Has anyone ever read The Epic of Gilgamesh? The flood described in that story is eerily similar to that of Noah. I heard that apparently that flood really happened and there really was a "Noah" and an "ark" and to this day it's remains are still sitting up utop Mt. Ararat in Turkey. The epic of Gilgamesh was written c.3000 B.C. i think. So is this a coincidence? When was the Noah story written? Has anyone actually done research on this?

There are myriad "investigations" of that topic.

The theory that makes the most sense to me is the one that claims an Armenian Christian sect built the "Ark" they've found on Mt. Ararat.

As far as a flood...no doubt. 40 days, 40 nights...much doubt...that's a lot of water. The "animals two by two", I'll let DarkMagneto take that one (he vents his spleen well on that topic). Did a loving God destroy everything out of "love"? If so, WHY? But that's a different topic.

Nox

There have been studies showing that earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in the Mediterranean caused massive tidal waves at the approximate time of the flood and other flood type stories. One probably happened during the rainy season and flooded the land. People thought the rain caused the flooding because they didn't know better, some dude lived on a boat and probably had some chickens, pigs, cows etc... that he used for food. There is the story of noah and his ark. The tidal waves causing floods is true, the rest is my speculation.

Yeah, I read Gilgamesh in my Religious Studies class. I don't have anything to add, because Nox and Sgt already said enough.

the epic of gilgamesh is like 5,000 years older than the account moses foretold.

the epic of gilgamesh speaks of a man on a journey who is told about the flood by an old man in the hills.

the epic of gilgamesh is considered sumerian mythology.

it is believed moses stole the story from the epic while perusing the libraries of alexendria, as he was adopted by the pharoahs daughter.

moses took the gilgamesh story where the animals are saved two by two and put a jewish spin on it where they are taken 7 of every clean and 2 of every unclean.

it is believed that most of the stories of the old testament are taken from other religions and given a hebrew spin to make it their own.

Not to mention everyone else has a flood legend too. Thats because there was a flood that nearly destroyed mankind...

Much of what I've seen points to receding glaciers causing the flooding around that time (especially in places such as Basilea and the Medeterranean), although tidal waves and other factors may have had an affect upon it.

I've read the Epic of Gilgamesh, and it was a great story, but I don't really think it has any signifigance.

I read the Epic of Gelgamesh, but it wasn't as perfect as the story of Noah


It isn't difficult anyway to write a story about some flood and a youngster who made an ark to survive it

It's a mere coincidence... the same way u can write a story, and then later know that someone wrote the same story years ago


Moses didn't take nothing from old religions
He had his teachings from God himself

But yes, what u said about remainings of the ark and the signs that show that there was a great flood thousands of years ago is VERY TRUE

LoL. No, he didnt borrow it from the tale that had existed and explained an actual flood in nearly every culture, he got the idea from God.

quote:

---

Originally posted by I NEED MUSHAF RESH!?:
It isn't difficult anyway to write a story about some flood and a youngster who made an ark to survive it

---

Youngster...Noah...wives...family...sons.

*Nox forgives I NEED because English isn't his first language*

Nox

Something for thought... Their is now evidence that shows about 8,000+ years ago their was a flood. Also it's been suggested that the sphinx was eroded mostly by water and is older than what some people think, about 8,000+. Don't remember the sources, sorry.

[This message has been edited by CuriousMonky (edited 09-21-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CuriousMonky:
Something for thought... Their is now evidence that shows about 8,000+ years ago their was a flood. Also it's been suggested that the sphinx was eroded mostly by water and is older than what some people think, about 8,000+.

---

Interesting, there is a dialectic regarding the book of Genesis, is it literal or not. My inclination is non-literal, however the second verse says: "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of ELOHIYM moved upon the face of the waters."

The words 'moved upon the face of the waters' implies something existed, a body of water. Without 'form' and 'void' could be applied to a flooded planet, and after Noahs flood God promises never to flood the earth 'again'.

The Mayans believed this is the latest in a series of creations on this planet, each ended in a catastrophe, but after - life revived; and so perhaps, this age will also end, to be superseded by another, and another, and another ........

Nope. The same Mayans said this is the Last Sun, and this will be the last time mankind dies.

The flooding others speak of is supposed to have occured 12,000 years ago, which is when the Ice Age ended. The water-erosion on the Sphinx is from rain, which only fell in that region around the same time.
At the same time 12,000 years ago, Siberia underwent a massive cataclysmic change that is has not recovered from.

The Aryans of Iran said their homeland, consistent with Hypoborea, went from a paradise with all forms of life and 4 seasons to a desolate wasteland of ice and no life with 10 months of winter (Siberia). Surveys of Siberia show that just before the Ice Age ended, massive amounts of plant and animal life existed in Siberia that was suddenly killed, some animals frozen in place and preserved until today. Rhinos, lions, mammoths, sabertooth tigers, horses, and people alike were swept clean from the region almost overnight in the same era that similar cataclysmic movements devastated continents.

Something big and bad happens every 12,000 years or so. Mayans calculated them forward and back, calling the eras between cataclysms different Suns, and each era of cataclysm was the death of that sun. Next ones supposed to begin in 2012.

An experiment was recently done in the Black Sea showing that there is an underwater "river" in which current near the bottom is going out towards the Mediterranean, while the current near the surface flows into the Black Sea area. Which scientists say, shows that the Mediterranean spilled into the once dry Black Sea basin at an incredible rate sometime around Noah's Flood.

The preserved Wooly Mammoths found on occasion in Siberia are found with undigested fruits and nuts, hinting at a sudden catastrophe.

Some scientists speculate that the Ice Age ended when a comet bigger then the meteor that killed off the Dinosaurs hit the earth with such speed that it shifted entire continents to their present day positions.

I like the idea that every 12,000 years, planets, stars, higher cosmic forces, the earths own gravitional force and spin, and the weight of the ice caps makes the surface just spin real bad.

I had a dream last night that happened actually, it was kinda cool. I was on a river watching people build some Egyptian looking structure on a moonless night, then there were tremors and the surface spun so much, the moon rose and ascended to its zenith in the sky in about 30 seconds, then fell again. Then there were riots and stuff and the dream was just a big fight...

The pyrimids are aligned to the stars at more then 8,000 years before scientists believe they were built

Defiant, do you know where I can get more info on the Mayans and such, especially the thing about this being the last world? The only stuff I can find is Newagey.

12000 years seems sort of strange, too. Jurgen Spanuth, who seems pretty credible, thought the destruction of Atlantis took place around the close of the thirteenth century before the common era. Maybe there are lesser cycles of catastrophe.

