6 ms·

Coming next: creationist interpretation of this in a Biblical flood narrative with reference to "opening up the fountains of the deep".

melling 12y ago
The flood story is covered in many cultures. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth
- fennecfoxen 12y ago
  Yes, but American protestant fundamentalists looking for something that superficially looks like it might theoretically maybe back up their literal interpretations of the Bible will care about this announcement in a way that most of the Babylonians won't. :P
- chc 12y ago
  AFAIK the Epic of Gilgamesh does not include the "fountains of the deep" aspect of the Noah story that's relevant here, and also there aren't a lot of Sumerian creationists around.
  - melling 12y ago
    I was simply pointing out that there are many flood stories in many cultures. I added another link for more references. I just know that Gilgamesh is one of the oldest. Many cultures, including the some Indians in North America, have incorporated it into their mythology.
    - ars 12y ago
      > I was simply pointing out that there are many flood stories in many cultures Being in many cultures isn't evidence against the story, as it seems you are trying to imply. It could simply mean there was one huge flood and lots of cultures recorded it. I am aware there is no scientific mechanism to cause a worldwide flood, this is explicitly about divine intervention. (i.e. a miracle, not creationism pseudo science).
      - nitrogen 12y ago
        Everything that happens on a geological scale leaves geological evidence. There is no such evidence for a global flood. It's not just the mechanism for causing the flood that's missing, but any sign of it whatsoever. I grew up learning about and believing in a global flood, and confronting the hard truth that there is no evidence for a flood was an important part of my intellectual development. However, since there are reasons other than reason and evidence for people to believe in a flood, no amount of reasoning or evidence will change those beliefs, so I propose we focus on the tantalizing science fiction implications instead.
        Gregorein 12y ago
        No proof? Go check sedimentary layers in affrica / Arabia / golden triangle
        espadrine 12y ago
        > Go check sedimentary layers in affrica / Arabia / golden triangle 1. Why only those? Isn't it global? 2. This comment has no value without an academic paper to reference. If nobody has studied it, this is just hot air. If someone has, you are expected to link to it in these lands. 3. It's "Africa". Not "affrica".
        crusso 12y ago
        no amount of reasoning or evidence will change those beliefs It worked for you, didn't it? It also worked for me. That's two of us. There are more. Keep the uh... "faith".
        waps 12y ago
        There is, however, plenty of evidence for a huge, huge flood at about the correct time. About 1/3 of the Black Sea was dry land until about 6000 BC [1]. The theory goes that it went from essentially dry land with forests and cities and ... to open sea in as little as 2 months, which can't have been a pleasant experience for the inhabitants. Also note that floods don't simply go in a straight line from A->B. In practice because towns are built on the more stable land, what you'd see happen is pretty much the worst possible scenario : the water would surround cities, first making most roads unusable (non hardened ones because they become mud, hardened ones because some parts of them collapse). Then the water level would rise until nothing remains above the water level. (I've got some experience living in Northwest Europe, and every 20 years or so you get introduced to this problem firsthand) Of course, even though the affected area was huge, it was still a local phenomenon. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
    - kaonashi 12y ago
      Probably has more to do with the first cultures that developed agriculture living near large rivers.
      - PhasmaFelis 12y ago
        IIRC, there is some evidence of a very large flood in...western Asia, I think?...caused by a highland sea breaking through a natural dam and emptying into a lowland area, right around the time that humans were starting to keep histories. It was big enough to affect multiple distinct cultures at the time. There's a theory that that's the origin of the ubiquitous Great Flood stories.
        cholmon 12y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
        will_work4tears 12y ago
        Also the Missoula Floods[0], though it's possible nobody was really around, and if there was, probably not many ( assuming humans started migrating ~18,000 years ago, it's possible some were there) [0]-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods
        waps 12y ago
        He might mean this, since the time period is a bit more correct : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    > also there aren't a lot of Sumerian creationists around Given Christianity has roots in Judaism and Judaism probably has some roots in Sumerian religion, I'm not sure if you could say that. Religions evolve from other religions, and in a geographic area, are likely to have common ancestors.
- contingencies 12y ago
  It's worth pointing out that fundamentally, humans like to live ... and live more successfully ... in places where their needs are met. That generally means ample food - plants and animals - and ample fresh water. These generally co-occur in water rich areas, such as low-lying coastal regions or flat, regularly inundated river plains. Thus, flooding in relatively populated early centers of civilization is likely to be a common experience across human cultures, purely by the geographical reality of proximity to water. Furthermore, recording such events is natural in a literate civilization since the destruction a nontrivial event might cause against food, shelter and population would affect all echelons of society.
