>Do you have a reference for his source of information about the 2030
>impacts? I find that hard to believe. In 1991 there were only 130 impact
>craters known on earth. (Richard A. F. Grieve, "Terrestrial Impact: the
>Record in the Rocks" Meteoritics 26(1991):175-194)
Here is his email address, check him out: email@example.com
>Secondly, what does a meteoritic impact in 2807 B.C. (assuming it actually
>exists) have to do with a flood in 3150 BC??????
I take all these dates with a grain of salt. I'm not sure it has
anything to do with it, or even if there was an impact. But that
date is only 93 years away from the archaeological date of 2900 BC
for the flood which I also take with a grain of salt.
>A comment about the data listed below. It is not good scientific procedure
>to simply list events which occur on or around the time of the flood you
>are advocating. To support your case, you really need to show a causal
>link between a Mesopotamian flood and the events you list below.
Picky, picky, picky.
>Both of the above could be due merely to a temporarily wetter climate. and
>5000 years before the present is about 150 years too late. 200 years ago
>the southern end of Lake Malawi was dry. Yet today it is filled.
>"Even faster rates of speciation were suggested by the finding
>that the southern end of Lake Malawi was arid only two centuries
>ago and is now inhabited by numerous endemic species and 'color
>morphs'. These are believed to have originated during the last
>200 years!"~Axel Meyer "Phylogenetic Relationships and
>Evolutionary Processes in East African Cichlid Fishes," Trends in
>Ecology and Evolution, 8:8(1993), p. 284
>I would suggest that unless you can tie the dating down closer than 150
>years, you can't claim the Dead Sea as evidence for your flood.
An event that happened 5,000 years ago, if we can date it within 150 years,
that's not too shabby in my estimation. Bible scholars can't decide on the
date of the Exodus within 150 years!
>>Greenland Dye 3 oxygen isotope ratio. Minimum value between 2000
>>and 8000 cal yrs BP occurs just before 5.0K yrs BP. Data from National
>>Snow and Ice Data Center. A large acid peak at 3150 BC is suggestive
>>of a volcanic event. Fisher et al, The Holocene 5, 1, 19, (1995).
>Yes there is a volcanic event at 3150 BC. That is clear from the Camp
>Century Ice Core and other cores. (see C. U. Hammer, et al, "Greenland Ice
>Sheet Evidence of Post-Glacial Volcanism and its climatiec Impact" Nature,
>1980, p. 231)
Hey, a point for the good guys!
>But so what? No one knows where that volcano was located. Can you point
>to volcanic ash deposits in the Mesopotamian basin to link it with your
>flood? I know of no ash evidence there at that time. That volcano could
>have been in Alaska, Indonesia, or even the Western US (My suspicion is
>that it was in the Pacific because that is the best place it could remain
>unidentified. But to conclude there is NO evidence connecting this
>volcanic event with Mesopotamia. All you are doing is listing things that
>occurred in a given time frame and expecting everyone to believe that there
>is a causal connection.
You asked for geological evidence. I gave you geological evidence and
qualified it by saying only that it MAY be germane. By all means test
the data. I'm not expecting you to believe there is a causal connection.
>I was born in April 1950. North Korea invaded South Korea in June 1950. Am
>I responsible for the Korean war?
Sorry, I need more data.
>Considering that Mesopotamia is nowhere near Greenland or Antarctica, the
>two sites of ice coring, how exactly do you connect this with the
I don't care if there is a connection or not. We had volcanic action.
It was registered in many different places, and we had a flood in the same
general time frame. I have no idea if there is a connection.
>This was the first issue of Nature I got after I started getting it. I see
>nothing unusual about the 5000 year BP data in these cores. What are you
>suggesting is the evidence connecting Santa Barbara to Mesopotamia? And by
>the way N. pachyderma is NOT a snail. It is a foraminifera which is a tiny
>marine animals which paleontologists in the oil industry use.
Of course. I knew that :>).
>>>Are you willing to say here and now that post flood Sumerians lived
>>>on average more than 100 years and gave birth to their children when the
>>>old geezers were 100 years of age?
>>No. The Sumerians are another culture altogether. They spoke an
>>unrelated language, and appeared to be racially distinct from the
>>Accadians, who came from Accad (Gen. 10:10), and spoke a language
>>precursor to Hebrew.
>Ok, are you willing to say that the Accadians were living past 100 years
>old between 7000 to 4000 BC? You avoided the question but didn't answer the
I didn't avoid the issue. I do not see any signs of long-lived Sumerians.
Read Genesis 5. What does it say? How old was Adam when he begat Seth?
How old was Noah when he begat three sons? Does Genesis not say 500?
You don't like the accuracy of the genealogies, and you don't trust the
ages of the patriarchs as recorded. Your quarrel is with Moses, not me.
>bonobos are very promiscuous.
I can't relate.
>>I don't think we have dug up any Accadians yet. Woolley found his
>>skeletons in Sumerian Ur. We do have a little historical data though.
>>Gilgamesh sought out Utnapishtim (Noah's parallel) because he was reputed
>>to be immortal and survived the flood. His name means "He who found long
>I find this extremely difficult to believe. Akkad was from 2350 BC to 2000
>BC. At this time we find numerous cemetaries everywhere. Cities, especially
>ones as big as Akkad require cemetaries for the disposal of the bodies. Do
>I need to search through the literature to find info on Akkadian bodies?
Glenn, if anybody could do it, you could.
Dick Fischer, The Origins Solution - http://www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."