And were you talking about the polar shift theory?

--------------------------------------------
Defiant, do you know where I can get more info on the Mayans and such, especially the thing about this being the last world? The only stuff I can find is Newagey
--------------------------------------------
You should check out Jose Arguelles's books, The Mayan Factor, Earth Ascending, and his new book, Time and the Technosphere.
He's totally scholarly about his theories, and has degrees in history, english, and art.
It's not new age, but it's all about the new paradigm.

Hapgood-Fingerprints of the Gods. And you must mean 13 millennia before Christ, before 1300 BC puts atlantis on the map at the same time as Phoenicians.

The death of the suns is relative to the procession of the Equinoxes we discussed earlier in August. Every 2012 years or so, the era of the equinox shifts into a new Zodiac sign, and the people of the world are affected by that on one level or another.

This age, begun during the lifetime of Christ, is the Piscean age. Jesus was probably a Pisces and his earliest symbol, recognizable today, was a Fish. The age that preceded that was Aries, and the god kings of the pantheons wore ram horns, or had the head of a ram, as Baal. Im pretty sure that age began around the time of Alexander the Great. Before the age of Aries was the Age of Taurus, and this coincides with the height of Bull worshipping civilizations like Minoan Crete and Spanish cities still being unearthed.

Anyway, there are 12 cycles in the Zodiac for the equinox to occur on, and every 2000 years or so, it shifts so the sun rises on another sign. The 12,000 year thing is half the cycle, which is for whatever reason a significant milestone in the geologic history of the earth.

Pyramids align with stars as of 10,540 BC or so, the same date as the Sphinx faces the first equinox's sun to rise in the Leo sign, 10,000 BC. Ive ben told there is also that Angkor Wat maybe, some Injun kinda city, has a temple that aligns with the constellation Draco, circa 10,540 BC.


I like Hapgood's theory. 12,000 years ago there was a civilization in many ways superior to our own. They knew the world was coming to an end and knew it would nearly destroy everything their civilization had accomplished and learned, so they encoded their knowledge in the form of mathematics, the one language guaranteed to survive and be retranslated, and plopped it all over the earth in forms of monuments designed to last forever, and in myths that people could easily remember and pass on.

Significant numbers in myths from all over the world regularly have significance in regards to procession of the equinoxes. The number of warriors in Valhalla, for example, are consistent with some kinda equinox number (I forget the exact significance, its almost 5am and I havent read it in a month) But that kinda shit pops up all over in myths, as though it was intentionally inserted to deliver coded messages to whomever was wise enough to look.

The Great Pyramid, for example, has a height relative to the diameter of the temple complex it sits on that equates to 2 Pi, and in other monuments in Egypt and mesoAmerica, pi. The area of the pyramid's sides is consistent with a scale model of the Earth's northern hemisphere, if plotted on a flat map using lattitude and longitude.

Theres all kindsa shit like that all over the ancient world, but 12000 years ago it was just erased and we had to start over I guess. The mayans say next time is the last and there will be no new start, but i hope thats not true, because Id love to live through the end of one age and the dawn of a new. Damn that would rule.

Many thanks for the further information. Actually I did mean 1300-1200 BC, but I think that what I was thinking about wasn't relevant. According to that theory, though, the Phoenicians were descendants of the Atlanteans, hence their hostility towards Egypt and such.

1300 BC is 5000 years after some of the earlier, less mysterios civilizations of the middle east.

Has anyone actualy read the story of Noah in the Bible? I think an interesting an offten overlooked factabout the animals on the ark is that it wasn't 2 of every animal, it was 9 sets of 2 of many of the animals. And as for the animals killing eachother it says that God shut the mouths of the animals meaning he kept them under controll.

It says that he brought aboard multiple animals that were considered "clean" which I assume they used for food purposes.

The Ark is insane and you would have to be so too if you actually believed it after all things considered. Look how diversified the animal kingdom is. He would have had to bring aboard pairs of each and every animal and keep them all fed. The dimensions of the Ark given in the Bible are nowhere near the size that would be needed to support that capacity. They didn't have todays materials or technology, so after the Ark would go over the first wave, the weight of the boat would have split it right down the center.

I laugh when I see these pictures people draw of Noah's ark and they have predators and their respective prey lying down submissively right next to each other with no conflict whatsoever. Then you also have the problem of food. The preservation techniques back then for food were virtually non-existent. The only thing they did was packed meat in salt to make it last a bit longer. So he has to ration out plant food sources for the herbivores and other animals of the clean variety that he brought aboard for the carnivores.

The plant life food would not last the duration of the flood without going bad. Then you also have the problem of animal repopulation and harvests. The entire world was flooded, all food sources are gone, Noah has to grow massive crops after the event and have enough food to settle everything over until harvest. Then you also have animal population problem. There are way too many predator types to keep feeding on a continual basis until the animal population could repopulate itself. It's logically impossible. There is no way he could have pulled it off. We could reproduce the same conditions to this day even with some use of modern technology and building materials and still not be able to do it.

[This message has been edited by Dark_Magneto (edited 09-24-2002).]

I always figured Noah only saved animals man used regularly, domesticated ones and pets. A few sheep, a few cows, a few goats, some cats and dogs, some birds, and some camels. The other Noahs in other cultures often take animals, and I would think thats what they did as well.

First of all he didn't have to take groups of every single living creature on the arc. Evolution is real, not the way most of you people belive but it happens. It's more adaptation, and such. He only needed to bring a few species. Say one or maybe 2 breeds of com, dog, bird, ect. Since the flood they have "evolved" into many species, and types. There is a theory that not all the animals not on the arc were killed in the flood. It's possible that some lived, by reaching the highest ponts of ground, I'm not sure if I buy it but it's possible.
Oh and you can't see all the animal living peacefully together, well ok that is the least of the possible problems. So God is able to get the arc made, call all the animals to it, close the door and flood the world, if that's possible I hardly think he'd have a problem controlling a few animals!!

I almost forgot to menchin the food situation. Grains were able to be stored for longer then neccisary, so that's what they may have eaten. After all the other stuff was managed, I'm sure that God was also able to cause the animals to eat what ever he wanted to. Besides origianly no one was meant to eat, when the world was perfect, it wan't untill the fall of man that meat began being consumed. Secondly the flood would have killed the plants, but not every seed on earth, plants would have begun go grow again as soon as the waters went doen. If you notive in the end of the story Noah sends out a dove, and it v=brings back an olive branch. The world wasn't just a huge muddy wasteland after the flood. Think about it how many places in the us flood every year, and plants do grow back quickly. It's all just common sense!

