Re: Redrawing Lines Without Viagra

Dick Fischer (
Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:01:32 -0400

Hi Glenn, you wrote:

>You appear to be using uncertainty as a means of granting you freedom to
>ignore any contradictory evidence for your flood scenario.

Now wait a minute. I live near Washington, DC, the spin capitol of
the world, not in Texas. I'm supposed to use techniques like this,
not you :>). Contradictory evidence? What evidence is there that a
flood didn't happen in Southern Mesopotamia around 3000 BC?

>You need to connect A specific rainfall with A specific Flood
>event. Without that connection, you can't be sure that there was a
>Mesopotamian flood at the time you say.

I can say with 95+ per cent certainty that the flood stories are
related. The volcanic action in the same relative time frame could
have caused the flood. But I wouldn't assign any greater certainty
than, say, 20-30 per cent. But I submit that all relevant data is
additive. O J's bloody glove wasn't but one piece of evidence in
the civil trial that convicted him. But what if it could be proved
that it had been planted evidence? It wouldn't explain away the
rest of the mountain of evidence that had nothing to do specifically
with a bloody glove. All the extra-biblical flood stories relate to
Southern Mesopotamia. The biblical flood story correlates highly
with the other flood stories. Therefore, it appears quite likely
the Genesis flood was in Southern Mesopotamia. No rocket science

Now we have the evidence of volcanic activity around that time frame.
Whatever percentage of likelihood we assign that, even if it is only
one per cent, adds to the overall likelihood that the Genesis flood
is the same flood in the Assyrian, Accadian, Sumerian, and Babylonian

>>How often can you guarantee that a well will
>>hit paydirt and be profitable?

>Often enough to drive the price of a barrel down from over $20 dollars to
>under $11. The probabilities of drilling a productive well are not
>analogical to the probability of demonstrating scientific connections
>between events.

You recommend a particular drill site using what? Is it not data and
evidence that the rock formations are similar enough to other successful
drill sites that there is a likelihood of success.

What other candidate sites and time frames for a flood have the abundance
of data that compares even marginally with what I have given you. And
by no means did I include in these email messages all the data presented
in the book. Plus, the book doesn't list all the data I dug out of
the Library of Congress from two years of digging.

>In the case of the Mesopotamian flood, I should be able to find information
>from sediments left by the flood. This is what is missing.

The clay layers found in the central cities were analyzed for content.
For one thing, there were no salt water organisms indicating that it
was river flooding entirely. No oceanic tidal waves.

>What I am trying to point out is that most widely accepted Christian
>apologetical scenarios are inconsistent with the observational data, and

>internally inconsistent with themselves.

No argument from me!!

>The Mesopotamian flood scenario should expect to find:

>1. a widespread sedimentary deposit of Holocene age.
>2. an interruption of civilization in Mesopotamia (most cities were built
>along the river banks which would have been the deepest part of any flood
>and should have been wiped out)
>3. Consistency with the laws of physics. One can not have the water flow
>downhill and the ark go uphill.
>4. consistency with the Biblical description;
>a. It needs to last a year (the ark would go into the Indian ocean in a week)
>b. the ark must somehow land uphill from where it was picked up
>c. the inability of the ark occupants to see land (something that would not
>be fulfilled given the Zagros mountains to the west.)

In fairness, these are demands that you require that it would take to
convince you. But I submit you are not convincible. You have a stated
position that you are going to defend. YEC's defend a 6,000 year-old earth.
TE's and PC's all defend their turf.

Expanded genealogies are necessary to your method of apology. So you make
a case for lost generations. But you neglect to consider what would be the
likelihood that enough generations are missing to put 5 million years
between Noah and Abraham. Think of all the factors that would have to be
involved for such to be the case. I can think of some real heavy road
blocks right off the top of my head.

>> How much data do you have outside of your Bible that there was a


>What we have is a consistency of physical and historical
>data with the resurrection. Of course we will never be able to prove the
>resurrection itself, but the resurrection is consistent with the data

And I would suggest to you that a flood at 5,000 years ago in the area of
Southern Mesopotamia fits the same criteria.

>>> Exactly how does methane play into a Mesopotamian flood?????
>>Shows a general climatological change at an identifiable point in time.
>>What caused the reversal? What were the effects on the earth at that
>The Mesopotamina flood caused the change?

No, the rapid change in climate caused flooding in regions that included

>The Persian Gulf deltas have prograded at the rate of more than 1 mile
>every 70 years. In 696 BC the shore line was 120 miles further northwest
>than its present location. (John C. Munday, Jr., "Eden's Geography Erodes
>Flood Geology," Westminster Theological Journal, 58(1996), pp. 123-154,p.
>At this rate of progradation, the shoreline could have been another 180
>miles NW in 4800 BC.

The percentage of our population over 65 is increasing every decade.
By the year 3000 will everyone be over 65?

>While I doubt that the shoreline in 4800 BC was fully
>300 miles nw of its current position, it was probably just shy of that
>value. There would have been no southern Mesopotamia in 4800 BC!!! Thus it
>is not surprising that there would be no cities prior to 4800 BC.

An interesting theory, but no oceanic fossils have been found north
of Eridu, although Eridu itself was a fishing village located near
the shore of the Persian Gulf.

It took technology to bring people to that region. The soil was good,
but the land was so flat that floods covered wide swaths periodically.
Irrigation was evident at Jericho. They took the existing technology and
applied it to Mesopotamia. By digging canals and locating the cities
many miles from the Euphrates they could grow crops, and they considered
themselves far enough away from the river to avoid the floods. They did
avoid most of the floods that way, but there was one that inspired a new
strategy. Since they couldn't move many more miles away, the surviving
Sumerians started building mud brick platforms instead. The earliest
are dated at 3000 BC. Sound like a familiar time frame?

Dick Fischer, The Origins Solution -
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."