Physics of the Biblical Flood

What group are you presenting for exactly?

So far you haven't presented any evidence of anything, either here or in your articles. Hopefully you will have something of substance to offer in any forthcoming posts. What we've seen so far has not benefitted your credibility in any way.

The younger Dryas followed by several of the semi cycic aridity events all point to one thiung.
If there was a significant flood (you now seem to want to back off on whethjer it was a worldwide event or not), any of the older sedimentological, tree ring, C14, paleomagnetics, ALPHA track data would be obliterated by follow on flooding. Does the sense of that point become clear?

ANy event (like a flood) would, of necessity wipe out evidence from earths erosion plane. The thins Im speaking of dont have to have any citations in literature because there is no literature that specifically tries to prove that there WAS NO FLOOD. Thtd be ridiculous a task. The fact that we can trace the earths map as one unobstructed surface upon which civilizations have come and gone is kinda like stipulating that water is wet.

Im keeping y patience in the hopes that some real evidence upon which we can debate will be forthcoming from you.
There are tons of references of what the planet looked l;ike in the Pleistocene and holocene (Foster Flints books on Glacial geomorphology, Eardleys old text on Structural Geology,

Heres a fact. The Northern hemisphere is literally covered in various age morainal sediment piles left by glaciers that came and went over 3 to 5 cycles during the Pleistocene. NONE of these moraines is , anywhere obliterated by a "worldwide flood" that turbates these sediment piles/ We have eskers whichare arge snakey like sheets of sand that were deposited by sediment laden waters pouring through the glaciers mass. We have End moraines and lateral moraines which enable us to map the size and shape. All these plus drumlins etc are accompanied by large batches of SCrathces on the bedrock , indicative of the acvtual path that the glaciers took. NO evidence of anything like a sediment disturbing flood.
The only places where any water "spillage' was proposed was in the Bosporus (which of late has been doubted that there was a catastrophic rise based solely on isotope chemistry), and at the "Scablands" of the Columbia river where there is definate evidence that a large glacial lake spilled out and wiped out some large mesas and rounded the rocks from the mesas all the while water was spilling over the crest of the glacial lake.


Seismic evidence of past earthquakes records data by showing various "slippage" in the shallow soil horizons above the earthquake epicenters and hypocenters. These slippage areas 9Reelfoot Lake, the Afar triangle of Africa, Zsechuan province of CHina, All of Japan and the Phillipines, the mid East, ect etc. All these areas have clear unbroken soil faulting records with no turbation evidence that would indicate a flood was disturbing these sediments.

I think youve got an impossible task to show ANY evidence that actually has happened upon which you could conclude that a flood was a partner in molding the earths surface fromm 3000 meters down to resent sea level).

If youre going to try to extract an argumentfrom present sea level rise I would also offer gemntle admonition that we are now living on that surface of sea level rise.


Let me play a game. Assuming that a flood DID occur, what do you expect to have happened to life on the planet? What is your explanation for all these species of non-fish that dont live in 300 meters of seawater. Was there some biological event that occured , like a genetic "bottleneck" of the majority of species.
You should be asked to produce a map showing continuous marine turbated sediment all over the Holocene surface.

These civilizations that were affected by a flood, why isnt there a major evidence of a flood deposit for leagues around the civilizations. (Youve proposed one site in which youve posited that "floodwaters or rain could have dissolved the brick". youve only begun your inquiry, I dont think that you have any evidence that is convincing to me(let alone some oracticing archeologist) that the "yale" project was flood related. AND even if it was, was the oication of the city so , that it indicated a worldwide inundation or just a local river flood (Quite common in the Tigres Euphrates valleys)

If you wish your work to be considered a scholarly one, then your evidence must preceed any conclusions. Your conclusions can only be as strong as your evidence allows.

read the geomorphoogy report from the Tel project. It appears that the city was founded atop a huge alluvial fan deposit of the Plesitone periglacial meltwaters. We have several worl wdie analogs to this (the Chesapeake Bay country, The Gulf of Karibougas , The Heligoland front of the Baltic) etc People always were building atop oldalluvial fan depsots cause it was easy clearing and materials were readily available. Still, from the Tel Leilan projects geomorph report, I see no evidence of a flood even there. What am I missing? (or what are you ignoring?)

I have several friends in the geo dept up there and a bunch of us are getting together in Penn State in early May, so Ill have a chance to bring this up .

