By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Underwater pryamids/cities give credence to Noah's Flood

CrazyHorse on 05 October 2010
Dr.Grass said:
Mummelmann said:


Begone with your insight and reason!

Masterfully put, and I'm sure there are one thousand other flaws and logical tears to be explored in the Noah myth (along with pretty much everything else in the greatest work of fiction ever).

Ya just keep up patting each other on the back.

So how old are the oldest trees that exist again?

I don't believe it rained for 40 days or whatever, but is there no possibility that the ice caps could have melted before? Is there no possibility that continents could have rapidly shifted and buried large parts of themselves under the ocean?

Why is there always such hate between you 'masterfully intelligent' scientific geniuses and the fanatic reliogionists?

No, there is no possibility that the continents could have shifted rapidly. Plate tectonics operates over millions of years, not decades or centuries.

As for the ice caps, yes they would have melted after the last glacial period but again there is no chance that the resulting melt water would have flooded all the continents.

As others have pointed out, floods happen all the time, it is hardly surprising that cultures developed stories about them.

Regarding your last sentance, I wouldn't call it 'hate' but the disagreements arise from one side using evidence and the other side too often ignoring it.



Around the Network
non-gravity on 05 October 2010

Among the residents of New Orleans there have been stories about a great flood in 2005.

More evidence!!!



SecondWar on 05 October 2010
non-gravity said:

Among the residents of New Orleans there have been stories about a great flood in 2005.

More evidence!!!

Thats actually a good point, theyre probably was a flood, as theyre have been loads even recently, but people probably assumed that it was a worldwide flood because it was so expansive over the local region (ie whenever Bangladesh has a bad flood) and as there was no global communication, these sort of stories occur.



pizzahut451 on 05 October 2010
Rainbird said:
OoSnap said:

There are over 300 cultures scattered throughout the world that have a worldwide flood story. Coincidence? I think not. "Hawaiians have a flood story that tells of a time when, long after the death of the first man, the world became a wicked, terrible place. Only one good man was left, and his name was Nu-u. He made a great canoe with a house on it and filled it with animals. In this story, the waters came up over all the earth and killed all the people; only Nu-u and his family were saved.

Another flood story is from China. It records that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters escaped a great flood and were the only people alive on earth. After the great flood, they repopulated the world.

As the story of the Flood was verbally passed from one generation to the next, some aspects would have been lost or altered. And this is what has happened, as we can see from the chart. However, as seen in the given examples, each story shares remarkable similarities to the account of Noah in the Bible. This is true even in some of the details, such as the name Nu-u in the Hawaiian flood story. “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.”" 

Sorry, I don't have time to read the whole thing, but after reading that short snippet, one thing pops up in my mind. Why would you assume that the story of Noah's Ark is the true version of this story? Why not the story of Nu-u? What if there just was a great flood, and everyone decided to write their own story about it? What makes the version in the Bible the correct one?

EDIT: Just to clarify, I think there was a great flood at some point, and all these stories are probably connected to it somehow.


Does it really matter if the guy is called Nu-u or Noah?



Rainbird on 05 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
Rainbird said:
OoSnap said:

There are over 300 cultures scattered throughout the world that have a worldwide flood story. Coincidence? I think not. "Hawaiians have a flood story that tells of a time when, long after the death of the first man, the world became a wicked, terrible place. Only one good man was left, and his name was Nu-u. He made a great canoe with a house on it and filled it with animals. In this story, the waters came up over all the earth and killed all the people; only Nu-u and his family were saved.

Another flood story is from China. It records that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters escaped a great flood and were the only people alive on earth. After the great flood, they repopulated the world.

As the story of the Flood was verbally passed from one generation to the next, some aspects would have been lost or altered. And this is what has happened, as we can see from the chart. However, as seen in the given examples, each story shares remarkable similarities to the account of Noah in the Bible. This is true even in some of the details, such as the name Nu-u in the Hawaiian flood story. “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.”" 

Sorry, I don't have time to read the whole thing, but after reading that short snippet, one thing pops up in my mind. Why would you assume that the story of Noah's Ark is the true version of this story? Why not the story of Nu-u? What if there just was a great flood, and everyone decided to write their own story about it? What makes the version in the Bible the correct one?

EDIT: Just to clarify, I think there was a great flood at some point, and all these stories are probably connected to it somehow.

Does it really matter if the guy is called Nu-u or Noah?

If you're trying to say that the biblical story is true, whether the guy is called Nu-u (and comes from Hawaii) or Noah does matter.



Around the Network
pizzahut451 on 05 October 2010
Rainbird said:
pizzahut451 said:
Rainbird said:
OoSnap said:

There are over 300 cultures scattered throughout the world that have a worldwide flood story. Coincidence? I think not. "Hawaiians have a flood story that tells of a time when, long after the death of the first man, the world became a wicked, terrible place. Only one good man was left, and his name was Nu-u. He made a great canoe with a house on it and filled it with animals. In this story, the waters came up over all the earth and killed all the people; only Nu-u and his family were saved.

