slightly OT, but still connected

Michael McCulloch wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:33:50 GMT, Chris L Peterson
wrote:

But there is no physical evidence at all supporting any of
the creation myths found in the Old Testament.

There is a recent idea supported by evidence that the Noah's flood
myth may be based in real flood event in the area currently covered
by
the Black Sea. The theory proposes that a natural dam failed and
allowed the Mediterranean Sea to flood a large area of inhabited
land.

http://www.pbs.org/saf/1207/features/noah.htm

http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.e.../story9_1.html

This event may be the source of the flood myths common to several
ancient traditions.

I'm not arguing that this supports YEC, but it does perhaps suggest
that the stories in the Bible (and of other ancient traditions) may
echo some real events in human history that may be worthy of
research.

Michael McCulloch:
Okay, yes, some stories in the Bible are worthy of research.
But the story of a Black Sea Flood is not. It's been shot down,
and it's dead in the water.

The BSFlood claim has failed on all counts.
It's just a modern myth.

And now, for your edification and enjoyment,
I present to you my standard rant on this subject:


Sorry, there was no 40-day flood in the Black Sea basin.
It was all a publicist's dream.


Parts of the modern Black Sea Flood claim are total
fantasy, like the imaginary dam that supposedly broke
7500 years ago. Somebody wrote that down, and suddenly
it was established as a "fact".


The trouble is, altogether too many people have the
mistaken idea that a catastrophic flood in the Black
Sea was the inspiration for the Noah's Flood story in
the Bible.
The TV programs on that topic are outdated and overly
sensational and can be safely ignored.
Sadly, you, and maybe millions of other
people, have been misled on this subject.


Alas, there was no "Noachian" Black Sea Flood, and
the science in William Ryan's and Walter Pitman's
book "Noah's Flood: the event that changed history"
has in several cases been superceded by better
information that indicates that there was no such event,
and was in most cases preceded by evidence that indicated
that there was no such event.
Ryan and Pitman set out to overturn the orthodox view
of the history of the Black Sea, but they have apparently
abandoned their hypothesis, if more recent articles
co-authored by Ryan are any indication.
The orthodox view has prevailed, subject to some
recent minor modifications.


There is evidence that there was an outflow southward
_from_ the Black Sea through the Bosphorus _to_ the
Mediterranean from more than 10000 years ago
(well before Ryan and Pitman's initial 5600 BCE flood
date), continuously until the present day, though
there may have been a relatively short interruption.
And evidence from the south shore of the Black sea
shows that the level of the Black Sea was only 18 m
below the present level at the time of the supposed
BSFlood.
The more recent claim by Ryan puts the flood date at
8400 BP, or about 9000 years ago, but then the
"floodwaters" through the Bosphorus channel would have
been only about 5 metres deep.
9000 years ago is when everybody else always thought
that Mediterranean sal****er first entered the Black Sea.


At about that time, the last phase of Glacial Lake Agassiz,
in central Canada, finally found an outlet to the sea
through or under the remnants of the Laurentide Ice Sheet
in what is now Hudson Bay, and so out into the North
Atlantic, raising sea level an appreciable amount, and
perhaps triggering a sudden inflow of sal****er into the
Black Sea basin.
But probably not sudden or great enough to inspire a
Noachian Flood myth.
Better candidates are widespread inundation of low-lying
parts of the Persian Gulf associated with the final
draining of Glacial Lake Agassiz, and similar flooding of
the Tigris-Euphrates delta, and (most likely) simultaneous
flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates, which would have
looked like a flooding of the entire world from
the viewpoint of a person near present-day Baghdad.
These candidates could each or all have inspired the flood
myth in the epic of Gilgamesh, which predates the first
known appearance of the Noachian Flood myth.


Check this out, for a layman-friendly synopsis of the
refutation:


http://home.entouch.net/dmd/bs=ADeaflod.htm


On the draining of Glacial Lake Agassiz:


http://cgrg.geog.uvic.ca/abstr=ADact...nceDuring.html


And here's a fairly recent news item on refutation of
Ryan's
and Pitman's hypothesis:


BEGIN QUOTE
January 14, 2003


Scientists are seriously challenging a recent,
fascinating proposal that Noah's epic story --
setting sail with an ark jam-full of animal
couples -- was based on an actual catastrophic
flood that suddenly filled the Black Sea 7,500
years ago, forcing people to flee.


In a detailed new look at the rocks, sediments,
currents and seashells in and around the Black Sea,
an international research team pooh-poohs the Noah
flood idea, arguing that all the geologic, hydrologic
and biologic signs are wrong.


Little that the earth can tell us seems to fit the
Noah story, they say. The new research takes direct
aim at the work of two Columbia University geologists
-- William Ryan and Walter Pitman -- whose proposal
in 1997 ignited much new interest, and much new
research, into Middle East history and geology.


END QUOTE


Also, Ballard did not find Noah's House, and he has
recently admitted that he didn't find any evidence of
human occupation of the Black Sea continental shelf,
let alone any support for the BSFlood hypothesis.
Here is another recent news article telling you about
that (please be warned that several statements in the
article are erroneous, e.g. "Scholars agree the Black
Sea flooded when rising world sea levels caused the
Mediterranean to burst over land and fill the then-
freshwater lake."):


"Black Sea Trip Yields No Flood Conclusions"


http://www.puresupply.com/newa=ADp/D8458SGG3.html


There was no actual ruined building found by Ballard,
but rather just a partly rectangular outline of
raised bed on the continental shelf, that might even
be the outline of the wheelhouse of a modern freighter.
To the northwest the outline continues, and narrows to
a point.
To the southeast, the outline continues for a shorter
distance, and ends in a rounded curve.
Just what you'd expect when a sunken ship's hull is
covered with sediment.
The wood he found, that dated to either about 3000 years
ago or to Napoleon's time, didn't necessarily contaminate
the site as driftwood from somewhere else; it might have
been part of the ship, and so accurately dates the site.
The roughly-worked stones that he found could have been
the ship's ballast.


Nothing that Ballard found is definite evidence of a house.
And he certainly did not find "several flooded cities".
That idea is just a weird exaggeration.


Here are a couple of relevant scientific papers:


Gorur, N., Cagatay, N., Emre, ., Alpar, B., Sakinc,
M=2E, Islamoglu,
Y=2E, Algan, O., Erkal, T., Kecer, M., Akk k, R. &
Karlik, G. (2001)
"Is the abrupt drowning of the Black Sea shelf at 7150
yr BP a myth?"
Marine Geology 176: 65-73


"Persistent Holocene Outflow from the Black Sea to the
Eastern Mediterranean Contradicts Noah's Flood Hypothesis"


http://www.geosociety.org/pubs=AD/gsatoday/toc0205.htm


Radio interview with a marine geologist the
BSFlood:


http://www.radio.cbc.ca/progra=ADms/...01-02/mp3/q=AD
q220602b.mp3


Several presentations on the BSFlood:


http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2003=ADAM/...on_9644.h=ADtm


There's lots more, but you'd need access to scientific
journals to read it, but you could ask me for more details
if you want them.
Some of the articles are available on the Web.


Sorry to splash water in the frying pan,
Daryl Krupa

wrote in message
oups.com...

----------------snip-----------------------------------------------------

Sorry to splash water in the frying pan,
Daryl Krupa


Oh yee of little faith. Too bad you haven't taken more time reading The
Bible. The reason these things can't be proven is made quite clear in the
great book.

God Bless especially to those who really need it,
Bob