Archaeologica.org

yup thought so

Well that was a fun bit of conversation

Anyway, I think thise of us who know what we're talking about are agreed that magma does contain water, though not - that we're aware - anything like as much as GV suggests.

Notwithstanding which - if the water came from the magma, where's the magma? The answer, presumably, is in the flood basalts scattered around the world - the Deccen Traps (India) and Siberian Traps are perhaps the best known, but there are may other.

Is the suggestion then that all these flood baslats eruptred simutaneously and that great depths of basalt built up in a matter fo days/weeks?

Only if so, I think the flood waters would have been the least of Noah's worries. How'd he breathe with so much noxious fumes being pumped into the atmosphere from hundreds of sites covering a sizeable percentage of the Earth's surface?

Most of the basalts extruded during the Deluge came through the midoceanic rift zones, and as you say, alot came from the continental flood basalts (often pillow basalts, extruded into water), the oceanic basalts were replacement material as Pangea broke up and separted, and there was considerable rift action in the Pacific as well, so new ocean floor was formed, which sank into the mantle when it lithified, deepening the oceans to accept the Deluge run-off the continents.

Yes some were undoubtably underwater eruptions, but many were clearly above surface - the volume of poisonous gases given off by the Deccen Traps would have suffocated the world.

And in any case, would the submarine eruptions have poisoned the waters?

I have not seen a major thrust by the anti-Deluge people that the gases (besides CO2 and H20) were supposedly a major problem, but other than that, I have not seen a study just looking at that. Maybe that's one the debunkers should go to work on.

so if all this happened and Pangea broke up around 2000bce why is it that the rivers mentioned as leading out of the garden of eden were still there after the world had been covered by water

principly the Tigris and the Euphrates which are well known to be rivers formed in the mountains of the Caucasus and which run through lands that they created themselves by depositing silt along their courses to the Arabian Gulf over the last 10,000 years. They don't cut through bedrock anywhere along their course so both would be scoured from the face of the earth by this deluge. And this in the very area that was most affected. Right near Noahs house

Jim if what you propose was possible then these two rivers would have ceased to exist
and they haven't

The Tigris, Euphrates, Gihon, and Hiddekel rivers were of the pre-Deluge world, the four rivers which flowed from the Holy Mountain in Eden, which was obliterated and redeposited during the Deluge (now in thousands of feet of sedimentary rock), so the current Euphrates and Tigris are renames, probably because they were the only two big rivers in their region of disembarkment.

so when were they renamed
it would take at least 5000 years for them to cut a new course to the persian Gulf
and with no slowly melting glaciers to give them the strength to cut their way to the coast there wouldn't be anything to rename until about 1000 from now
maybe God put them back in because he liked the geography eh
pity he didn't confide that to Moses or Jonah

The last "trickles" of the ocean's recession off the continents did some of the river valley gouging and deposition, and the rainfall around 2000 B.C. there was probably four or five times what it is today, so those caused the seemingly greater age for the river valleys and deltas.

The Nile was about fifty feet deeper, and a few times wider, during the Ice Age, when the Nile lapped at the paws of the Sphinx, I'm trying to find data on how much deeper and wider were the Tigris and Euphrates during the Ice Age, do you know of any source for this?

The river valleys today are called "underfit" because the river flows are much less than during the Ice Age, so the river valleys are "too big" for the current flows.

thats not possible
when the two rivers in question formed they went south only because it was impossible for them to go in any other direction.
if it happened like you claim they would currently be feeding into either the black or the caspian seas

No, the T & E flow south from the Caucasus into what was, during the Ice Age, a shallow wide valley with marshes, prairies, and forests, that is now the Persian Gulf, and the smaller rivers which flow north from the Caucasus quickly flow into the Black or Caspian Sea.

No, the T & E flow south from the Caucasus into what was, during the Ice Age, a shallow wide valley with marshes, prairies, and forests, that is now the Persian Gulf

so how do you account for the fact that the Sumerian, Akkadian and Babylonian king lists run from the time of Alexander all the way back to around 3500BCE uninterupted with no mention of a global flood at any time and no mention of sunken cities from the time claimed by you as that of the ice age with astronomical observations through a clear sky throughout the entire period involved when you claim there was almost total cloud cover
how about the Cities in mesopotamia that have been excavated and show no signs of a global flood which date from before til after your ice age

could you answer any of these questions with what you said previously

the entire land was submerged

clearly from the archaeological remains and the records of the people themselves (i.e. not carbon 12/14 dates) which claim they were living there in their thousands the whole time

then much much later some Hebrews turn up and plaguiarise their history
and creationist chritstians everywhere got confused because they haven't studied the deity that your god originated from
Enlil
Of Sumer

Marduk, you read my book, remember?

yes but you relied on generalities rather than specifics
for your book to be correct the entire plain of mesopotamia would have had to be isolated from the rest of the world the entire time in some kind of giant bubble
and the kings who wrote accounts of travelling to foreign lands such as India and Anatolia would have had to be lying
and the rest of their records would have to be a fabrication designed specifically to throw off future historians and researchers into thinking they were doing fine the whole time when in fact they drowned in their thousands. (can you see one or two people on the boat of Noah turning out millions of scribe school learning tablets to be found later buried in the ruins of Nineveh)

i read it twice James and the closest you got to addressing this evidence was saying that Oannes was symbolicly dressed like a fish
you didn't mention Uan (1800BCE) who Oannes was based on
and you didn't mention Adapa (pre 3000BCE) who Uan was based on
and you didn't go into a lot of detail about the reason that Berosssus fabricated the character of Oannes in the first place (do you know it, its an interesting story)

still better than the crap Hancock said about the character though i'll give you that much

Whatever Marduk.