What IF Noah's Ark was found?

So then, by your own admission, you are only willing to accept certain evidence. Namely, you only accept the Bible, not the many other flood myths that came before it.


Ignorance is Bliss.
Reality is Better.

David B:

I think is rational to believe that if a story is recorded, then evidence is found that corroborates that story, then creedence is certainly more attributable to that story, yes.


Patrick Ashley

“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown

You (as usual) didn’t answer the question. The other stories were recorded as well (how do you think we know about them?). Your “evidence” is ambiguous at best – even in this hypothetical you dreamed up. But all you’ll believe is what’s in your Bible.

David B:

[qoute]You (as usual) didn’t answer the question. The other stories were recorded as well (how do you think we know about them?). Your “evidence” is ambiguous at best – even in this hypothetical you dreamed up. But all you’ll believe is what’s in your Bible.
[/quote]

Well, here we go with the personal slams again. But what else should I expect from you?

The evidence would not be “ambigious, at best” Dave. Your ability to accept it would be, of course.

And what other theories are you talking about? Earth to Dave, come in please!


Patrick Ashley

“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown

David B:

That’s not true, I’m not a Fundamentalist nor a Literalist.

Doesn’t anyone else care to comment on the crassness of this “moderator”?


Patrick Ashley

“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown

Pashley said:

Considering it wasn’t a “personal slam,” but rather a statement of fact about the way you act here, you should expect more of them (statements of fact, that is). You should know what a “personal slam” is, as you seem very prone to use them. You know, things like “Screw you, David” or calling people various names. Those are personal slams.

Yes, actually, it would. And several people have pointed that out to you. Your reaction was to slam them and basically say that anybody who doesn’t agree with you is an idiot or is anti-religious – even when they give you perfectly reasonable and rational explanations of why they disagreed.

Theories? Where did I say that? I didn’t. I said stories. And if you can’t figure this out, perhaps you should reread the thread, because it’s been mentioned several times. But I guess if it’s not in the Bible, it’s meaningless to you.

Indeed, this seems to be the root of the problem. You believe that no evidence is necessary. Yet you still want to pretend that you are in favor of having evidence. You have to choose a side, Patrick. You can’t have it both ways.

Ignorance is Bliss.
Reality is Better.

David B:

Again, you can’t see the forrest for the trees, David. The statement refers to faith. Of course, since you have never proclaimed any, I am left to assume you have none, and as such, cannot understand the statement.


Patrick Ashley

“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown

I still think it would be clear supportive evidence for the story of Utnapishtim. Any discrepancies in geometry or dimension of the craft could certainly be accounted for by the same literary license that allows a boat to hold far more creatures than could physically possible.

When arguing for support of an account, it is only reasonale to go to the original account. Utnapushtim’s story predates Noah’s and the cultural transmission is directly attributable to Abraham’s time at Ur. So, Pashley, you go find the boat and I’ll stock up on holy beverages to toast Ninkasi.


The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

Flood myths! Getcher flood myths here!

Here’s some you might like, Patrick, that predate the Noah myth (IIRC):

Assyrian:
The gods, led by Enlil, agreed to cleanse the earth of an overpopulated humanity, but Utnapishtim was warned by the god Ea in a dream. He and some craftsmen built a large boat (one acre in area, seven decks) in a week. He then loaded it with his family, the craftsmen, and “the seed of all living creatures.” The waters of the abyss rose up, and it stormed for six days. Even the gods were frightened by the flood’s fury. Upon seeing all the people killed, the gods repented and wept. The waters covered everything but the top of the mountain Nisur, where the boat landed. Seven days later, Utnapishtim released a dove, but it returned finding nowhere else to land. He next returned a sparrow, which also returned, and then a raven, which did not return. Thus he knew the waters had receded enough for the people to emerge. Utnapishtim made a sacrifice to the gods. He and his wife were given immortality and lived at the end of the earth.
[Sandars, chpt. 5]

Babylonian:
Three times (every 1200 years), the gods were distressed by the disturbance from human overpopulation. The gods dealt with the problem first by plague, then by famine. Both times, the god Enki advised men to bribe the god causing the problem. The third time, Enlil advised the gods to destroy all humans with a flood, but Enki had Atrahasis build an ark and so escape. Also on the boat were cattle, wild animals and birds, and Atrahasis’ family. After the flood, the gods regretted their action, and Enki established barren women and stillbirth to avoid the problem in the future. [Dalley, pp. 23-35]

