Physics of the Biblical Flood

The mounds are interesting because the technique is ubiquitous. Tumuli, also known as kurgans, are a good example. Although the term almost always refers to burials, there is more and more evidence that the "Kurgan" invasion of central and western Europe used the technique to build hill forts. The Keltic invaders of central and western Europe are known as the Hill Fort people. The technique is realtively simple--people bring stones and begin piling them up around a marked perimeter, the grave is built within in the perimeter, and then more stones are piled over the burial mound, with gravel and earth to stabilize the structure. They can be quite imposing and durable, too. Mamayev Kurgan (the "tomb" of Mamai) at Volgograd, formerly Stalingrad, was fought over repeatedly by the Germans and Soviets, and survived repeated heavy shelling and aerial bombardment.

I suspect the mounds of North America were constructed on the same simple and obvious basis. The Hill Fort Kelts may simply have adapted the technique to the construction of their stockades.

The mounds and Naaca probably also used grid transfers to lay out the designs. Erich (there's a sucker born every minute) von Daniken attempts to beg the question of Nazca by saying that obviously they were laid out from above, so space aliens (as opposed to illegal aliens) must have been flying above the plain to direct the work. But how the hell would you communicate with the people on the ground and direct their activities? You couldn't do that with the technology we possess. One of the biggest wastes of tax payer money was when a group of academic jokers got an NSF grant to go to Peru to "prove" that hot air balloons were possible with the materials available. Fer Chrissake, has no one heard of a grid transfer ? ! ? ! ?

You take the original image, and impose a grid on it.



Then you make a grid of the same proportions but much larger dimensions and copy the image into it.



I suspect that was what was done at Nazca. I also suspect that that was how Serpent Mound in Ohio was laid out.





Our ancestors were just as intelligent was we are, they were just slightly more ignernt.

This is an interesting point which more people should be aware of. The same brain capacity which today produces Astrophysicists, Grand-Master Chess players and World-Class Composers, existed in the heads of our ancestors crawling around through the fields with their spears. Those same people undoubtedly sat around the fire at night and wondered about the stars. They didn't have our knowledge, but they did have our intelligence. I would really love to know what they thought of the world. It's a shame that detailed written language didn't survive from that earliest of times.

I always find the mental image of Astrophysicists crawling around in the tall grass to be very entertaining.

the med was filled with water well before hominims were a gleam in god's eye

Theres really nothing "New" because most all technologies are collaborative and derivative. Even atomic theory was developed by several concepts being meld through time.

The thing that sorta annoys me in this thread is the tagging of the thread with "geochemostry or geophysics". Theres no more geochem or geophysics in his thread than there is LIGHTNING in a lightning bug.

With like, glasses held together with tape?

There is some very exciting new work being done in paleo-anthropology in reinterpreting previous archaeological finds. Because of the middle east prejudice, it was always assumed that Europeans thousands of years ago were illiterate and rather dull-witted. It was assumed, for example, that they learned metallurgy from Sumerian traders (that the Sumerians traded into the Balkans is something for which there is a written record). It was also assumed that the symbols they made were just imitative of Sumerian cuneiform, and were not actual written languages. But Bulgarian archaeologists have been insisting for decades that evidence for copper mining and smelting, and tin mining and smelting and bronze smelting found on the eastern slopes of the Balkans dates to a time well before metallurgy in the middle east. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, western investigators have been able to go in and look at the evidence, and most of them are convinced. (Older academics with a published "turf" to protect make up the bulk of the remaining skeptics.)

This is not to say that the Sumerians got metallurgy from their trading partners in the Balkans--nobody could answer that. But it does throw out the previous assumption that Europeans got their metallurgy from the Sumerians. On the basis of that upheaval to previously held notions, younger investigators have been looking at a whole range of previous assumptions. One that really inerests me is the question of whether or not Europeans of the Upper Paleolithic and the Copper and Bronze ages actually were illiterate. There are systems of symbols, dozens of symbols, which are ubiquitous in Europe, which many researchers now think may well have been a coherent system of writing--in fact, there are at least two major systems, one using markings, and the other accumulations and groupings os small clay, bone or wooden markers, like the chips used in casinos. The current sense of their use was as markers in an inventory/accounting system.