And about the size weight problem, there are lots of theorys on that as well. They may not have been techhnical genuise but they weren't all idiots. If you want to argue a topic, then try to get all your facts straight first, and do your reserch before be take something on as a belife, disagree with it. You might just learn something!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by wifemommyandwoman:
First of all he didn't have to take groups of every single living creature on the arc.

---

If any land animal was to live, he would have to have it on the ark. You also have the problem of saltwater and freshwater getting mixed together. That would have caused the salt/fresh specific aquatic life to die off.

quote:

---

Evolution is real, not the way most of you people belive but it happens. It's more adaptation, and such.

---

Adaptation doesn't bring about entirely new species.

quote:

---

He only needed to bring a few species. Say one or maybe 2 breeds of com, dog, bird, ect. Since the flood they have "evolved" into many species, and types.

---

For evolution to occur on that scale, it would take alot longer than 10,000 years to accomplish.

quote:

---

There is a theory that not all the animals not on the arc were killed in the flood. It's possible that some lived, by reaching the highest ponts of ground, I'm not sure if I buy it but it's possible.

---

I don't. Animals have specific eating habits that have to be maintained. Also Noah would have to accomodate exotic animals specific eating habits, like the Koalas eucalyptis leaves and the Pandas bamboo amongst several hundred other non-preservable food types.

quote:

---

Oh and you can't see all the animal living peacefully together, well ok that is the least of the possible problems. So God is able to get the arc made, call all the animals to it, close the door and flood the world, if that's possible I hardly think he'd have a problem controlling a few animals!!

---

Noah built the ark and yes, I think he would have a problem with the food chain occurring within the ark. That's one of the main reasons why I don't think it ever happened to begin with.

quote:

---

I almost forgot to menchin the food situation. Grains were able to be stored for longer then neccisary, so that's what they may have eaten. After all the other stuff was managed, I'm sure that God was also able to cause the animals to eat what ever he wanted to.

---

Again, certain animals have specific eating habits. Theres no way he could have got all the animals aboard the Ark eating grain. Especially the carniviores. What are they going to eat? Every animal they consume takes away from the population. Animal birth takes several months and these guys have to eat on a regular basis. The rate of consumption would exceed the population expansion in a matter of months and you would be having alot of extinct species after everyone got off the ship.

quote:

---

Besides origianly no one was meant to eat, when the world was perfect, it wan't untill the fall of man that meat began being consumed.

---

Ah yes, the "Garden of Eden" crap. The fall was bullshit. He damns all of mankind...all of it...based on the actions of 2 people. He designs Adam and Eve with curiosity, and then he proceeds to damn them and everyone else that has yet to be born, so they don't even get a choice in the manner and are fallen by default, for their actions of 2 people eating a simple piece of fucking fruit. How just and fair is that?

God puts an apple tree in the middle of the Garden of Eden and says, do what you like guys, oh, but don't eat the apple. Surprise, surprise, they eat it and he leaps out from behind a bush shouting "Gotcha!". It wouldn't have made any difference if they hadn't eaten it... because if you're dealing with somebody who has the sort of mentality which likes leaving hats on the pavement with bricks under them you know perfectly well they won't give up. They'll get you in the end.

-Douglas Adams

quote:

---

Secondly the flood would have killed the plants, but not every seed on earth, plants would have begun go grow again as soon as the waters went down.

---

First of all, I don't understand how a flood of that proportion just up and fucking vanishes. It's constant torrential downpour for 40 days and nights. A flood of that proportion would take years to subside, then all the sudden the water dissapears. Then you have the problem with the land. It would have been so oversaturated that nothing could have grown until the ground dried out. Then they have to all wait for the damn food to grow till' harvest. He has to have enough food to feed the entire animal kingdom, himself, and his family until the harvest, but they can't even plant seeds until the ground is no longer saturated. There is no fucking way he could have had that much food and still fulfilled minimum vitamin and protein requirements to keep everyone alive.

quote:

---

If you notive in the end of the story Noah sends out a dove, and it brings back an olive branch. The world wasn't just a huge muddy wasteland after the flood. Think about it how many places in the us flood every year, and plants do grow back quickly. It's all just common sense!

---

There are many places that flood in the U.S. every year. Just look at New Braunfelds, TX. The whole place was underwater and took forever to dry out. These places take many many months for the waters to receede and dry out. They expect us to believe it rained for 40 days and nights and the water receeded somehow and didn't rain back down like water does when it evaporates, causing perpetual flooding, and then he managed to have enough food to last the duration of the flood and the amount of time it took to plant and harvest these gargantuan harvests and that he had the right food to accomodate specific eating habits of exotic animals. Get the fuck outta here.

quote:

---

And about the size weight problem, there are lots of theorys on that as well. They may not have been techhnical genuise but they weren't all idiots. If you want to argue a topic, then try to get all your facts straight first, and do your reserch before be take something on as a belife, disagree with it. You might just learn something!!!

---

Problems with a Global Flood

[This message has been edited by Dark_Magneto (edited 09-25-2002).]

If the ark never happened, then what is on Mt. Ararat?

I don't think God or religion had anything to do with a flood, but Noah like some legends were probably based on fact.

[This message has been edited by Joe Boo (edited 09-26-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Boo:
If the ark never happened, then what is on Mt. Ararat?

---

A geological formation in the mountain that resembles some type of vague boat shape.

quote:

---

but Noah like some legends were probably based on fact

---

Every single culture has a flood myth. There is no geological evidence to indicate that there was ever a flood of such a proportion.

[This message has been edited by Dark_Magneto (edited 09-26-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by wifemommyandwoman:
If you notive in the end of the story Noah sends out a dove,

---

I understand where you are coming from, but this example that you use blows your entire food argument away. The bird that Noah sent out first was a raven- a carnivore- who, as is noted in the bible, didn't come back because it was feasting on corpses. This initself shows that the flesh-eaters needed flesh to subsist.

Nox

>>>>Every single culture has a flood myth. There is no geological evidence to indicate that there was ever a flood of such a proportion.<<<<<

yes there is. If every culture has it, isnt that a pretty good start anyway?