smoyer 12y ago
There have been quite a few times that science has confirmed accounts in the Tanakh and New Testament ... large portions of both are dedicated to conveying history regardless of whether you believe in the spiritual aspects described.
- glenra 12y ago
  By "science has confirmed accounts", do you mean anything more than "has confirmed that some historical locations used for these stories actually existed"? If so, can you give some examples? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible#Challenges_to_historicity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible#Chall... (by way of illustration: most of Robert Parker's Spencer novels are set in Boston. You could prove via archeological evidence that the buildings and streets mentioned in these stories exist - they weren't invented out of whole cloth - but this wouldn't prove Spencer himself ever existed much less did any of the things claimed about him in the stories.)
Kaizyn 12y ago
Why would this be unreasonable? If I were to propose a scientific theory and a discovery were made that provided evidence that the theory were correct, we would call it good science. Why is it considered anything less to point out that the Bible made a statement that is strengthened by the same discovery?
- pjscott 12y ago
  Water trapped in crystals as hydroxide ions far underground do not exactly constitute a gushing source of floodwater. You'd need divine intervention to get a flood from this stuff -- and if you're already bringing the Hand of God into it, do you really need a geological mechanism to complete the story?
deciplex 12y ago
And after that: a concerted effort to open up those fountains, flooding the Earth in order to make the prophecy come true. Sorta like how a lot of them support Israel for the sole purpose of instigating the end times.
- rbanffy 12y ago
  It's probably easier to bring three oceans worth of comets to rain on Earth than it would be to dig that deep and extract that water. Eventually we will opt to dismantle the Earth to build more habitats, but it'll be more like peeling an onion layer by layer. By the time we are peeling 700 km, we'll encounter the water.
- jcromartie 12y ago
  Who? Fundies assert that the world won't be flooded again (as per God's promise after the original flood). They are waiting for the world to be destroyed the second time by fire, not water.
venomsnake 12y ago
The first thing I thought of too. A massive earthquake with juust the right condition could squeeze some water in the ocean. Or tsunami like event for a simpler explanation. Or something just big enough to make a good splash in some sea. The flood myth is very persistent but we need to have in mind that humanity was tiny back then. So even a 2011 Japanese like tsunami could be the flood.
- arethuza 12y ago
  There have been large tsunamis caused by underwater landslides - notably the Storegga Slide off Norway that inundated a lot of areas in what are now Scotland and Norway ~8000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storegga_Slide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storegga_Slide The Storegga Slide might also have been, at least partly, responsible for the disappearance of Doggerland under the North Sea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland
ohwp 12y ago
There already are theories about this. For example: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ29.html http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ29.html I'm not sure why you think creationists are dumb people. Even scientists don't agree with all theories in the science books. So yeah, maybe there was an event where fountains of the deep opened up. Some people believe dinosaurs were killed because after that a change in atmosphere provided less food. Others believe a comet killed them. There is and isn't proof for both theories so maybe there is truth in both. Our creation / existence is one big riddle everyone tries to solve different.
- gambiting 12y ago
  Are you one of those people who think that "evolution is just a theory"? Creationists are dumb people. So are people believing in homoeopathy or astrology.
  - ohwp 12y ago
    Yes I think evolution is a theory. A good scientist knows other theories may come and change the landscape. So you need to keep an open mind. That's why I posted the link to the theory of the deep fountains. I think it's a good theory explaining some events in the past. Is it true? I don't know. But we also have no proof for evolution. But the theory of evolution works very well to explain a lot. The only science that has proof is math. (I'm not a creationist by the way) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory
    - gambiting 12y ago
      I am not saying that you are a creationist,but I am saying that everyone shouting "evolution is just a theory!!" is almost universally wrong. >>But we also have no proof for evolution. Then you must have missed a lot of pretty much everything going in science in the last ~300 years. If ancient bones are not "scientific" enough for you, look at bacteria, which evolve(yes,evolve, not magically change due to divine intervention) in a space of days,not millennia.
    - 12y ago
Shivetya 12y ago
well its neat they could be some basis for it. Granted they would never have known about this but if there were a chance the water could break surface, catastrophic earth quake or some such fun never experienced since that allowed this water to reach the surface, just imagine the outcome. After all you would not have water falling from the sky, it would just be there all around you.