The Banpo neolithic culture is named after an archaeological site first excavated in 1953. The houses enclosed by a circular moat were built of mud brick and wood, with thatched roofs. The era was the 7th millennium before the the contemporary era. Radiocarbon 14 dating puts the successive settlements in the period of 6700 years to 5600 years before the present.

Had there been a worldwide flood, mud brick buildings would not have left any traces, let alone the traces of successive villages built one atop the ruins of the former.

Thats the kind of actual analyses Id like to see in his dissertation about the "flood".

I'd say that's exactly what you're not going to see. I just got tired of the BS and applied what i know to the question. Mud brick was a construction material of choice in many upper paleolithic and neolithic cultures--China, the Indus River valley, the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. Had any such flood taken place, we simply wouldn't see any archaeological remains more than 6000 years old, yet they are all over the place.

From Wikipedia, the remains of mud brick buildings in the Indus River valley dating as far back as 7000 ybp:

Once again, from Wikipedia:



This site is in what is now northern Iraq. Surely even if this putative flood had been only regionally massive, mud brick ruins would not have survived.

maybe it wasnt so much aflood at the Tel, but a matter of some baaad plumbing.

Ill be away till Tues but Ill check in here from time to time to see what our host presents

Well, isn't he off teaching his grandmothers at the Planck Institute how to suck eggs? We may not hear from him for a while.

he he.

Hi everyone,

I wrote that I will reply on Monday. I am preparing it now. Haven't finished yet and its bedtime here in Israel. I'll do my best to post it tomorrow.

Roi

gnite, Im gonna catch a plane back home soon anyway,

Welcome back. I was beginning to think a mob of physicists with pitchforks and torches had cornered you in a castle somewhere.

Hi everyone, I'm back.

I will now supply you all with detailed replies and in the end I will also provide the next piece of geological-archeological evidence. First of all, I wish to emphasis the evidence that HAS already been displayed in my book and/or discussed in this forum. THE FOLLOWING LIST SHOULD CAUSE ALL THOSE WHO SAY THAT I DID NOT SUPPLY ANY EVIDENCE TO RECONSIDER THEIR CLAIM...

1. Earth does contain more than enough water to supply the Biblical flood. The water is dissolved in Earth's mantle and core. In my book I display evidence from the most recent geochemical and geophysical findings. None of you disputed this determination so far. It is based on solid evidence. Notice that this determination alone is revolutionary in the research of the flood and it solves one of the greatest theoretical questions: “Where is the water today?”.

2. A major, global, abrupt and yet unexplained climate event named “4.2 kilo year event” occurred in the 22nd century BC. A dating that correlates exactly with the traditional Biblical dating of the flood. There is geological and archeological evidence for this event and no one is this forum has disputed this fact.

3. The 4.2 climate event is already considered today among historians as the cause for the collapse of the Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, the old kingdom in Egypt, the Harrapan civilization in India and the neolithic culture of China.

4. The evidence that I displayed from Tel Leilan shows that at least in that site the 4.2 kilo year event began with a very short wet and volcanic phase. The rain of was strong enough to cause mud brick walls to collapse. The evidence shows that the site was abandoned at once within the time span of this short phase.

Of course I must display much more supporting evidence from many other sites worldwide. It will take some time, but I will do so. The question now is not whether I have evidence. The question is if have enough evidence and if someone else can present contradicting evidence of his own.

To MontereyJack:

I am glad that an archeologist has joined this discussion. You claim that there is no archeological evidence for a global flood. I claim that a global flood actually occurred in the 22nd century BC. The archeological evidence must show that all human settlements worldwide were simultaneously abandoned. To begin with, read the evidence from Tel Leilan. Tel Leilan and the whole region was abandoned for several centuries and it is very clear that the abandonment began at the very beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event. I will provide you with more evidence from post to post.
Meanwhile, if you think that you can contradict my theory please show me your own evidence. Personally, I trust only evidence that uses radiometric dating such as carbon dating. All you have to do is to find a single archeological site that was undoubtedly inhabited CONTINUOUSLY from 2300 BC until 2000 BC. I write to you ahead of time: the main problem is with the resolution of the carbon dating from this era. You must use CALIBRATED carbon dating and display the full laboratory analysis of this dating (not only a single date that represents the sample's “gravity center”, but the whole range of possible dates).