>>>Every single culture has a flood myth. There is no geological evidence to indicate that there was ever a flood of such a proportion.<<<

The Black Sea area was flooded quite suddenly, There is evidence that the Indonesian Islands were one land mass, And there are 7 temples off the coast of India that are now underwater by a large flood. Off the coast of Cuba, divers believe they may have found several underwater cites. Egypt has several cities that were flooded, and finally, the Greek Coastline is dotted with flooded cities. What about the Ice Age? It goes without saying that the melting ice would cause somekind of flood.


Never forget that myths are based on truth. Ever heard of Troy?

>>>A geological formation in the mountain that resembles some type of vague boat shape.<<<

During the late 1940's, the CIA was so interested in that "Geological Formation" that they classified Aerial Photographs of it, And have you known anyone who has seen this up close?

Another thing I just thought of. I would like to see how they got around the inbreding problem that would have caused horrible genetic errors. If you take 2 related hampsters and breed them and within their own offspring, the results are less than optimal to say the least.

This is of course ignoring the problem with predators killing off entire species by eating other animals which would be guaranteed to happen after the ark.

Obviously, if every culture has a Noah, theres more than 2 people left.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Obviously, if every culture has a Noah, theres more than 2 people left.

---

Or if the whole world was flooded, not just regions.

Some versions of the flood myth actually involve people moving to higher ground.

How did all the fish survive? Some require cool clear water, some need brackish water, some need ocean water, some need water even saltier. A flood would have destroyed at least some of these habitats.

How did sensitive marine life such as coral survive? Since most coral are found in shallow water, the turbidity created by the runoff from the land would effectively cut them off from the sun. The silt covering the reef after the rains were over would kill all the coral. By the way, the rates at which coral deposits calcium are well known, and some highly mature reefs (such a the great barrier) have been around for millions of years to be deposited to their observed thickness.

How did diseases survive? Many diseases can't survive in hosts other than humans. Many others can only survive in humans and in short-lived arthropod vectors. The list includes typhus, measles, smallpox, polio, gonorrhea, syphilis. For these diseases to have survived the Flood, they must all have infected one or more of the eight people aboard the Ark.

Other animals aboard the ark must have suffered from multiple diseases, too, since there are other diseases specific to other animals, and the nonspecific diseases must have been somewhere.

Host-specific diseases which don't kill their host generally can't survive long, since the host's immune system eliminates them. (This doesn't apply to diseases such as HIV and malaria which can hide from the immune system.) For example, measles can't last for more than a few weeks in a community of less than 250,000 [Keeling & Grenfell, 1997] because it needs nonresistant hosts to infect. Since the human population aboard the ark was somewhat less than 250,000, measles and many other infectious diseases would have gone extinct during the Flood.

Some diseases that can affect a wide range of species would have found conditions on the Ark ideal for a plague. Avian viruses, for example, would have spread through the many birds on the ark. Other plagues would have affected the mammals and reptiles. Even these plague pathogens, though, would have died out after all their prospective hosts were either dead or resistant.

How did short-lived species survive? Adult mayflies on the ark would have died in a few days, and the larvae of many mayflies require shallow fresh running water. Many other insects would face similar problems.

How could more than a handful of species survive in a devastated habitat? The Flood would have destroyed the food and shelter which most species need to survive.

How did predators survive? How could more than a handful of the predator species on the ark have survived, with only two individuals of their prey to eat? All of the predators at the top of the food pyramid require larger numbers of food animals beneath them on the pyramid, which in turn require large numbers of the animals they prey on, and so on, down to the primary producers (plants etc.) at the bottom. And if the predators survived, how did the other animals survive being preyed on?

How could more than a handful of species survive random influences that affect populations? Isolated populations with fewer than 20 members are usually doomed even when extraordinary measures are taken to protect them. [Simberloff, 1988]

How did animals get to their present ranges? How did koalas get from Ararat to Australia, polar bears to the Arctic, etc., when the kinds of environment they require to live doesn't exist between the two points. How did so many unique species get to remote islands?

How were ecological interdependencies preserved as animals migrated from Ararat? Did the yucca an the yucca moth migrate together across the Atlantic? Were there, a few thousand years ago, unbroken giant sequoia forests between Ararat and California to allow indigenous bark and cone beetles to migrate?

Why are so many animals found only in limited ranges? Why are so many marsupials limited to Australia; why are there no wallabies in western Indonesia? Why are lemurs limited to Madagascar? The same argument applies to any number of groups of plants and animals.

Why is inbreeding depression not a problem in most species? Harmful recessive alleles occur in significant numbers in most species. (Humans have, on average, 3 to 4 lethal recessive alleles each.) When close relatives breed, the offspring are more likely to be homozygous for these harmful alleles, to the detriment of the offspring. Such inbreeding depression still shows up in cheetahs; they have about 1/6th the number of motile spermatozoa as domestic cats, and of those, almost 80% show morphological abnormalities. [O'Brien et al, 1987] How could more than a handful of species survive the inbreeding depression that comes with establishing a population from a single mating pair?

How did the human population rebound so fast? Genealogies in Genesis put the Tower of Babel about 110 to 150 years after the Flood [Gen 10:25, 11:10-19]. How did the world population regrow so fast to make its construction (and the city around it) possible? Similarly, there would have been very few people around to build Stonehenge and the Pyramids, rebuild the Sumerian and Indus Valley civilizations, populate the Americas, etc.

Why do other flood myths vary so greatly from the Genesis account? Flood myths are fairly common worldwide, and if they came from a common source, we should expect similarities in most of them. Instead, the myths show great diversity. [Bailey, 1989, pp. 5-10; Isaak, 1997] For example, people survive on high land or trees in the myths about as often as on boats or rafts, and no other flood myth includes a covenant not to destroy all life again.

See what I mean? It's inconsistent bullshit. There were probably some major localized floods like people that live below sea level and they took that to think that the entire world flooded when all they could se was water. It was just Noah and 7 other people. Inbreeding is inevitable.

If you take it literally youre a fuckin idiot. I think youre a bigger fuckin idiot for arguing with it on literal terms.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
If you take it literally youre a fuckin idiot. I think youre a bigger fuckin idiot for arguing with it on literal terms.

---

So do I. We've showed him the evidence, and all he has is what-if's.

What if my aunt had balls? would she be my uncle?

what if birds had Machine guns, would cats fuck with them?

You seem to not understand that myths are based on fact. In this case, we've provided evidence that the flood was based on the melting of glacier ice during the ice age, and regions, not the world, were flooded. You counter with animals would come out with 3 heads due to inbreeding.

You say don't let religion in over science, yet when religion is based on that science, you deny everything.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
If you take it literally youre a fuckin idiot. I think youre a bigger fuckin idiot for arguing with it on literal terms.