On the islands of Malta and Gozo there are huge megalithic structures, and recent topographical studies show that the two were one island 20,000 years ago, and may have been connected to Africa and the Italian mainland. Remains of pygmy elephants and other African species have been found there, as well as remains of European animals that had not previously been thought to be native to Malta. Their culture was flourishing long before others in the middle east arose. This megalithic temple:



. . . on the island of Gozo is the oldest, surviving, free-standing megalithic structure in the world. It dates to more than 5500 ybp. The culture which built the temples seems to have disappeared for no reason which is obvious, as did those which preceded it. Mankind arrived at least as early as 20,000 ybp, and are considered to have been of Iberian origin (genetic studies? i'm not clear on why people think that). Some modern researchers say that markings found there may be related to the symbol systems used in Upper Paleolithic Europe--and the bolder ones say it was coherent writing. Some go so far as to relate the un-deciphered Linear A of Crete to the UP symbols from Europe, and speculate that they may have reached Crete from Malta/Gozo. I can't speak to the reliability of the claim. Linear B has been deciphered and is the oldest form of written Greek (about 3500 ybp). But attempts to decipher Linear A based on Linear B produce gibberish. It seems clear that Linear A is written in a different language. Linear B predates any written Greek on the mainland by several centuries.

The most extravagant claim is that Linear A and the earliest writing in Egypt (which is not necessarily hieroglyphic--heated controversy rages bout that, though) are direct descendants of the UP European symbols systems. The most convincing reason to reject the cultural diffusion hypothesis (once alleged to have been a scientific theory) is precisely that our ancestors for more than 100,000 years were uniformly as intelligent as we are, so it is silly to suggest that they couldn't come up with metallurgy or writing on their own, and had to wait for the cousins of Abraham to come along and enlighten the poor, benighted souls. We can read Linear B because it's in an early form of Greek. We can read Sumerian because of a sound "chain of custody" from their writing to later forms of writing known to the Greeks. We only were able to read hieroglyphs and hieratic script of Egypt because of the Rosetta Stone. The earliest markings found in Egypt were at Siwa, and some claim they are not related to hieroglyphs or hieratic (another hotly debated claim). There are those who suggest they are related to the UP European symbol system (this usually leads to fist fights).

But there is no Rosetta Stone for the UP European symbols, so we likely will never know with any certainty whether our ancestors there were truly literate.

Which is the basic thought process behind Cities Of The Red Night by William Burroughs. If archaeology only goes back 10,000 years, should we assume we spent 90,000 years living in caves.

think geographically too. In much of that period, the Northern Hemisphere was covered by Ice to Lat 35 and another 5 degrees was permafrost tundra, so the traipsiing around was limited in a relatively narrow stretch of latitudes from Africa to Asia.
Africa has not been looked at in a detailed fashion because the Eurocentric mind has "assumed' that darker South Africa had no civilizations worth discussing, it was only a petri dish to spawn future Indo-europeans.

Just as our US archeologists and geomorphologists are being drug screaming to a realization that the Folsom culture WAS NOT the earliest.

Hi everyone,

Sorry that it took me so long to reply. I'm working hard these days and I don't have much spare time. Farmerman, thank you for your concern about my lecture. The lecture was very successful, just like my previous lecture in IAI (Israel Aeronautic Industries), in which I presented the physics of the Biblical flood. You may find it hard to believe, but there actually ARE physicists, geologists and space engineers that take my theory seriously. I'm not a “science fiction guy”. Nevertheless, I appreciate the criticism in this forum as long as the discussion remains scientific.


LIST OF EVIDENCE
**********************

1) EARTH DOES CONTAIN ENOUGH WATER TO SUPPLY THE BIBLICAL FLOOD.

To Sentana: I explicitly wrote that the water of the flood is DISSOLVED in Earth's mantle and core. You wrote that there isn't enough groundwater to supply the Biblical flood and hence my evidence in this matter is not an evidence. By doing so you just made it easier for me to prove that you did not bother to actually read the evidence! Here is a quote from the first paragraph of chapter 8 in my book:

“As aforesaid, the quantity of the groundwater is negligible in comparison to that of the oceans and it certainly cannot satisfy the Biblical flood. Therefore, in order to find the waters of the flood we must go further and deeper beyond Earth's crust. We must reexamine the geological knowledge regarding our planet's interior.”