To rosborne979

The fact that I cannot show you where the cosmic cloud that caused the flood is today does not provide a “huge problem” for my theory at all. There are many other pieces of evidence that I can supply. Many theories are proved based on partial or indirect evidence. Einstein's relativity is considered as “proved” despite the fact that one of its major demands for “length contraction” was never proved. Just keep reading this discussion from time to time and you will see the evidence accumulating.

By the way, as an answer to your question: yesterday I presented a new type of geometry that may help unify relativity and quantum mechanics to physicists and space engineers in IAI (Israel Aerospace Industries).

To Sentana and Farmerman (regarding the mud-bricks):

Why did you assume that “had there been a worldwide flood, mud brick buildings would not have left any traces”? There is no reason that mud brick buildings that were already buried in the ground by the time of the flood would have collapsed. Furthermore even mud brick buildings that were still exposed may have survived.

Search the term “Choqa Zanbil” in wikipedia. There is a nice picture of this massive mud brick there (by the way, how can I attach pictures to this post?). This massive building is 3300 years old. Look at the picture: there is vegetation around it. It actually rains there! Do you think that this building was not exposed to storms throughout the last 33 centuries? Yes, you can see that some of its bricks disintegrated (look at its top). But most of them survived.
The rain at the beginning of the flood may have partially disintegrated mud brick buildings. As we see in Tel Leilan some walls did collapsed. But there is no reason to claim that no mud brick building could have survived the flood.

To Farmerman:

You have not provided me yet with any specific evidence. You are still only supplying general claims. Nevertheless, I will do my best to answer these claims. Some of your claims demand further investigation and I'll ask you for more information...

Should salt deposits be expected?

I am not sure what was the salinity of the flood water. If its salinity was low then you shouldn't expect to find to many salt deposits. But even if its salinity was similar to that of ocean water, salt deposits should not be expected everywhere. Studying salt deposits from recent tsunamis shows that they depend on several variables. Most of all on the drainage conditions of the land and the amount of rain in the area. Fresh water quickly washes away the salt deposit from the surface and leaches salt that was soaked in the ground away. Of course, if the land doesn't receive enough fresh water then we should detect a salt deposit.

Since the fresh water floats above sea water and it takes a lot of time for great bodies of water with different salinities and/or temperature to mix, the upper layer of the flood water must have been composed from fresh water. This means that when the water was finally drained back to sea the entire land was washed by fresh water and soaked with it. In this scenario most of the salt should have been removed. However, in closed basins where water was trapped and slowly evaporated salt deposits should have formed.

Regarding the footprints that you mentioned in the volcanic ash that “didn't get wet enough to change into a hydration pozzolonic structure” and also the “cave deposits of human habitation along sea side an Karstic terrains of Yugoslavia and Croatia where dry human habitation evidence goes back almost 100000 yeasr and the straw and fecal matter is dessicated”, please refer me to web pages that provide more details on these issues.

Fire pits: How does the fact that pre-flood fire pits are still aligned with the ancient magnetic field prove that there was no flood? Because you assume that the flood should have moved the material? If the material was already buried then it shouldn't have moved.

The tephra fall in Tel Leilan is from an unknown source. You asked if the tephra deposits show evidence of being hydrated in situ at depth. How should the tephra react when it is subjected to great water pressure? That is indeed a question that I must further investigate and I would be glad to receive your professional help in this matter. Please elaborate...

Morainal sediment piles left by glaciers may be moved by strong currents. But once again, I do not relate the flood to a tsunami, but to a more gradual rise in the sea level. There should be a great difference between the force that is exerted upon a rock by a 10 meter tsunami that hits it at once to the force that is exerted upon the rock by a 10 meter rise in the water level that is distributed throughout half a day (for example). It would be interesting to check morainal sediment piles that lie close to river banks and were definitely subjected to river floods throughout the holocene. Did they move?

You asked what is my explanation for all these species of non-fish that don't live in 3000 meters of seawater? Well, the Bible is very clear about that isn't it? The samples of all terrestrial fauna were saved in the ark. Sounds crazy right? I thought so too until I did the math...

The evidence from Tel Leilan showed that there were heavy rains right at the beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event. But can we find evidence for a river flood in this region at that time?