---

Then stop saying it actually fuckin' happened! When people that teach the Noahs Ark myth stop teaching that it literally happened, I will stop literally stomping their argument into the ground.

By the way, the whole "figurative" cop-out thing is an answer for lemmings and is getting old fast. Every time Bible scholars will be jocking a bible up somethin' fierce on something being literal and then evidence arises to invalidate the claim, they quickly change their tune. Gallileo got the Bible's geocentric universe played on him when he implied that the universe was heliocentric. Suddenly we find out that the earth is not established on an immoveable set of pillars, not flat, and not the center of the universe, quick regress into figurative. We could find Jesus's corpse tomorrow and suddenly the resurrection would become figurative. Any time they get their ass handed to them on something, they call it figurative.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Boo:
So do I. We've showed him the evidence

---

What evidence have you shown? I have shown you a plethora of ways that it woudn't work as stated, all backed by scientific findings.

quote:

---

and all he has is what-if's.

---

Such as "What if people were making outrageous physically and logistically impossible claims and trying to pass it off as true?", which many bible apologists do to this day.

quote:

---

You seem to not understand that myths are based on fact.

---

There is still no geological evidence to this day to indicate a *worldwide* flood. Sure there are sumerian flood myths and evidence of mass localized floods that they could have just as easily misunderstood, but many stories get grossly imbellished like saying that Noah and his 7 people were the only humans left, etc.

quote:

---

In this case, we've provided evidence that the flood was based on the melting of glacier ice during the ice age, and regions, not the world, were flooded.

---

Yes, regions, not the whole thing, that's what I have been saying the whole time. These people I run across defending Noahs Ark are hard pressed on it being literal since it specifically states that everything that was not on the Ark died. Now I don't know how you can warp your mind to make that into figurative 9along with the task of obtaining the animals, yadda ya), but I am sure it would amount to no shortage of ad-hoc rationalizations.

quote:

---

You counter with animals would come out with 3 heads due to inbreeding.

---

That's only *if* the Genesis account is claiming to be accurate in it's testimony. And I never claimed 3 heads, just fatally flawed results.

quote:

---

You say don't let religion in over science,

---

Yes.

quote:

---

yet when religion is based on that science, you deny everything.

---

Flood myths are hardly what I would call the basis for a religion. The floods happened, there were records of them from multiple cultures from different regions during different time periods (which is a direct indication of the flood not killing everything that wasn't on the ark per Genesis).

If you don't take genesis to be literal, that is, an accurate account of a real-world happenstance, then I have no problem. But when you start defending claims that he actually gathered 2 of each animal, put them on the boat, somehow sustained the right environmental habitat and eating habits of all animals, and there was no food chain occurring like wifemommyandwoman was claiming, then you open yourself up to getting your irrational illusions shattered.

>>>>Then stop saying it actually fuckin' happened!<<<<

Im not. I said a big flood and global cataclysm happened. Siberia went from temperate and crawling with life to uh, Siberia right quick.

>>>I will stop literally stomping their argument into the ground.<<<

What's funny is that you actually think you do this. You still haven't given proof that the object on Mt. Ararat is not the Ark, nor answered my question of if you know anyone who has seen it up close and proved beyond a doubt that it is only an anomaly.

>>>Gallileo got the Bible's geocentric universe played on him when he implied that the universe was heliocentric. Suddenly we find out that the earth is not established on an immoveable set of pillars, not flat, and not the center of the universe, quick regress into figurative.<<<

The church was not the only group who did not except Gallileo's proof. Nor did everyone except it because it was contrary to the bible's teachings.

>>>We could find Jesus's corpse tomorrow and suddenly the resurrection would become figurative. Any time they get their ass handed to them on something, they call it figurative.<<<

Reminds me of the shroud of Turin being dated in the middle ages, then it's suddenly discovered that a mold was growing on the shroud, contaminating the dating. And Science still hasn't accounted for the radiation that was found on it.

>>>What evidence have you shown? I have shown you a plethora of ways that it woudn't work as stated, all backed by scientific findings.<<<

I've shown you,

An ancient shoreline in the Black Sea,

An object on Mt. Ararat, a boat shape, what it is to still be determined.

Ancient cities flooded on the Greek Coast.

I could go on, but why?

Yet the best you can do is inbreeding. So sad.

Think about this, you have never been more then 20 miles from your village, and possibly have never seen any strangers. Daresay that if that was you, you would think that the surrounding countryside was "all the world" hence how it was passed by mouth to mouth, then written down. A classic "fish tale"

>>>Such as "What if people were making outrageous physically and logistically impossible claims and trying to pass it off as true?", which many bible apologists do to this day.<<<

Not considering variables, such as the story may have become distorted, considering that it took place over 7000 years ago, shows a total lack of general understanding.

>>>There is still no geological evidence to this day to indicate a *worldwide* flood. Sure there are sumerian flood myths and evidence of mass localized floods that they could have just as easily misunderstood, but many stories get grossly imbellished like saying that Noah and his 7 people were the only humans left, etc.<<<

Like I said in the above, your village gets flooded, you and your family and farm animals pack into a boat, Your village (some might consider it your world) is flooded, your family survives...wahlah, Noah and the Ark, the Great flood. Take into account the story being distorted over thousands of years, and there you have it.

>>>then you open yourself up to getting your irrational illusions shattered.<<<

As does not understanding there is truth in nearly every myth, and when nothing coincides with each other, then you should not easily discount it.

Something tells me you hate religion more then beyond simple bullshit. I'm not going to guess why.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Boo:

What's funny is that you actually think you do this. You still haven't given proof that the object on Mt. Ararat is not the Ark, nor answered my question of if you know anyone who has seen it up close and proved beyond a doubt that it is only an anomaly.

---

Begging the question, are we? So there is something on Mt. Ararat that vaaguely resembles a boat shape. Until it gets determined exactly what it is, it would be best not to jump to conclusions. I have also seen reports of people forging ark wreckage and scientists handing their forgeries back to them with their asses as well.

quote:

---

The church was not the only group who did not except Gallileo's proof.

---

But I didn't see anyone else threatening to kill people that disagreed with biblical "truths" for heresy.

quote:

---

Reminds me of the shroud of Turin being dated in the middle ages, then it's suddenly discovered that a mold was growing on the shroud, contaminating the dating. And Science still hasn't accounted for the radiation that was found on it.

