Path: typhoon.sonic.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!europa.netcrusader.net!209.150.97.11!feeder.qis.net!btnet-peer!btnet!mendelevium.btinternet.com!not-for-mail From: Doug Weller Newsgroups: sci.archaeology Subject: Re: Question about Sphinx's Message Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 11:58:18 -0000 Organization: RAMTOPS Lines: 100 Message-ID: References: <389D6718.687DAC5B@flash.net> <38a0beb2.5893117@news.mcmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: host5-99-52-175.btinternet.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.20 Xref: typhoon.sonic.net sci.archaeology:120408 In article , estevens@ip.co.nz says... > On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 07:31:20 -0000, Doug Weller > wrote: > > >In article , estevens@ip.co.nz says... > >> On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 18:44:29 -0000, Doug Weller > >> wrote: > >> > >[SNIP] > >> [SNIP] > > > >Eric, you are really clued in on some subjects, but this is not one of them. > > With respect Doug, I could say the same about you. On this one? Not unless we are talking at crosspurposes. > >Please see the flood faq on talk.origins: > >http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-flood.html > > But this is a straw man: either that or a change of subject. These are > all arguments against Noah's flood, what ever that may be. As far as I > can see, none of them are arguments against the evidence for a world > wide deluge and flood of the kind I to which I have been referring. In > fact, I don't think any of those refrences aven recognise or > acknowledge the possibility of such a deluge or that it is even being > seriously discussed in some scientific circles. > > It is ludicrous to describe these as geological evidence of any kind > against a world wide deluge. At the best, they are arguments against > particular version of the Noah story. It is equally ludicrous to hold > that the only possible world-wide deluge is of the Noah variety. It > isn't and it is nonsense to think you have covered all the options by > discounting Noah. This one: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html Specifically shows the geological evidence against a global flood. Not just the Noah story. > I ask you again "What geological evidence would you expect to find for > a global deluge" and I take your original point "What geological > evidence is there against a global deluge"? With respect to that last > question, if you are to respond to that satisfactorily you must > produce evidence, not just contrary opinion. > > > >> There is certainly worldwide geological evidence for deluges > >> everywhere at some time or another. You would be crazy to suggest > >> otherwise. The problem is showing that that they were synchronous or > >> were due to a common cause. The fact that nobody has done it yet is > >> not evidence that nobody will ever be able to do it. > > > >This is simply not true. I don't know what you mean by 'deluge' vs 'flood', > >but I can assure you that there are many parts of the globe that show very > >clearly that they have had no floods for the past many thousands of years. > > Deluge means very heavy rain. Whether or not you have a flood depends > upon whether or not you are on the op of the hill or in the valley. In > any case, with respect to these 'many parts of the globe that show > very clearly that they have had no floods for the past many thousands > of years' please name one, the time period since the last deluge and > your evidence for that claim. > > > >Can I, for instance, refer you to the Sinai desert. I don't have the figures to > >hand, but there is evidence much earlier than your 2007 bce date .. > > You are no doubt referring to Bruce Masse's 2087 BCE date for which I > have never argued. What is the most recent time that the Sinai was > subject to a deluge and what is the evidence that this was the most > recent time? I misunderstood your reference to it then. Do I take it you agree that that is an impossible date? > > ... that is too > >fragile to have survived a flood. There are a number of digs in this country > >where the strata goes on down below that date with no signs of flood > >disturbance. Etc. etc. > > Which country? Which digs? How far down in time? How can you rule out > deluges on those sites? I see now you are talking about very heavy rain. Since that's not unusual in Britain, I certainly won't argue against it. The more common meaning of the word is, I think, great flood, which is what I thought you meant. So to see the earliest for any heavy world wide rainfall you'd have to find out the earliest deserts. You're not far from Australia, you should be able to find some info about those. But again, depends on what you mean by heavy rain. Doug -- Doug Weller member of moderation panel sci.archaeology.moderated Submissions to: sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details