NEXT EVIDENCE: EUPHRATES RIVER FLOOD:

According to the findings from Tel Leilan, the beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event marked the end of the Akkadian Empire or came very shortly after it. Anyway, by the time of the Early Dynastic Ur III period the Northern Mesopotamian region was arid and hardly occupied. Therefor, if there is evidence for a flood in Mesopotamia it should be found between the Akkadian layer to the Ur III layer. You can find in the web page of the Yale's university, Tel Leilan project publications, an article from 2000 named:
"Beyond the younger Dryas: Collapse as adaptation to abrupt climate change in ancient West Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean. In Environmental disaster and the archaeology of human response, Edited by Garth Bawden and Richard Martin Reycraft. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers, No. 7: 75-95."

The following is quoted from the last paragraph of page 88:

“Along the middle Euphrates, the settelment systems dominated by Tell Bnat complex (McClellan and Porter 1997; Porter 1995) in the Early Dynastic III period quickly collapsed ca. 2200B.C. MASSIVE EUPHRATES FLOODING, a product perhaps of depleted vegetation cover and reduced soil infiltration capacity, has been identified for this same period by Tipping and Peltenburg at Jerablus Tahtani (Peltenburg et al. 1997; Petelburg 1999).”

There is an ongoing debate among archeologist regarding the exact dating of “ the Early Dynastic III period”. But the carbon dating does not lie. The collapse of the civilization at Tell Bnat is abrupt like that in Tel Leilan. Within the resolution of the carbon dating they seem to be simultaneous and a massive flood of the Euphrates marks the beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event! The archeologist tried to explain this flood by an allegedly depleted vegetation cover and reduced soil infiltration capacity. But the arid phase which actually depleted the land followed the short wet phase and not vice versa.

Now you should not expect to find too much river flood sediments in lower regions because they were quickly submerged by the sea. It is not by chance that the flood marks are found in the higher regions (more than 300 meters above sea level in Tell Banat and Tel Leilan), because they had enough time to be exposed to the rain and to the river flooding before they were submerged.

Together with the findings from Tel Leilan this strongly indicates that the 4.2 kilo year event began with heavy rain and flooding in Mesopotamia. Of course, I will supply more evidence from other locations in my following posts...

Feel free to respond.

Roi Lotan Glazer
The Physics of The Biblical Flood

You have provided no evidence for your claim #1. Just saying something doesn't make it so.

You have provided no evidence for your claim #2. Just saying something doesn't make it so.

Your claim #3 is a flat-out lie. For example, the Akkadian Empire collapsed because it could not deal with the incursions of "barbarian" peoples from the Zagros Mountains area.

You are ignoring that your world-wide flood would have left mud brick structures immersed in water over an extended period of time, which is not at all the same as the effects of rain. By the way, i've seen adobe walls melt in heavy rain. You're peddling bullshit once again.

You are in your fall-back position of no one having disproved your claims. You have to prove your claims, no one is obliged to disprove them. You keep babbling about evidence, but all you do is make ipse dixit claims which you then fail to substantiate.

By the way, the 4.2 kiloyear event was a drought, not a flood. Jesus, your "evidence" is pathetic.

If you think all we need to know is "where the cloud is today", then you're missing the point. You cannot simply posit an unknown and undemonstrated phenomena the movement of which is counter to everything we know about astrophysics, and then attribute to it yet another set of undemonstrated attributes, and consider it in any way supportive of your theory. (refer to the cartoon above where "a miracle occurs" is shown in the equation). You need evidence, and you have none. And simply saying "what else could have pulled the water from the rocks", is not evidence.


Ok, go ahead. We're still waiting.


Yes, but you have provided no partial or indirect evidence. So making this observation in no way lends any credence to your theory which is devoid of any evidence.


We have yet to see any evidence, much less an accumulation.

Evidence:

Ive been a geologist (started as a chemist) and Im practicing for about 35 years now. Your first statement about "enough water : is kinda wrong at its first inspection. Is this water connat? water of hydration in minerals? besides that which is surficial.

Aw far as deep ground-water reervoirs, perhaps tyou should get the encyclopdia of water resources and several decent Hydrogeology Texts that have "basin statistics" for underground water.
There ius nough data that shows radioactive isotopes (like C14) show the ages of deep water basins to be over 7 to 15000 yars old. If , omehow, this water came to the surface you would see a unifom "Mixing" nd a fairly common date of entrained wubsurface waters. IT ISNT THE CASE--therefore you are dead wrong about your firwt assertion

Both set and I have reminded you of these "kiloyear events" after the Younger Dryas. These were aridity cycles with NO evidence of subsequent flooding WHERE IS THE FLOOD EVIDENCE