melling 12y ago

The flood story is covered in many cultures. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth

fennecfoxen 12y ago
Yes, but American protestant fundamentalists looking for something that superficially looks like it might theoretically maybe back up their literal interpretations of the Bible will care about this announcement in a way that most of the Babylonians won't. :P
chc 12y ago
AFAIK the Epic of Gilgamesh does not include the "fountains of the deep" aspect of the Noah story that's relevant here, and also there aren't a lot of Sumerian creationists around.
- melling 12y ago
  I was simply pointing out that there are many flood stories in many cultures. I added another link for more references. I just know that Gilgamesh is one of the oldest. Many cultures, including the some Indians in North America, have incorporated it into their mythology.
  - ars 12y ago
    > I was simply pointing out that there are many flood stories in many cultures Being in many cultures isn't evidence against the story, as it seems you are trying to imply. It could simply mean there was one huge flood and lots of cultures recorded it. I am aware there is no scientific mechanism to cause a worldwide flood, this is explicitly about divine intervention. (i.e. a miracle, not creationism pseudo science).
    - nitrogen 12y ago
      Everything that happens on a geological scale leaves geological evidence. There is no such evidence for a global flood. It's not just the mechanism for causing the flood that's missing, but any sign of it whatsoever. I grew up learning about and believing in a global flood, and confronting the hard truth that there is no evidence for a flood was an important part of my intellectual development. However, since there are reasons other than reason and evidence for people to believe in a flood, no amount of reasoning or evidence will change those beliefs, so I propose we focus on the tantalizing science fiction implications instead.
      - Gregorein 12y ago
        No proof? Go check sedimentary layers in affrica / Arabia / golden triangle
        espadrine 12y ago
        > Go check sedimentary layers in affrica / Arabia / golden triangle 1. Why only those? Isn't it global? 2. This comment has no value without an academic paper to reference. If nobody has studied it, this is just hot air. If someone has, you are expected to link to it in these lands. 3. It's "Africa". Not "affrica".
      - crusso 12y ago
        no amount of reasoning or evidence will change those beliefs It worked for you, didn't it? It also worked for me. That's two of us. There are more. Keep the uh... "faith".
        waps 12y ago
        There is, however, plenty of evidence for a huge, huge flood at about the correct time. About 1/3 of the Black Sea was dry land until about 6000 BC [1]. The theory goes that it went from essentially dry land with forests and cities and ... to open sea in as little as 2 months, which can't have been a pleasant experience for the inhabitants. Also note that floods don't simply go in a straight line from A->B. In practice because towns are built on the more stable land, what you'd see happen is pretty much the worst possible scenario : the water would surround cities, first making most roads unusable (non hardened ones because they become mud, hardened ones because some parts of them collapse). Then the water level would rise until nothing remains above the water level. (I've got some experience living in Northwest Europe, and every 20 years or so you get introduced to this problem firsthand) Of course, even though the affected area was huge, it was still a local phenomenon. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
  - kaonashi 12y ago
    Probably has more to do with the first cultures that developed agriculture living near large rivers.
    - PhasmaFelis 12y ago
      IIRC, there is some evidence of a very large flood in...western Asia, I think?...caused by a highland sea breaking through a natural dam and emptying into a lowland area, right around the time that humans were starting to keep histories. It was big enough to affect multiple distinct cultures at the time. There's a theory that that's the origin of the ubiquitous Great Flood stories.
      - cholmon 12y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
      - will_work4tears 12y ago
        Also the Missoula Floods[0], though it's possible nobody was really around, and if there was, probably not many ( assuming humans started migrating ~18,000 years ago, it's possible some were there) [0]-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods
        waps 12y ago
        He might mean this, since the time period is a bit more correct : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis
- seanmcdirmid 12y ago
  > also there aren't a lot of Sumerian creationists around Given Christianity has roots in Judaism and Judaism probably has some roots in Sumerian religion, I'm not sure if you could say that. Religions evolve from other religions, and in a geographic area, are likely to have common ancestors.
contingencies 12y ago
It's worth pointing out that fundamentally, humans like to live ... and live more successfully ... in places where their needs are met. That generally means ample food - plants and animals - and ample fresh water. These generally co-occur in water rich areas, such as low-lying coastal regions or flat, regularly inundated river plains. Thus, flooding in relatively populated early centers of civilization is likely to be a common experience across human cultures, purely by the geographical reality of proximity to water. Furthermore, recording such events is natural in a literate civilization since the destruction a nontrivial event might cause against food, shelter and population would affect all echelons of society.