---

Reminds me of a shorud of turin that was a fake and contained no DNA, which is understandable seeing as they had no knowledge of blood cells and DNA at the time of the forgery.

quote:

---

I've shown you,

An ancient shoreline in the Black Sea,

An object on Mt. Ararat, a boat shape, what it is to still be determined.

Ancient cities flooded on the Greek Coast.

I could go on, but why?

Yet the best you can do is inbreeding. So sad.

---

Your suffering from a case of selective observation.

I have shown you that if a worldwide flood happened:

- Environmental conditions for animals could not have been maintained

- Dietary requirements could not have been fulfilled

- The size of the ark was inadequate for the capacity

- Food and water could not have been provided for the entire duration

- Extinction of species would have been inevitable due to predators and inbreeding

- The water could not have came and gone that rapidly.

- Aquatic habitat change would have had fatal results

- Sensitive marine life would have died

- They would all have to be infected with disease for them to still exist and the results would have proven mostly fatal

- Short lived species would have died

- Predators would have died

- Random influences that affect populations would have most likely been terminal

- Regional specific animals couldn't have got from or to their continents. Contintnal drift is not enough to separate a pangea that much in that amount of time.

- Ecological interdependencies couldn't have been reserved

- Human population could not have rebounded fast enough for all the historical happenstances around the world to take place when they did.

- Myth inconsistency

quote:

---

Think about this, you have never been more then 20 miles from your village, and possibly have never seen any strangers. Daresay that if that was you, you would think that the surrounding countryside was "all the world" hence how it was passed by mouth to mouth, then written down. A classic "fish tale"

---

If it's a fairytale, then it's a fairytale and that's that. Enough said, case closed, end of discussion.

quote:

---

Not considering variables, such as the story may have become distorted, considering that it took place over 7000 years ago, shows a total lack of general understanding.

---

So your believing in distorted and wickedly twisted bullshit. Suit yourself.

quote:

---

Like I said in the above, your village gets flooded, you and your family and farm animals pack into a boat, Your village (some might consider it your world) is flooded, your family survives...wahlah, Noah and the Ark, the Great flood. Take into account the story being distorted over thousands of years, and there you have it.

---

So the only way the myth persists is if it's innacurate and distorted. Well shit, if Noah's ark is bullshit that got blown up to epidemic proportions, what's to say that Jesus could heal and it wasn't grossly overexagurated and embellished parlor tricks?

quote:

---

As does not understanding there is truth in nearly every myth, and when nothing coincides with each other, then you should not easily discount it.

---

If it's a myth then I don't have a problem with it. It's not real but might have a shred of some semblance of an actual event that happened, that still doesn't lend it credit. Now if we can all concede that the Bible is a manmade bullshit story predominantly comprised of such happenstances and myth in addition to it's failed prophecy, misstatements, errors, and contradictions then this will be wrapped up nicely.

quote:

---

Something tells me you hate religion more then beyond simple bullshit. I'm not going to guess why.

---

If someone makes a bullshit claim like wifemommyandwoman and argues that the event actually transpired as told, they need to get the taste slapped out their mouth and introduced to this thing I like to call "reality".

I hate most religion more than it being simple bullshit. It is also an institution of mind conditioning and socially engineers the masses with blatant brainwashing propaganda. Not only does it consist of bullshit, but it holds the shit high above its head, claims it to be the one and only truth, and that you will burn in eternal hellfore for thinking otherwise.

Hellbearing religion is the thought police. If you aren't thinking what they want you to think, it's a thoughtcrime and you go to hell for not "believeing", aka. submitting to their propaganda. They demonize anything that would conflict with them so their sphere of narrowminded influence grows stronger. If it wasn;t for religion, we wouldn't be having things like the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, Jihads, and the World Trade Centers getting planes slammed into them.

>>>Begging the question, are we? So there is something on Mt. Ararat that vaaguely resembles a boat shape. Until it gets determined exactly what it is, it would be best not to jump to conclusions.<<<

>>>Guess who stated right off the bat that it's a photograpic anomaly?<<<

>>>I have also seen reports of people forging ark wreckage and scientists handing their forgeries back to them with their asses as well.<<<

And?

>>>They would all have to be infected with disease for them to still exist and the results would have proven mostly fatal<<<

Infected with disease to still exist? How does that work? I'd think if something dies, it would not exist anymore. Stop hitting the pipe.

>>>But I didn't see anyone else threatening to kill people that disagreed with biblical "truths" for heresy.<<<

Outright disagreement perhaps?

>>>Reminds me of a shorud of turin that was a fake and contained no DNA, which is understandable seeing as they had no knowledge of blood cells and DNA at the time of the forgery.<<<

You must have skipped over the mold growing on the surface, preventing any accurate readings, did you not?

>>>I have shown you that if a worldwide flood happened:<<<

Most of these people never went 30 miles beyond their homes, considering that, that was their world. Animals grazed in dry land, etc etc.

Why is it you discard religion as not allowing you to think on your own, yet you don't do that yourself?

>>>If it's a fairytale, then it's a fairytale and that's that. Enough said, case closed, end of discussion.<<<

A fish tale. Big difference. I suggest you get outside more and interact with other people.

>>>So your believing in distorted and wickedly twisted bullshit. Suit yourself<<<

Yes, 7000 years old, told by word of mouth, just like the game of telephone. The idea is to sort through everything. Why not try it? Or is it too much for you?

>>>So the only way the myth persists is if it's innacurate and distorted.<<<

You missed the point, I see.


>>>If it's a myth then I don't have a problem with it. It's not real but might have a shred of some semblance of an actual event that happened, that still doesn't lend it credit. Now if we can all concede that the Bible is a manmade bullshit story predominantly comprised of such happenstances and myth in addition to it's failed prophecy, misstatements, errors, and contradictions then this will be wrapped up nicely.<<<

Much of the bibical events that took place did actually happen. The rain of ash, Jerico, and Christ. The bible is not total bullshit.

>>>I hate most religion more than it being simple bullshit. It is also an institution of mind conditioning and socially engineers the masses with blatant brainwashing propaganda. Not only does it consist of bullshit, but it holds the shit high above its head, claims it to be the one and only truth, and that you will burn in eternal hellfore for thinking otherwise.<<<

I think it's more then that. Much much more.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Boo:
And?

---

And if there is actually a boat on Mt. Ararat, it needs to be scientifically dated to determine tht some assholes didn't build one and make it look like it was Noah's ark.

