http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/090206-smaller-noah-flood.html

"The ancient flood that some scientists think gave rise to the Noah story may not have been quite so biblical in proportion, a new study says.

Researchers generally agree that, during a warming period about 9,400 years ago, an onrush of seawater from the Mediterranean spurred a connection with the Black Sea, then a largely freshwater lake. That flood turned the lake into a rapidly rising sea. (See a map of the region.)





A previous theory said the Black Sea rose up to 195 feet (60 meters), possibly burying villages and spawning the tale of Noah's flood and other inundation folklore.

(Related: "Noah's Flood" May Have Triggered European Farming" [November 20, 2007].)

But the new study—largely focused on relatively undisturbed underwater fossils—suggests a rise of no more than 30 feet (10 meters).

New Flood Evidence

Marine geologist Liviu Giosan and colleagues carbon-dated the shells of pristine mollusk fossils, which the researchers say bear no evidence of epic flooding.

Found in sediment samples taken from where the Black Sea meets the Danube River, the shells "weren't eroded, agitated, or moved," said Giosan, of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts. "We know the mud is exactly the same age as the shells and so can determine what the sea level was about 9,400 years ago."

The results suggest the Black Sea rose 15 to 30 feet (5 to 10 meters), rather than the 150 to 195 feet (50 to 60 meters) first suggested 13 years ago by Columbia University geologist William Ryan and colleagues. Ryan declined to be interviewed for this story.

Dueling Theories of Noah's Flood

In 1993 a Black Sea expedition found evidence of former shorelines and coastal dunes at depths of up to 390 feet (120 meters).

Researchers said these areas had been flooded when the Mediterranean and the Sea of Marmara—which lies between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea—breached a rocky barrier across the Bosporus, the Turkish strait that links the Maramara with the Black Sea.

Before such a flood, Ryan and colleagues said the flooded regions may have been rife with agricultural settlements. His research supports the notion that the flood submerged some 62,000 square miles (100,000 square kilometers), driving out farmers in droves, thereby supercharging the agricultural development of Europe, to the west.

However, Giosan's new study, which appears in the January issue of the journal Quaternary Science Reviews, indicates a less catastrophic influx, submerging only about 1,240 square miles (2,000 square kilometers).





That's because, according to the new study, the Black Sea's pre-flood water levels were significantly higher than Ryan's study suggested. As a result, there may have been much less water cascading through the Bosporus and onto the exposed continental shelf surrounding the Black Sea.

The ages of the shell fossils detailed in Giosan's report hint that the pre-flood sea surface was only 95 feet (30 meters) lower than it is today. Columbia's Ryan, by contrast, suggests the Black Sea's rise has been at least 150 feet (50 meters) since reconnecting with the Mediterranean some 9,400 years ago.

Nail in Noah's-Flood Coffin?

Giosan's analysis points to a reconnection that was "quite mild," said Mark Siddall, an oceanographer at the University of Bristol in the U.K. who was not involved with the study.

"It looks like the connection may have involved an overspill from the Sea of Marmara of just a few meters," Siddall added.

Tony Brown, a paleo-environmentalist at the University of Southampton in the U.K., said he fully supports Giosan and colleagues' new findings.

"This seems to be a further nail in the coffin of the Ryan hypothesis," Brown said.

"I hope this will counter some recent catastrophist and misguided accounts of the spread of farming across Europe by what is likely a mythical flood."

Good thing AIG examined the claims. Thanks for pointing out the skepticism from your cult.

AIG is on top of the secular smear machine, Frank.

Interesting that, according to materialists/secularists, the Bible is so obviously wrong, and yet they are incessantly attacking it...funny how that works, huh?

:lmfao:

Bwhahahahahahahahahahahha.....hahahahahahahahhahah aha,aaaaaaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahh ahaha

Nobody cares what AIG has to say from their trailerpark "LAB".


ahahahaaahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaa

Proof of the Global Flood is simple: billions of dead things buried in rock layers all over the world....and I mean literally in every corner of the globe, we find fossils hundreds of feet below grade in various strata, and fossilized marine life has been found on Everest!

vast imaginary time periods explain zip....it's a world of many fools, "professing to be wise"

I was hoping for this thread to bee bullshit free. What was I thinking.

Proof of a global flood is non existent. It's right up there with still thinking the world is still flat.

Interesting that, according to materialists/secularists, the Bible is so obviously wrong, and yet they are incessantly attacking it...funny how that works, huh?

And religious zealots are attacking science: Which came first, Mark, the chicken or the egg? At least science is nice enough to call things "theories". They don't proclaim everything to be wrong, wrong, wrong just because they say so.

Hell, the Catholic Church put out an OFFICIAL response to a work of fiction (The DaVinci Code). Circle those wagons, defend against everything, including fiction. Why so frightened??? I'll tell you why all these religious groups defend, defend, defend: They don't want to stop the money machine. They need wallets to feed on, Mark. They need to keep the tithes rollin' in.

why does jesus need money?

drugs

why does jesus need money?