And here is a quote from the last paragraph of the same chapter:

“We concluded with a great deal of certainty, that Earth does contain quantities of water, which can easily satisfy the necessary quantities for the Biblical flood. These water quantities are present in the mantle and maybe even in the core. We have understood that the water does not fill oceans in Earth's interior, but is DISSOLVED in the mantle's and core's rocks and magma.”

These claims are supported with credible scientific references from recent years. Just read chapter 8 of my book and its references before you try to claim again that there is no evidence...

To Farmerman, most of the water in the mantle and core is indeed connate or simply dissolved, but it can be released when the rocks are heated. Once again, read chapters 8-11 in my book to understand the mechanism.

2) THE 4.2 KILO YEAR EVENT: 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.

To Sentana and Farmerman: I know very well that the 4.2 kilo year event is recognized as a major arid event. Nevertheless, it may mark the Biblical flood. I will repeat once again what I wrote in page 2 of this discussion:

“This event is one of the most extreme in the holocene, it is very abrupt in its nature. It is well associated today with the collapse of all near eastern civilizations as well as Indian and Chinese civilizations. In addition I personally checked the archeological records in South America and Europe and found that the archeological marks of this events are global. There is evidence that all cultures simultaneously collapsed at any excavation that provided high resolution radiometric dating. The articles usually emphasis this event as a global aridification event. Its cause is not clear yet. Amazingly, it perfectly fits the dating of the Biblical flood (as calculated directly from the Bible).

I claim that the aridification is merely the side effect of the flood. The flood damaged terrestrial vegetation. The ground remained relatively barren for a while. There weren't enough plants to hold the ground. That is why dust began to accumulate everywhere worldwide and we can see the signs of this dust spike globally. It took centuries for the climate to rebalance.

The direct signs of the flood are hidden within the layers marking the beginning of this event and they include volcanic ash, riverine flood deposits, turbulence in deep water samples, destruction of coral reefs, geo-archeological findings that relate an integrated rain and volcanic event to the collapse of the society and the very beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event and there is more... The geologists are still confused and you will find all kind of hypothesis regarding this event. The fact that the accuracy of carbon dating for this era cannot supply a resolution better than a whole century makes it difficult to correlate the evidence properly. In addition many archeologist refuse to accept the carbon dating and insists in holding on to their old interpretation of the history. This only magnifies the confusion.

The whole event which is undoubtedly extreme (even without regarding it as the Biblical flood) was totally unknown 20 years ago! That should teach us something about our geological ability to determine short and abrupt climate events. 20 years ago, geologists knew nothing about what is now considered as the most extreme climate event in human history. What may we find out throughout the next 20 years?”


3) THE 4.2 KILO YEAR EVENT IS ALREADY CONSIDERED AS THE CAUSE FOR THE COLLAPSE OF MANY CIVILIAZTIONS: the Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, the old kingdom in Egypt, the Harrapan civilization in India and the neolithic culture of China.

To Sentana: I am familiar with the theory that relates the collapse of the Akkadian empire to an invasion of a barbaric nation named “Gutians”. This does not contradict the claim that the Akkadian Empire collapsed due to climate change. Actually, the common opinion today is that climate change weekend the Empire and that is why the Gutians managed to invade. I personally conducted an extensive research in this important issue. Amazingly, I discovered that there is no archeological evidence that the Gutians actually existed!! I checked dozens of articles describing the relevant layers (between the Akkadian empire and Ur III) all over Mesopotamia and found absolutely no evidence for the Gutians! The Historians assumed their existence based on scriptures that were written 500-1000 years later in Babylon and Assyria. These ancient royal writers had a political interest to rewrite history in a manner that would serve their king best. It will take a great volume to explain why they did so (too much for this reply). Personally, I trust the archeological findings. None of them show evidence for the Gutian. All of them show evidence for depopulation or abandonment at that exact stage.

