It's always about water and around the same time. If it walks like a duck, quack like a duck then it's a duck.
Yes, and his font quack like a duck. Ancient stories, but no evidence to back them. The stories are not the same at all.
No evidences beside magaliths destroyed all across the globe, massive amount of organic squish burried under the ground, acient folklor litterally saying so etc etc?
Yeah, that evidence does not back your absurd idea of a global flood. Beside the fact there isn't enough water for such a thing.
Beside, what else could actually utterly destroy the biggest stone structures ever built?
If they were destroyed they wouldnt be there for you to point to. That said local disasters are enough.
Are you for real? All these is left is small remainings.
Yet you extrapolate so much about them.
The Earth is covered by 70%. That's plenty of water.
It is not nearly enough to drown the planet. Those who believe the flood myth dont seem to understand volume. That is okay for the bronze age the ideas came from, but not modern times.
According to? Your paradigms?
According to basic math. Adding that volume of water would require too much water to be added, and it would have had nowhere to go to disappear.
Go on show me your math. Can't wait to have a good laugh.
This series might help you. It is done by an actual scientist.
But now I get it. You brush off evidences because you are afraid it might shackles your dogmatic paradigm. You just exposed your yourself with such video 😂
Beside this video is 100% off topic. Where arent talking about evolution whatsoever. You are making it a dogmatic case. I don't.
Dogmatic people doest not worth arguing with. They only care about proving their dogmas rather than finding the truth, no matter what it is.
Yes, and you are the dogmatic person in this conversation. You believe religious dogma over facts.
Sure sure projecting much? I talk about megaliths, you talk about creation vs evolution like if it was slightly related.
I want talking about evolution. I was talking about religious flood myths. You seem to think large old structures prove your flood myth. That series help dispel such funny ideas.
So basically you have flood myths all across the globe from all the older civilizations. You also have large structures (the largest ever built) utterly destroyed. 1 + 1 = 2
Not all destroyed, and not by flooding. You see lots of similar myths from old civilizations. Doesnt mean those things actually happened. Especially with the differences in the myths.
And the difference in the myths relies with details. Exactly what one would expect to see if different cultures would talk about the same event but from their very own perspective.
With the events not happening at the same time everywhere. How does a global event not happen at the same time?
Well that's the thing, they talk about the same event otherwise they wouldn't share the same myth.
So if I saw I saw a flood on the flood plains at 6000 years ago, and someone else saw a flood 5000 years ago in India, you conclude they were the same flood, and happened globally?
No but the odds of such thing are quite slim.
Well you are currently doing just that.
Otherwise how can humanity completely lose their construction techniques that was globally known and spread?
We didnt lose anything. We have far better techniques now. It is like the myth that Roman's made better concrete. Just because we we often cheap out doesnt mean we cant.
I meant that the odds of such multiple desctructive events happening is such a short time frame are slimmer than a bigger happning just once.
We have seen such events over a far short time span, I think you are wrong. Natural disasters happen. Especially since the disasters those places had were common to their area.
Not flooding? Then how? And how complete sites managed to be buried in the ground?
Not all of them were buried. You would think there would be a massively disturbed global sediment layer around the world if there was a global flood. There is no such layer though.
I think the ones near the "event" were burried while the ones further or those protected by mountains have simply been destroyed except for the pyramids because of their shape.
There is no further off, and closer, if the flood was global.it should have happened everywhere is Everest was below water. So it should be all, or not.
Obviously it was global to some extent. AFIC there were survivors.
What do you mean by "global to some extent?" Are you claiming it was a global shallow flood that only hurt coasts? Are you saying it was only certain continents?
Meaning that the coasts were probably the most affected and what would have standed behind mountains would have suffered less damages.
The sediment movement something that ridiculous would have caused would have been very noticable. It would be impossible to cover up. There is no evidence to support such a wild idea.
I just mean that damages was probably not equal everywhere depending on how far you were from what triggered the water movement and the geographic landscape.
Nothing could trigger something like that. It would take magic. Physics wouldnt allow the continents to sink below the ocean or for water to flow up onto land out of the oceans.
Their shape offers no protection, except against gravity.
