Archaeologica.org

the problem with the following is that monotheism was not created by Josiah but thatking brought the people BACK to God. quite a difference

Archaeological finds suggest otherwise. Judaism underwent a significant change as a result of the Babylonian Exile and its exposure to Eastern ideas.

Further, we don't have the earliest copies of the bible...merely the ones which have been redacted throughout the centuries. Scholars like Friedman do their best to piece it together but one suspects that there are many differences between the original and the final copy (which is all that the Copenhagen School is really saying.)

Likewise, Shakespeare's original notes for Hamlet probably bear little resemblance to the finished product.

Mainly, as a consequence of an increase of humidity related to heavy rains, the fluvial system coming from the northwest was reactivated, producing a strong erosion of the lagoon sediments along an east-west oriented channel showing a canyon like morphology.

where did this water and humidity come from?

During the Flandrian transgression

what is the source of such transgression? why have we not seen one in modern times?

regressive events

what are these regressive events?

A new transgression of the sea

what caused this event?

** i haven't read all the article yet but these are just questions that come to mind as i read the quote. maybe i will get some answers when i read the whole thing.

Arch, you really need to be sharing those drugs, OK? You get yourself a Fladrian transgression today and you'll be standing knee deep in Korean water.

Before re-reading the article please put an ice cube in a glass and watch what happens to the water level as the ice melts. If you really want to be daring, drink the water after you're done and pretend you flooded the earth.

you really need to be sharing those drugs, OK

i read the article and there was no mention of snow {ice} melting and even if there were, where did the water come from to form the snow and ice? the question doesn't change because you decided to be flippant.

if you look at the quote, it specifically mentioned humidity and rain not ice. so again instead of being whatever you were doing, please answer the questions.

We've been down this road before, Cogs.

Arch needs these vast reservoirs of underground or up-in-the-air water to account for the Noah's Ark scenario. He's not big on growing and shrinking ice caps.

He's not big on growing and shrinking ice caps.

it is just the same question you ask me...where did the water come from to form such vast resovoirs of ice? where did the water go after it melted?

a good explanation is in order

where did the water go after it melted?

Into the ocean.....where it raised the water level.

Into the ocean.....where it raised the water level.

that i knew but... how low were the oceans at the time? how high did they rise? these are just the same type of questions you asked of me.

i am doing some research on this Flandrian transgression and from what i read it sounds as if it would take more than ice melting to have the affect it did

.http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/pro ... _id=159931

Midwinter Lagoon is a large, shallow coastal lagoon, bordered on its seaward side by a barrier, along the mainland coast of northern Belize. As much as 19 ft of Holocene sediments, deposited on karsted Tertiary limestones during the Flandrian transgression, consist of a complex mosaic of mixed siliciclastic and carbonate facies

http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/be-vwvnw.html

[/quote]In the V-VIth century, coastal Belgian was flooded during the event known as the second Flandrian transgression. Only a row of islands covered with dunes emerged from the sea. The sea withdrew me three centuries later but it does not seem that the Frankish tribes immediatly colonized the islands

this limited or selective approach causes me to wonder how it would be able to only hit certain areas while not affecting other coastal regions. i think something stronger than ice caps mmelting are needed to provide the water action it takes to deposit such large amounts of sediment.

i read the article and there was no mention of snow {ice} melting and even if there were, where did the water come from to form the snow and ice? the question doesn't change because you decided to be flippant.

if you look at the quote, it specifically mentioned humidity and rain not ice. so again instead of being whatever you were doing, please answer the questions.

My apology Arch, I thought you were being flippant and responded in kind. We are discussing an issue that was first debated in 1837:

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/permafr ... istory.htm

I really don't believe that you would be asking "Where did the water come from?" if the current ice caps melted and you were standing knee deep in the ultimate Flandrian transgression.

Since ice = solid water, the answer to your question, "Where did the water come from?" is, "It was there all the time":

1. Earth cools down, ice formation increases on land, sea levels drop.
2. Earth warms up, ice formation reduces on land, sea levels rise.

Now, it is your turn to answer my question from a different post. I believe it is relevant here since it will tell me where you're coming from and I will ask you again while here:

"Do you believe that Methusaleh was a real-life person who died at the age of 969? Yes, or no?"

I wish I could put $20 on "Yes."

Since ice = solid water, the answer to your question, "Where did the water come from?" is, "It was there all the time":

sorry that doesn't make sense. how did it get there in the first place? you make it sound like it is a cyclical event yet judging from the current situation there seems to be MORE water now than then. where did the extra water come from?

under your reasoning, the oceans should be a lot lower at this time because of the gigantic ice caps still present at the poles.

so something doesn't add up.

Do you believe that Methusaleh was a real-life person who died at the age of 969? Yes, or no?"

so you do not label me incorrectly i am not a standard run of the mill christian (i told minimalist in a pm that i got booted off two christian websites within a week, i was called a false teacher in one of them several times). i look for the truth and the Bible has to be true in all parts or we do not have any hope and can not look to Christ for salvation because how would we know when He and the Bible were lying and when they were telling the truth. God cannot lie nor would He allow His word to lie and though some verses need more investigation than others to understand their meaning, the Bible is true in all parts.

so my answer is 'Yes'.

Damn.....cost me $20 bucks.


Never a bookie around when you need one.

Since ice = solid water, the answer to your question, "Where did the water come from?" is, "It was there all the time":

sorry that doesn't make sense. how did it get there in the first place? you make it sound like it is a cyclical event yet judging from the current situation there seems to be MORE water now than then. where did the extra water come from?

under your reasoning, the oceans should be a lot lower at this time because of the gigantic ice caps still present at the poles.

so something doesn't add up.

Arch, it certainly adds up. As you have pointed out astutely we are still in an ice age, albeit in an interim warm period. There is not as much ice locked up in the north and south poles now as there was at the Last Glacial Maximum. North America alone was covered by ice a mile thick as far south as the midwest U.S.

http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/

That's where the water came from. Yes, it is a cyclical event. And yes, at the Last Glacial Maximum sea levels were as much as 120 meters below current levels. Apparently, in your world that never happened. I grew up in Seattle where the Puget Sound and nearby lakes were carved by glaciers a mile high. You can still see the glacial scraping along granite mountains. I guess that didn't happen either? There is no more water today than there was back then since we live in a closed system (ie Earth).

so my answer is 'Yes'.

The maximum lifespan of humans on the planet is 120 years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_life_span

What evidence do you have that supports Methusaleh living a total of 969 years, or eight times longer than anyone could possibly live today?