4. EVIDENCE THAT THE 4.2 KILO YEAR EVENT BEGAN WITH A SHORT VOLCANIC AND WET PHASE: 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 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. In my previous post I added the evidence from Tell Bnat that shows that the 4.2 kilo year event began with massive Euphrates flooding. It should be clear by now that at least in Mesopotamia the beginning of the 4.2 kilo year event was abrupt, volcanic and very wet.

OTHER ISSUES:
******************

MUD BRICKS: To Sentana, you claim that no mud brick construction can be submerged and survive? Show me evidence for your claim. The mud brick buildings that you presented on page 4 of this discussion were clearly buried in the ground before the archeologist exposed them. Do you really claim that even buried mud brick buildings must also disintegrate if their environment is submerged? Prove it... Yes, it is your job to prove it and not mine. It is your claim...

COSMIC CLOUD: To Rosborne979, I have presented my cosmic cloud theory to many physicists, some of them professors. The theory does indeed deal with a theoretical phenomena that was not yet researched, but all of the physicists found my theory plausible. Are YOU an astrophysicist? If so, can YOU prove my theory to be theoretically wrong? Yes, it is your job to prove it and not mine. It is your claim...

AGE OF DEEP WATER BASINS: To Farmerman, deep water basins should not necessarily mix in the conditions of the flood. If you are speaking about groundwater, when the ground is soaked with water and submerged, deep underground water will float upwards only if it is lighter than the flood water. That depends on the relations between their salinity. If the ground water can't rise then the flood water can't seep down. And even if it can seep down the rate in which the water reservoirs should actually change its composition depends on the porosity of the ground and rocks above it. If you are relating to water above the surface, it may still remain separated from the flood water if its salinity is greater. Strong turbulence is indeed expected, but not everywhere. It is expected in the areas where water was released from the mantle (mainly along the rifts) and in area where water was pushed against the land.

GENERAL REMARKS: I have spent a couple of hours writing this reply. The English is not easy for me. Based on the responds to my previous replies I get the feeling that most of you do not make the minimal effort to actually read the evidence that I supply before you write whatever you write while using inappropriate street language (for example words beginning with “ball...”). Any intelligent reader will understand that this indicates weakness, an inability to deal with my claims in an appropriate scientific level. So far, I have supplied many pieces of specific evidence with detailed scientific reference. Those who are trying to disregard my theory have supplied none. At the most they have supplied only general statement. Scientific evidence must have scientific reference or provide some new data or logic. I would be glad to supply more pieces of evidence of my own if there will really be a demand. I don't feel that there is any demand right now.

Finally: Just saying that I have no evidence does not make the evidence disappear. Beware, there is a great resemblance between a religious fanatic to an atheist fanatic. Both of them cover their eyes and plug their ears when evidence seems to contradict their beliefs. Let us all remain open-minded and not fanatic...

My next reply may take some time (hopefully next week) but I will check in in the following days to see if there are any replies to this post.

Roi Lotan Glazer
The Physics of The Biblical Flood
(Google it...)

As usual, you present ZERO evidence. All you do is make ipse dixit claims for which you provide no substantiation. A perfect example is your silly remarks about the extent of vegetation. That's just yet another unsubstantiated claim on your part, it's not evidence at all. The Akkadian Empire collapsed within a few years of the death of Sargon, even though the drought conditions were already present. Certainly climactic conditions were a major contributing factor, but one cannot ignore the failure of leadership.

As always, you drag the discussion off into irrelevant side channels. It's not for me to prove that mud bricks could not survive prolonged immersion. It's up to you to prove that any such immersion took place. You have consistently failed to do so. I have no expectation that this will change in the future, especially in light of the drivel you've just posted. Quoting your own silly book is the very nadir of responses to a call for evidence.

No evidence? No reason to buy your dog and pony show.

There certainly are evidences of all of the above geological processes, the only problem with your using it as "evidence" is that they are NOT united in time or space. Where on earth do you see a continuous series of sheets of any of the above processes that show a unique lyer of water deposition. (especially in the time period you are comcerned with)

Also, I can say without danger of being contradicted by other geologists. There are no deposits of "dewatered" (anhydrous) minerals that underlie deposits from the mid Holocene. It takes 300 degrees C to remove water of crystallization in feldspathic minerals and 500 degrees C to totally transform hydrated minerals into anhydrous forms. Theres no continupus dehydration event that is visible in recent stratigraphy. You are making that stuff up from out of the air. Why do you continue asserting that this is true when a first year min student could destroy your assertion.