Another flood story is from China. It records that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters escaped a great flood and were the only people alive on earth. After the great flood, they repopulated the world.

As the story of the Flood was verbally passed from one generation to the next, some aspects would have been lost or altered. And this is what has happened, as we can see from the chart. However, as seen in the given examples, each story shares remarkable similarities to the account of Noah in the Bible. This is true even in some of the details, such as the name Nu-u in the Hawaiian flood story. “Nu-u” is very similar to “Noah.”" 

Sorry, I don't have time to read the whole thing, but after reading that short snippet, one thing pops up in my mind. Why would you assume that the story of Noah's Ark is the true version of this story? Why not the story of Nu-u? What if there just was a great flood, and everyone decided to write their own story about it? What makes the version in the Bible the correct one?

EDIT: Just to clarify, I think there was a great flood at some point, and all these stories are probably connected to it somehow.

Does it really matter if the guy is called Nu-u or Noah?

If you're trying to say that the biblical story is true, whether the guy is called Nu-u (and comes from Hawaii) or Noah does matter.


If the story of great flood on mankind for its wickedness is true, why does it matter if the biblical version is wrong or right? The story and the point are true, except for some other details



Rainbird on 05 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
Rainbird said:
pizzahut451 said:

Does it really matter if the guy is called Nu-u or Noah?

If you're trying to say that the biblical story is true, whether the guy is called Nu-u (and comes from Hawaii) or Noah does matter.

If the story of great flood on mankind for its wickedness is true, why does it matter if the biblical version is wrong or right? The story and the point are true, except for some other details

True, it's irrelevant then.



wfz on 05 October 2010
SecondWar said:
non-gravity said:

Among the residents of New Orleans there have been stories about a great flood in 2005.

More evidence!!!

Thats actually a good point, theyre probably was a flood, as theyre have been loads even recently, but people probably assumed that it was a worldwide flood because it was so expansive over the local region (ie whenever Bangladesh has a bad flood) and as there was no global communication, these sort of stories occur.


Yup, pretty much this. Someone mentioned it earlier in the thread too, but these two posts combined made the stance pretty clear.



pastro243 on 05 October 2010

Even if you melt all the ice in the world, get all clouds dry, etc... you cant get a flood like the one you have in the bible.

The whole story is stupid( a family building an ark andputting animals inside? that would take decades) , in almost every part of the world people have had floods because they live near water and weather changes from time to time, its all natural but poeple tend to give a supernatural look at things when they cant explain them.

Its really predictable that people that live in areas that have had some flood or experience change in weather to some point to create miths about them.



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

.jayderyu on 05 October 2010

Great way to miss facts by only listening to Si8nt. Let's make this clear. The Flood Myth is older than the hebrew and abahamic god. ie the Flood Myth is not Noah.

http://www.historywiz.com/primarysources/sumerianflood.html

In the region we are speaking. The flood myth is Sumerian. Which means a couple things. It's pre a Bible story. It's pre old testament and finally. It's during a time where it's God's as in plural.

Was there a flood. Very likely. Apparently they have found sea shells on mountains. This would certainly indicate an increase in the ocean level. However it should be noted that the scientific theory is that the myth spawned in cultures all over world because of the sea shells found on the mountains. If you find a piece of evidence like that. You certainly are going to think of of a flood. 

I'm not going to stomp on your flood myth. I am however a believer in don't give credit to the wrong source. This is a case where the Bible is taking the story from old Hebrew testaments and it's more than likely they got their from Sumeria.

Yes there are flooded stone structures. That's pretty much proven fact. The also indicated that the ocean level was lower at one point during civilization.

Where the flood myth goes wrong however is another problem. Regardless how man came about. It's know that inbreeding causes birth defects over a period of time. Many of these flood mythes don't support a diversity of people. Usually less than a dozen. Where as a larger genetic pool is required. Noah and the other legends could not have adequate repopulated the Earth with just them. If the flood myth is true. Then likely there were large groups of people that survived and the stories are exactly that. Stories to make it more exciting.

The reason I know this useless knowledge. Simple. I've been putting together an RPG about the paranormal and mythological. Over the last year I've come across some weird mass culture stuff. This is certainly one of them. At the same time though it's also lead me down the path that this story. Isn't Biblical in origin.

 

I admit to loving S8int.com, but they do skew current information towards the bible and ignore prior historical fact. Great source of unusual stuff. Just remember.
Do your own research
Never assume that a single source is right
Everyone is biased.

Again "DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH"



Squilliam: On Vgcharts its a commonly accepted practice to twist the bounds of plausibility in order to support your argument or agenda so I think its pretty cool that this gives me the precedent to say whatever I damn well please.