it is all just a fairy tale for Christians. They prefer believing in their own fairy tale of evolution. However, for you who are interested in the young earth creationists view of the flood, I recommend downloading the following video with the YouTube downloader and watching it when you have the time. It is the Hovind Theory of Noah's flood.

    YouTube&feature=relmfu
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    03 Nov '12 21:27
    Originally posted by menace71
    In my mind it's inconclusive.....because we have people who say they've seen it but as you have said you think it would be in a museum if it were found without a doubt. Hearsay while not being solid still has some validity until proven false. Another thing if if is up there it's above 10, 000 ft. In elevation no easy feat to get up there. The thing would no ...[text shortened]... ories from all over the world. Some are whacky but truth always turns into legend and myth.
    I remember a report that the ark had broke into and that part of it was down lower in the mountain than that photographed by the U2 spy aircraft in 1949.
  15. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140197
    03 Nov '12 21:441 edit
    The U2 was not around in 1949 ? But some plane in 1949 took pictures ?

    First flight was 1955 ***Added***

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2


    Manny
Back to Top