On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:04:00 -0500, Augray <aug
...@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
>On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 01:10:56 -0800 (PST), All-seeing-I
><ap
...@email.com> wrote in
><64022ed2-c2a5-413a-b15c-00355d0f5
...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> :
>>Ooops. Huston.
>John Huston, the legendary actor, director, and screenwriter?
Or maybe his dad, Walter Huston? Or daughter Anjelica Huston?
>>We have a problem
>> These sediments could have been deposited in such great quantities
>>only by major sea flooding,
>So you say, but even assuming that the sediments are there, why
>couldn't they be the result of the accumulation of wind-blown
>material?
Aeolian, or wind-blown, deposits exist all over the world, some
fairly recent, known as "loess", and some gone to rock. They are
pretty easily recognizable, and halite deposits don't look like
them. There's also the problem that windblown salt deposits would
have had to be loose surface deposits t o be blown.
Salt deposits have been created by the evaporation of ancient
seas, which were present in a number of somewhat unexpected
places (one of the largest salt mines extends under Lake Erie at
Painesville, Ohio).
>>> > Destroyed information that was on the sides of the pyramids? Yep.
>>> > There ya have it. Evidence for Noah's flood and The Pilars of Seth
>>> > all rolled into one.
>>> So the evidence is essentially something that is not there, because it
>>> was destroyed?
>>Read for comprehension. People saw the evidence and saw the evidence
>>being destroyed.
Name them. Or at least tell us who saw the salt/silt marks way up
on the sides of the pyramids.
>No, they didn't. You merely *claim* that they saw the evidence being
>destroyed.
The problem here is that the flood legend began in the
Mesopotamian regions, a word which, sifgnificantly, means between
the rivers. The whole region was subject to flooding, and it's
almost a certainty that some floods would have, in the eyes of
the residentss, seemed to cover the whole world. A flood myth is
not surpising in such an area, and it's well known to scholars
that the original myth seems to have come from the Sumerians.
Given the considerable trade across the mideast from the
Mediterranean to as far as Afghanistan, the story spread across
the whole area, becoming a bit modified at each location it came
to. Even the Greeks hadd the myth, and the Greek version did
precede the Biblical version. but the Biblical version is know to
come from the Hurrian, who happened to live not far from mt
Ararat.
There are flood legends in many parts of the world, especially
those who have flooding from time to time, but they differ enough
from the Noachim sources, i.e., that God has sent teh flood to
destroy mankind for it sins save for a few exceptional people,
that they undoubtedly have different roots.
>>Some of the evidence was even written down before it
>>was destroyed.
>Even if we accept the claim of a Noachian Flood, there's no way the
>evidence would be destroyed. I can walk you through it if you like.
>And besides, you don't believe what they wrote.
As noted above, the evidence for the story is well known. And
there is certainly evidence of large floods anywhere where floods
have historically occured. Archeologist Leonard Woolley, who in
the 1930s claimed to discover the site of Ur also dug very deep
and found a very wide band of silt which he claimed to be the
silt of the Noachim flood. The problem is, of course, that
finding evidence of floods in flood-prone areas is pretty much a
non-starter for a theory.
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatu...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
|