If youve got geologists buying your geology story, Id like to meet em.


Are you aware of the Ghyben Herzberg priniple or the Hubbert and Rubey Hydrodynamic Principle?
Also, ground water will stay against the pull of gravity as a function of the hydraulic conductivity, the dynamic viscosity of the fluid, and gravity constant. Wouldnt water being driven upward (assuming your hypothesis of magamatic water becoming available for some unknown reason0 reach a temperature that would be above its boiling point at sea level?

The thermo triple point of hydrothermal fluids would result in the deposition of certain minerals at the same time that your water is being freed (to boil away).I think we should see, if you are anywhere near even close to being right,a whole lot more pegmatite deposits all over the earth(quartz is the mineral that deposits at the lowest temperature of fluid). We should see the earth crawling in it, and we do not.

At the tip of New Jersey (just NW of Cape May) there are flood deposits of alluvial sands AND GRAVELS covering A pine forest that once lived there. This flood deposit is about 2000 year old and was dated at about 250BC(C14 of the tree stumps). Its a remnant of a catastrophic flood that coursed in teh ancient Delaware River and Bay. The extent of this flood is well documented and the upland areas (areas that were left dry) extended in a parallel line to about 70 mileswest Westernbanks of the Delaware River

My advice is that you had better think your thesis out a whole lot better before you pop it out there for public scrutiny

It most definitely is NOT my job to disprove your conjecture. There are thousands of whacked out theories out there. It would take endless lifetimes to prove them all wrong, and at the moment yours is just as unsupported as any of the others.

You continue to speculate and conjecture while providing no evidence whatsoever. I don't know who you've been presenting your ideas to but I would be amazed if you could get a legitimate astrophysicist to take you seriously.

Perhaps you could provide us with some actual names and contact information for these people you claim to have impressed so that we can contact them directly to hear what they have to say.

I still say hes a writer of fiction who has a theory for a story and is fishing for all sorts of responses to the negative so he can bolster his story line.

Sort of a series of "left behind" story lines.

Or maybe "left high and dry" stories . . . i think he's just clinging to his goofy hypothesis, and hoping to use interactions such as these to "prefect" his presentation. Of course his problem is that with no evidence at all, he's not getting anywhere with his claims, so i can't see that it's doing him any good. Finally, pathetically, he's keeping his name before the public--theoretically. Now mean of those monitors to remove his links!

the center of his story is that the Biblical Flood was accurate, implying, of course, Biblical Inerrancy.

Im not holding out for anything compelling, or any real evidence at all.
He dooesnt realize that evidence is physically repeatable and discoveries of evidence would be out there for anyone to see. Its sorta like advanced statistics, If you need the statistics to "explain" what just occured, then maybe truth isnt what one is looking for

I think he's a true believer who thinks that scientific jargon can replace the scientific method (and facts).

Well, in a sense, theology is just a game of jargon, so maybe he thinks scientific jargon is science. He certainly thinks anecdote is the same a history.

We've been waiting for evidence since the beginning of the thread and not a shred has been presented yet. Which isn't surprising since we all know that there isn't any evidence of a worldwide flood because the whole idea is just a preposterous myth.

That's an interesting point because so many of the theists we see (who are struggling so hard to appear scientific), exhibit the same tendency to confuse jargon for substance.

They don't seem to respect the scientific method itself, instead just focusing on the style of terminology. And as you say, this tendency toward presentation over substance is very much a part of theological communication.

All right. So we've got water dissolved in the earth all the way down to the core, and we need most of it to have a worldwide flood. And we get it out by heat. How do we do that and heat it enough to get it out WITHOUT COOKING EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY ON THE EARTH AND LEAVING THEM EXTREMELY WELL-DONE, NOT TO SAY CHARBROILED?

A mechanism, please, preferably something that actually happened.

And then, when the flood is done, how do we get all that water back into the earth that is allegedly there now, including all the way thousands of miles deep into the core? Which presumably got there in the first place over several billion years.

Another physically possible mechanism, please.