Beer!! Although I think because of his faith and times, it would have been wine.

Beer!! Although I think because of his faith and times, it would have been wine.Pssh...he could just turn water into wine.

"Dude, shut up! Tell him you believe he's the son of God. I don't care, just fuckin' tell him, dude! If you piss him off and he leaves, where the fuck are we gonna get more wine this time of night? You want to bang that chick, right? You need to be able to lubricate those panties off her, and to do that, you need wine. Just go with it. He's the son of God until tomorrow morning, ok?"

how? creationists never attack true science...we've been over this many times, rather we uphold true science, which will always verify what God has spoken (because only God was there)

Bullshit. They are constantly attacking true science in attempts to spread lies and deceit. You are living proof of that very notion.



that's obvious and well documented, theology was at one time referred to as the "queen of the sciences"

Speaking of puppets. Look who just watched a sermon from that blow hard Macarthur and is now has a pull string attached to his back.


well, again, roman catholicism is a false cult, most pastors I know simply dismissed the book as the latest fad

Your group is a false cult as well. Religious moderates or not. You know what they say about birds of a feather.

example?

and don't start in with your "fig leaf" (radiometric dating of rocks), frank, that has nothing to do with empirical science

Where does one start?! Honestly.

Human footprints with dinosaurs. Neanderthal is based off of a disfigured human. All hominid fossils are fully human or fully ape. The list goes on and on and one of the lies your cult groups spread. Lets not also forget buddies of yours like Behe who have literally been exposed as liars and frauds in court.

I would love to see the day where you brought ANY of the bullshit you try and push on here under the same circumstances. You would get laughed out just like all the other creationist/ID dumb shits trying to pass there garbage as "real science".



lizards morphing into birds and other such magical changes counter to observation and the laws of thermodynamics are all about "lies and deceit", frank

More of your typical bullshit. WE DON'T LIVE IN A CLOSED SYSTEM. This is exactly the kind of bullshit i am talking about.


um, the Bible at face value is hardly a "cult"

Your religious institutions are very much a cults.

that's hardly a new concept, before MacArthur stated it (and I repeated it)

Not to your unoriginal ass it wasn't.



and these people would absolutely obliterate your whimsical little brainwashed mind, captain google

Says the guy who can't find any answers if they're not on AIG. To bad worthless quotes bases completely on OPINION have nothing to do with science.

that was dismissed some time ago

As is all the garbage you spread



post ice age humans, which had abnormalities....and you have proof to the contrary?

So they all had the same abnormalities? I'm sure you have evidence to support such a claim?



heck, Leaky himself said "all the evidence we have for human evolution would fit in a single coffin with ROOM TO SPARE!"

so where is all the evidence for human evolution, when even one of it's most die hard advocates admits the evidence is glaringly absent?

More of your bullshit. Leaky is a dumb shit if he actually said that. Unless of course he was talking about modern hard drives. Evolution is nothing less than a fact. Yet you continue to show how little you know and that you are nothing but a liar yourself.



in your brainwashed fantasy mind it does, but not in the real world, frank

Says a guy who lives his life based on a book of fables.


the universe is generally reagrded as a closed system, but, regardless:

But the earth isn't genius. You and I are nothing but recycled space dust. Your blatantly ridiculous thermodynamics claim is so minuscule on a Universal scale I cant believe you even have the audacity to show such stupidity.

these are men who actually do the work of science (unlike you), and their opinions, like Einstein's, trump yours any day of the year, son

Big fucking deal what they do. If there opinion doesn't have the data to back it then who gives a fuck. Which is exactly why all you can provide are these kinds of quotes. Unsupported garbage like that is right up your alley.

most of them did, yes, that's well documented, you need to do your homework

You're kidding right? So what did they have then? Lets see the evidence to support the claim.

Go Go AIG!



lol, so anyone with a little common sense and honest grasp of reality is now a "dumb shit"....you're so far gone it's incredible

No ignorant statements like the ones you posted above are nothing but that. Even Newton himself said such rubbish about things he could not explain which were later down the road.

there is no evidence for ape to human evolution....none...zip....the "93% common DNA" or whatever the latest number is does not provide evidence of "common decent", it provides evidence of a Common Designer

Wrong again. There is plenty of evidence to support it. Zero evidence that a common designer even exists yet alone he did ANYTHING. Just remember. holes in the theory of natural selection in no way support your tall tale. Because even with what we know it still blows your nonsensical scenario out of the water.:bigthumb:

throwing more f bombs just means you're frustrated, and you only look more retarded, frank (hmmmm, I wonder why?)

you got nothin....