[/quote][/b]
Infected with disease to still exist? How does that work? I'd think if something dies, it would not exist anymore. Stop hitting the pipe.
[/quote][/b]

Right. So the flood would have wiped out most if not all of these diseases that require hosts. Especially the ones that kill in 2 weeks and have a super fast incubation period.

quote:

---

You must have skipped over the mold growing on the surface, preventing any accurate readings, did you not?

---

I read that. There has been multiple piece of cloth that has been professed to be the shroud, and all have been disproven or inconclusive, you know that right?

quote:

---

Most of these people never went 30 miles beyond their homes, considering that, that was their world. Animals grazed in dry land, etc etc.

---

So the Bible was lying when it said that all things that were not on the ark died, right? Isn't the Bible supposed to be divinely inspired? Don't you think God would know better? Maybe it's form the general fallibility of humans and the twist and embellishment they like to put on everything. If it actually happened, it's probably nothing along the lines as the depiction, like people living several hundreds of years and such.

quote:

---

Why is it you discard religion as not allowing you to think on your own, yet you don't do that yourself?

---

I don't discard myself as not allowing myself to think for myself? What?

quote:

---

A fish tale. Big difference.

---

Bullshit nontheless, fresh from the cows ass to your head.

quote:

---

I suggest you get outside more and interact with other people.

---

What the hell does that have to do with anything other than being a futile ad-hominim attack to compensate for something? FYI I just got in the door 10 minutes ago from sparring with a bunch of friends.

quote:

---

Yes, 7000 years old, told by word of mouth, just like the game of telephone. The idea is to sort through everything. Why not try it? Or is it too much for you?

---

Sifting through the shit. What's the point? Shit is shit. It might have a drop of truth in a sea of crap, but still, you could spend your time better instead of sifting through grossly inflated crap to try to find the 1 piece of not so great truth it was extrapolated from. You know it's predominantly comprised of shit, you have even admitted it yourself, why dwell on it? Wipe the ass and move on.

quote:

---

You missed the point, I see.

---

I got the point, I just don't see what the point of it is. If you want to find the origin of myths (yes, it falls under the definition of myth), you can go to snopes.com and find more than enough. The origins of bullshit are not that damn fascinating.

quote:

---

Much of the bibical events that took place did actually happen. The rain of ash, Jerico, and Christ. The bible is not total bullshit.

---

It's predominantly comprised of bullshit. It indicates the earth is flat, there is a sky dome and God lives on top of it, rain comes to the earth through windows in the sky dome, the earth is immoveable and established on a set of pillars, Jesus said that noone has gone to heaven except the "son of man" which was a reference to himself even though Elijah ascended to heaven when God sent a fiery chariot to pick him up, Ezekial predicted babylon would conquer Egypt and failed miserably, he said that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre and failed, Jesus said that the world would end in his generation, said believers could handle snakes and drink poison without consequence, Exodus has no archeological evidence to support it since there is nothing where supposeably hundreds of thousands of people died, Joshua causes the sun and moon to stand still over aijalon and Gibeon which violates the laws of physics and astronomy, Ahaziah was 2 years older than his father, Bible clains that hares chew their cud and that there are 4 legged insects, Matthew miscounts his generations, the signs that will accompany the end of days have been going on for a couple of hundred years now, I could go on all day. It's so blatantly wrong on so many things and others are so highly suspected to be bullshit that you might as well toss the damn thing out the window. So they got a couple of historical instances right, big deal. Someone uses a historical event to preface a big lie. Just because Sodom and Gammorah were destroyed doesn't mean anything. It was most likely a natural disaster that they milked and used for confirmation bias to reenfoce the idea that their God did it simply because it happened.

quote:

---

I think it's more then that. Much much more.

---

Not unless you know something about me that I don't, which I highly doubt.

The funny thing is, we can detect a genetic bottleneck arising from near-extinction in such species as Cheetahs tens of thousands of years ago, when they were limited to a few hundred individuals due to known factors such as the ice age, but the vast majority of other species have no indication of being limited to *at most 14 individuals* only a few thousand years ago.

And there's no indication of a radiating origin of all terestrial species originating in the middle east, like you would find if every surviving animal disembarked from the ark and went on its merry way. And Koalas somehow got to Australia but nowhere else, while rare lizards and blood-drinking finches did the same with only a few islands.

B-u-l-l-s-h-i-t. Read [u]Noah's Ark - a Sinking Ship[/u] for more or go to TalkOrigins for the definitive smackdown.

And please don't make it even more embarrasing by claiming Noah's ark was found. I normally wouldn't dream of linking to a Young-Earth Creationist site, but it should tip you off that even *they* are too embarrased to use that rock in Turkey as evidence: [u]Has Noah's Ark Been Found in Turkey?[/u]

Also, next time, you might want to include actual references instead of asserting something and leaving it up to the skeptic to disprove. An anecdotal story of "I heard the moon landings were fake on TV" or "my cousin's postman told me they found Noah's ark" won't cut it.

You might as well try and debunk Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Obviously there was no single boat that housed all the animals on earth. It is an obvious metaphor for a true event that did happen all over the world over 10,000 years ago.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Obviously there was no single boat that housed all the animals on earth. It is an obvious metaphor for a true event that did happen all over the world over 10,000 years ago.

---

Agreed 22, it is an obvious metaphor, like most of scripture.

Carbon dating of indigenous sites in OZ shows a continous inhabitance for a period much longer than ten thousand years, and yet OZ is one of the lowest lands on earth, we don't even have any very high mountains, if the whole world was flooded ten thousand years ago, how to explain the archeological evidence? Sounds more like a pole shift, with localised flooding in some places, upheaval and subsidence in others.

quote:

---

It is an obvious metaphor for a true event...

---

Spiderman was based on a true event as well. Stan Lee saw a fly crawling on a wall.

You can base stories of epic proportions off of simple events or global proportions off of localized ones. The people back in their respective days believed Noahs Ark was literal. Because they wanted them to think it was literal and taught it and still teach it to this day as a literal happenstance.

[This message has been edited by Dark_Magneto (edited 10-04-2002).]

If it is a metaphor, then the difference is that those people probably had no warning from a god. So it could be more like a warning - for the next time.

Those that survived it, would be the ones that reacted quickly; had boat-building skills (and/or access to high ground that didn't get destroyed.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by user X:
If it is a metaphor, then the difference is that those people probably had no warning from a god. So it could be more like a warning - for the next time.

---

Reason, that's what we share in common with our ancestors, the power of Reason, the ability to reason, and yes I agree the metaphor is an obvious warning. Did the many thousands of people to have died in floods since, experience any different a fate, to those people who died in a mythical/actual worldwide flood?

quote:

---

Those that survived it, would be the ones that reacted quickly; had boat-building skills (and/or access to high ground that didn't get destroyed.)