It absolutely offers protection. Water pressure on pyramidal shape would be inferior than applied on a perpandicular wall.
As I said, from gravity. Which is irrelevant. The world was not suddenly crushed uned a new ocean. Oh wait, you are going to claim that coal and oil appeared suddenly during the flood.
No I'm saying that water somehow moved accross lands coming from the oceans. The water movement was horizontal, not vertical.
That is an even worse idea. You are saying water decided to flow up hill out of the oceans then. God did it is the only way to explain such nonsense.
Real scientist don't laugh at people. They make arguments.
Also you must not talk to real scientists much. I have. They most certainly laugh at people.
Sorry to pop your bubble but they are fake scientists.
Oh, and only creationist scientists are real for you? I'll stick with the phD holders, and published researchers.
Still bringing up religion my dogmatic off topic fellow?
You brought it up by using religious sources of info. Maybe you are just unaware that talkorigin is a Christian fundamentalist group.
Unawared and irrelevant. The accounts listed are all real and authentic.
No, it's mostly bullshit. They will also have you believe the Earth is 6000 _10000 years old, and other such nonsense.
I'm not saying what the accounts say is authentic, I'm saying the account themselves are authentic you twat.
So someone either honestly lied, or was honestly wrong. That is fine.
Actually science is about debunking theories. He does that here clearly.
I'll let this guy explain differences in volume to you.
I'm not gonna watch any dumb video. Show me your maths.
5.1×10^8 Km^2 * 8.848 km = 4.5*10^9km^3 of added water volume to the Earth. Where did it go after the flood?
5.1×10^8 Km^2 * 8.848 km = 5.7km^3 of added water volume to the Earth. Where did it go after the flood?
A huge meteorite hitting the ocean could have made similar damages at similar scale. In both scenarios no changes of water volumes are required.
Nope, that is false. It would not have caused a flood. We do know what that causes, and know when those event happened. Long before there were humans.
Sure. A meteorite hitting water won't move water. Logic isn't your strength isn't it?
Move water, sure. Cause a tsunami, sure. Cause a global flood, no. Especially not one that puts Everest under water. There isn't enough water on Earth for that.
Somehow Mt. Everest is filled with fossilized marine shells.
As it should be since that land was below the ocean when the Indian plate crashed into the Asian plate. This was far back, like the timeframes it takes for things to fossilize.
This can easily be explained by a change of the earth's suface geometry (mountains height and oceans depth).A rapid change could have simply trigger mass of water to move across lands
How could that rapid change happen? Chemical differentiation happened long ago. Granite plates float of the mantel higher than basaltic plates. They dont suddenly sink into the mantle.
Keep digging.
Oh, I have thoroughly refuted your ideas. The idea that the surface of the Earth disobeyed physics to cause the flood is absurd.
BTW the ancient stories are pretty much the same if you dare to look at them.
I have looked at some, and they are not the same, and have a huge spread as to when they happened. I once read a biblical flood apologist book. Really stupid stuff in there.
Talkorogins... lol. I prefer valid sources of information. Religious sources of information are no good for figuring out how thigs work.
They don't talk about religion you moron. And I'm still waiting for an answer.
Thru are a Christian propaganda group. One of the worst garbage sites out there.
BTW even if it's garbage Christian propaganda group which account exactly isn't real? Seriously at this point you just sound retarded and completely lack of argument.
Most Christians accounts of history are not real. The most they get right is that cities existed. They are not actually history. They are stories meant to teach a lesson.
And what about the Wikipedia article? Is that too much facts for your little brain to process so you had to dissmiss it?
Actually if you actually read those myths you see how they are far to spread out in time to be talking about the same event. Your own link defeats your argument.
Which one? Because the majority talks about a global wiping flood. Obviously you haven't read them.
At very different times, and with a limited understanding of what the entire world was.
Exactly. Interesting isn't it?
Not really. Rather trivial, and doesnt lead to any interesting conclusions.
Unless you start using your brain.
That is how you see it doesnt support these wild conclusions.
Still waiting for an answer.
I did answer actually. When you asked "what about these" I told you the source was garbage.