Not frustrated in the slightest.:bigthumb:

really?

where are "250,000 years" worth of chimp/ape to man transitional forms? THEY DO NOT EXIST...PERIOD....all we find in the fossil record is dead stuff vitually identiacal to modern times, or creatires now extinct...PERIOD

you loons live in a dream world.....you can only die and be proven wrong, you're flailing at the air

Funny how you keep dodging my questions. Yet you continue to ask for evidence. Feel free to look at Australopithecus, Homo rudolfensis, Homo habilis, to name a few of the transitional fossils you claim "don't exist".

Perhaps we can be proven wrong. But it sure isn't going to be by the likes of anybody like you and it hasn't happened yet. We continue to prove ourselves more right every day, burying your nonsense further into the ground.

So how many accredited colleges teach your nonsense again?:lmfao:

when you let fly with the f bombs every two words, your true colors come shining through: you're just another little potty mouth jerk with a two bit education

Actually your personal attacks show your true colors because you can't back anything up you claim. If education is based upon who can cut and paste articles from AIG then yes you are very much a PHD in cult bullshit.

Of course they are a separate species. They are a transitional fossil genius!Just because you are unwilling to accept what is real doesn't mean they don't exist. Good for Jimlab.:bigthumb:

Yeah because all fossils are transitional and transitional forms are separate species. Just because you equate 1+1=5 doesn't mean you are right.

1+1=5?

Again, this is a question of interpretation of the available (limited) evidence for so-called transitional forms. Many people, in fact, a majority, are not convinced. So, believe what you want, it's a free country, just don't play the "fact"/"science" card, because it doesn't hold any water.

lol @ your "majority" claim. More unbacked nonsense from you.

The equation above is in regards to spontanious complex life just suddenly appearing like your bible suggests. The evidence of natural selection completly trumps any other theory out there.

no, it's well documented most people question all or some aspects of goo-to-you darwinism

No it's not. Where do you come up with this BS?



and, again, natural selection has absolutely NOTHING to do with origins, and it's when you guys try to go there and claim "science" that reasonable people throw the flag

Natural Selection has everything to do with transitional fossils. Which is the topic at hand. This of course leads back to origins in which there is NO evidence of instantanious creation. Reason is not in your vocabulary unless it has zero conflict with the good book of BS.

polls of the general populus....you really think if you ask 100 people off the street they're going to say we evolved from bacteria? are you serious?

Post em up pal. Less than 50% in every poll i have seen believes in a young earth not to mention instantanious creation. You are the minority.





natural selection is observable, testable and repeatable, "transitional forms" are none of the above, instead it's speculated that the fossilized specimen in question represents a "transition", but there is no proof

Look who knows very little about Natural Selection. But at least you admit Darwin's thory is right.



there is evidence, but no proof

More evidence against it than there is for it.:bigthumb:

how did we go from neo-darwinsim (all life evolved from simple bacteria or whatever it was) to the age of the earth? that's a different topic which is far more esoteric

Because they go hand in hand. The only reason anybody would even come close to buying YEC garbage is religious incredulity.



natural selection is irrefutable science, anyone who argues against it is a moron...Darwin had part of the equation right, what he observed is true

Yup and never proven wrong.:bigthumb:

the age of the earth cannot be assessed by science...period

many claim it can, but they are indoctrinated to believe uniformitarian radiometric dating of rocks cannot be wrong...the bottom line is, no one was there

Look somebody yanked the Macarthur pull string

Incorrect again. It can and it has thousands of times over again. Of course you have your unsupportable scenarios where physics would literally have to be suspended in order to be true. The funny thing is you sit around crying foul about thermodynamics yet every single thing you bring forward in regards to origins literally would have to defy to ALL physics.





again, the age of the earth is not testable by science....vast imaginary epochs are not only garbage (no evidence whatsoever for human civilizations or any life beyond thousands of years), they are no help for mutation driven goo-to-you evolution

Of course you are wrong again. Both the earth and the universe age have been accurately tested.



and that's irrelevant, it has nothing to do with origins, for the 500th time

With the origins of life?! Of course it does you fool.

nope, I've been saying this stuff for YEARS, well before I heard that sermon, before I heard anyone else say it....great minds think alike

It's the stupidest slogan ever. In that case it's no wonder you two parrot each other.



nonsense....and we've been over this so many times, your incredulity is the result of your indoctrination

http://www.theforumlounge.com/why-radiometric-dating-t13237.html

Congrats on providing a link to yourself providing absolutely NO information to back your theory (not to mention getting blown out of the water). Once again provide circumstances and proof demonstrating increased isotopic decay is possible for ALL the earths naturally created isotopes.





nonsense....pure and utter nonsense

the speed of light can be used as a measure of distance, not time, relativity blew that apart decades ago

lol WTF?

So back to the topic at hand. How about some evidence for the global flood? Better yet where is the Ark that was able to store ever creature on earth, provide food and a place for them to shit?

I'm assuming its in the North Pole with Santa.

it's only "stupid" to a brainwashed psychopath such as yourself

observable
testable
repeatable

anything else is speculation/metaphysics....period

At least you admit god is speculation.....period.

http://www.theforumlounge.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3136&stc=1&d=1235594389