---

Spirit 22 I think introduced the subject of pole shift, seems a much more valid explanation. The ancients had advanced knowledge of the stars, geometry and maths. The story of Noah sounds like some people 'reasoned' it all out and left a tale for future generations to ponder, a tale that has suffered the ignorance of inaccurate translation, superstition and dogma.

Yeah, I saw the topic on the pole-shift, and thought it was damn interesting. I misunderstood it at first, thinking it would take place slowly - like plates shifting at the rates they do today. But apparently it's a violent and fast action. Tidal waves, quickly melting ice caps, etc.

Pole-shift is the only feasible cause of concurrent global flooding.

quote:

---

Redzed:
Did the many thousands of people to have died in floods since, experience any different a fate, to those people who died in a mythical/actual worldwide flood?

---

If it was "mythical", then they didn't really drown did they?

quote:

---

The ancients had advanced knowledge of the stars, geometry and maths.

---

If they did, it got lost since their time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by user X:
If they did, it got lost since their time.

---

Actually the Pyramids are laid out in the pattern of Orion, and Angkor Wat in Cambodia is arranged in the pattern of the constellation we know as the scorpion. Both are arranged as those stars would have appeared in our skies 10,000 years or so ago, dating them to similar times and demonstrating the ancients knowledge. Also the Inca and Aztec civilisations have left plenty of proof of an intricate knowledge of astronomy, plus Stonehenge in England and many other archeological sites.

Long before I actually saw them I read a book about the Nasca lines and how individual lines (when extended) directly (not nearly) crossed such notable landmarks such as Stonehenge, Pyramids at Giza, Kerr Batch and Wassu (both of the later located in The Gambia).

Rampant speculation abounds as to the why's but there is no definative explanation. Hence we return to the large point that both redzed and User X made about information being lost in time. The pole-shift theory is far more than just interesting. However, like anything else, the theory raises as many questions as it answers.

Nox

Some people did have warnings from 'gods.' The people who built cities out of stones we still cant lift were literally gods to the people who had just discovered creation of fire (Arguably, that was taught to them by these gods). The men who had already mapped the Earth and heavens could predict when things like polar shifts and equinox succession wold occur. They probably made an effort to tell some of the people or peoples they had a soft spot for, so people were told by God to prepare for a coming storm.

I don't deny that the ancients had a decent grasp on basic astronomy. The construction of temples and such - could be accomplished using this knowledge and a crude transit-like instrument. But this knowledge either got lost, or suppressed (for religious reasons?), prior to the age of the flat-Earthers. (And, I believe that Nordic maritime skills met the same fate - whatever it is.)

And I've seen all the documentaries whereby effeminate, yankee stone-masons attempt to reconstruct ancient construction techniques. I tend to lean towards the theory that mortal men - with knowledge of pulleys and levers; a desire to know (or appease) their gods; and a generous construction schedule; are responsible for these feats.

When you say "gods" do you mean demi-gods (in this case - mortals that arrived from more advanced civilizations)? or do you mean off-world beings?

What is "equinox succession"? The new schedule of changes that would follow a pole-shift? and is this the reason that the equinox and soltice vary from culture to culture? ie. the Chinese equinox preceeds ours by a month or so.

>>>>When you say "gods" do you mean demi-gods (in this case - mortals that arrived from more advanced civilizations)? or do you mean off-world beings?<<<<

I mean advanced people, but lower people thought them Gods. This was 30,000 years ago or so, so pictuer this.

You are a 4'6" tall extremely round-headed, black haired, dark-skinned individual with thick lips and a small, smashed in nose. You scratch things on stones because the idea of you creating lines and leaving a mark fascinates you. You hunt for food with sticks and barely altered rocks, and use fire every now and then, but it has failed to revolutionize your way of life.

Over the hill comes a new kind of man, of a neolithic race. He is near 6' tall and has a high, lean head with very chiselled, very fine features in contrast to your own coarse and rather unattractive ones. His skin is light and changes to reflect his moods. When he's angry his lips drain of color, and when he's flustered he turns red. His hair is gold and almost reflect the light off of it. His eyes are a crystal blue, in contrast to yours, which are black and indescernible from your pupil. He builds fires quickly and efficiently, employs wheels on carts pulled by animals he has mastered like the spirits you worship. He can turn mountains into fields with terracing techniques, and leaves his mark. Where you are content to scratch on things and feel like this aids in a sense of immortality, he builds massive and imposing monuments of stone that will stand forever. He disappears across the sea on the backs of monsters with many arms.

He would be a god. In times before really any racial mixture, the contrast between pure white and pure mongoloid and negroid would have been so great that all 3 races would just stare at each other in awe and not recognize each other as people.

>>>>What is "equinox succession"?<<<<

The zodiac appears to orbit the earth as time passes, so that the sun rises on the equinox underneath a different zodiac constellation over time. I think its 2012 years or so for a sign to change, for a new solar age. The pole shift and global cataclysm thing changes at opposite ends of the cycle I think, so every half cycle (2012 or so x 6)
There is a definite and predictable way to forecast the changes in that, which ancients apparently mastered. There are numerical codes that illustrate this, because they demonstrate the equations necessary, in norse myths about Valhalla, in the story of Osiris, in some Chinese lore, etc, etc, all over the world.

Bah. We all know the advanced ones had pale to olive skin and black hair. Or possibly blond with green or purple eyes. The Blonde-and-blues are good as peasants.

What are you talking about?

How those damn blonde-and-blues were not the ones with the technology. Could not have been.

I spent about an hour surfing the subject of pole-shift. It's a very convoluted subject. I did see some sites that made convincing correlations between religious myth, and geo-science.

"pole shift" in the search engine will bring up plenty of sites.

It's somewhat scary too, myth not withstanding.

user X,

Thanks for the link.

Nox

I read a good one that a comet struck earth about the time the Ice Age ended. The comet was about twice the size of the one that took out the dinosaurs, and when it hit it caused the tectonic plates to shift to their present day postions, and made the poles shift. The seas rose 300 ft, and climates changed abruptly. Which explains how frozen woolly mammoths and mastadons are found upright with non-tundra vegetation undigested in their stomach.

References for those ridiculous claims, please.

Pole Shift and other great links. The Zetas subscribe to the comet (or planet X) theory.

I think Pole Shift is real plausible, and I usually deny this kind of stuff.

You'll have to actually do some reading though...