smoyer 12y ago

There have been quite a few times that science has confirmed accounts in the Tanakh and New Testament ... large portions of both are dedicated to conveying history regardless of whether you believe in the spiritual aspects described.

glenra 12y ago
By "science has confirmed accounts", do you mean anything more than "has confirmed that some historical locations used for these stories actually existed"? If so, can you give some examples? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible#Challenges_to_historicity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible#Chall... (by way of illustration: most of Robert Parker's Spencer novels are set in Boston. You could prove via archeological evidence that the buildings and streets mentioned in these stories exist - they weren't invented out of whole cloth - but this wouldn't prove Spencer himself ever existed much less did any of the things claimed about him in the stories.)

Kaizyn 12y ago

Why would this be unreasonable? If I were to propose a scientific theory and a discovery were made that provided evidence that the theory were correct, we would call it good science. Why is it considered anything less to point out that the Bible made a statement that is strengthened by the same discovery?

pjscott 12y ago
Water trapped in crystals as hydroxide ions far underground do not exactly constitute a gushing source of floodwater. You'd need divine intervention to get a flood from this stuff -- and if you're already bringing the Hand of God into it, do you really need a geological mechanism to complete the story?

deciplex 12y ago

And after that: a concerted effort to open up those fountains, flooding the Earth in order to make the prophecy come true. Sorta like how a lot of them support Israel for the sole purpose of instigating the end times.

rbanffy 12y ago
It's probably easier to bring three oceans worth of comets to rain on Earth than it would be to dig that deep and extract that water. Eventually we will opt to dismantle the Earth to build more habitats, but it'll be more like peeling an onion layer by layer. By the time we are peeling 700 km, we'll encounter the water.
jcromartie 12y ago
Who? Fundies assert that the world won't be flooded again (as per God's promise after the original flood). They are waiting for the world to be destroyed the second time by fire, not water.

venomsnake 12y ago

The first thing I thought of too. A massive earthquake with juust the right condition could squeeze some water in the ocean. Or tsunami like event for a simpler explanation. Or something just big enough to make a good splash in some sea. The flood myth is very persistent but we need to have in mind that humanity was tiny back then. So even a 2011 Japanese like tsunami could be the flood.

arethuza 12y ago
There have been large tsunamis caused by underwater landslides - notably the Storegga Slide off Norway that inundated a lot of areas in what are now Scotland and Norway ~8000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storegga_Slide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storegga_Slide The Storegga Slide might also have been, at least partly, responsible for the disappearance of Doggerland under the North Sea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

ohwp 12y ago

There already are theories about this. For example: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ29.html http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ29.html I'm not sure why you think creationists are dumb people. Even scientists don't agree with all theories in the science books. So yeah, maybe there was an event where fountains of the deep opened up. Some people believe dinosaurs were killed because after that a change in atmosphere provided less food. Others believe a comet killed them. There is and isn't proof for both theories so maybe there is truth in both. Our creation / existence is one big riddle everyone tries to solve different.

gambiting 12y ago
Are you one of those people who think that "evolution is just a theory"? Creationists are dumb people. So are people believing in homoeopathy or astrology.
- ohwp 12y ago
  Yes I think evolution is a theory. A good scientist knows other theories may come and change the landscape. So you need to keep an open mind. That's why I posted the link to the theory of the deep fountains. I think it's a good theory explaining some events in the past. Is it true? I don't know. But we also have no proof for evolution. But the theory of evolution works very well to explain a lot. The only science that has proof is math. (I'm not a creationist by the way) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory
  - gambiting 12y ago
    I am not saying that you are a creationist,but I am saying that everyone shouting "evolution is just a theory!!" is almost universally wrong. >>But we also have no proof for evolution. Then you must have missed a lot of pretty much everything going in science in the last ~300 years. If ancient bones are not "scientific" enough for you, look at bacteria, which evolve(yes,evolve, not magically change due to divine intervention) in a space of days,not millennia.
  - 12y ago

Shivetya 12y ago

well its neat they could be some basis for it. Granted they would never have known about this but if there were a chance the water could break surface, catastrophic earth quake or some such fun never experienced since that allowed this water to reach the surface, just imagine the outcome. After all you would not have water falling from the sky, it would just be there all around you.