Hindu:
“The Lord of the Universe,” to preserve king Satyavarata from dangers of the depravity of the age, sent him a large ship, and told him to gather himself, medicinal herbs, and pairs of brute animals aboard it to save them from a flood. Seven days later, the three worlds were flooded and darkened. The god appeared in the ocean as an enormous fish, a million leagues long, and Satyavarata tied the ark to its horn with a huge sea serpent. [Howey, pp. 389-390]

…so if we did find a RBB boat, we have a lot of stories to go through, to find which one is “right”. And if we have to believe in every belief of that religion then… :eek:

Every now and then I hear this “faith” thing thrown around as if it proves something.

Some of those with it seem to think it conveys special knowledge or an inherent superiority of thought process.

Some pretend that faith or “being saved” is like tryig to describe an orgasm to a five year old. If you don’t have it you can’t understand.

This is simply pure bullshit (though it sounds good.)

For those who go spouting off about how their faith gives them a special point of view the reality seems to be more like it gives them a lobotomy.

Faith is not a weapon. It is a burden.

What God do you believe in that fits in your little box?

Hey!! Keep those Ashur-loving Assyrians out of my mthology.

Utnapishtim is a Sumerian legend.


The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

I think that you have quite clearly stated the root of the problem of this debate. It has been asserted that you choose to ignore views oppositional to those you had hoped to elicit. Here, you have admitted that a contradictory perspective is plausible but have refused to personally accept said interpretation as a possibility. It is my understanding that the objective of the thread was to establish verification that biblical events are equivalent to real events. Even in light of the deficient and unrealistic parameters (e.g. omitting problems with the animals) of the hypothetical situation, it has been shown that alternative views are rationally based. You have elected to dismiss this fact.

In regards to your statement that it is reasonable to conform with the opinion that the discovery would authenticate the biblical tale, it is no less reasonable to assume the artifact would corroborate other enumerable theories. In fact, confirmation of the tale of Noah’s Ark is less probable, statistcally speaking, due to the deficient parameters for discussion you imposed. I suggest that you either cease to disregard the opposing views or substantiate what appears to be an irrational arguement.

Aaarrg!

Ziusudra is the Sumerian name. Damn, that’s what I get for posting these things without checking references first.
Ziusudra == Sumerian
Utnapishtim == Assyrian/Babylonian
Atrahasis == Akkadian/Babylonian
Spiritus == embarrased

Hey, in my defense the sources are not clear and Assyrian/Babylonian/Sumerian names are often mixed together in the same sources.

Yeah – that’s the ticket. And everyone know they were all Sumerian stories originally (well, except for the whole Marduk-tiamat cyle.) Anyway – I am right about Ninkai, so there.

Someone pass me a beer.


The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

::::: :passing Spiritus a much-needed brewsky:::::

damn smileys…

No offense, Hardcore, but I can’t help but comment that your previous post seems to indicate a desire to get somebody drunk and lick their ass.

Funny what one misplaced Smiley can convey.

[parable]Ok, here I find myself in the firing squad again…

IF, and I said “IF”, and this is the preposition you are to work on, the following came to pass…

Enough fossils were found for a single animal (say, an eagle) in an area that allowed scientists to trace the complete evolution of the animal back for millions of years.

How would you religious zealots deal with this?

I’d love to hear what you’d have to say.

Don’t be cheap and say “It could’nt ever/hasn’t happened.” Just assume, for the sake of argument, it DID. [/parable]

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
Scylla,

Yeah, but I wouldn’t have Spiritus in mind…

I’m thinking more Jenna Jameson…

Scylla:

No sir, faith is a freedom.

YOU bear the shackles of hoplessness.

YOU are the only thing in your box.

YOU can’t look outside the box.

I feel very sorry for you.


Patrick Ashley

“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown

Pashley, pashley, pashley… {sigh} And I had such high hopes for you.

You will gain a little more respect and recognition on this board if you would severely curtail espousing dogma at people and actually answer questions directed at you in some logical sense, even if you end it with, “This is what I believe, and I realize you might not agree.” I promise you that if you follow this advice, you will quickly stop being today’s SDMB whipping boy.

Esprix


Ask the Gay Guy!