Quranic Version of the Great Flood
This is a continuation of the discussion on the great flood on the "Historical Veracity: The Bible vs. Other Ancient Manuscripts" thread with a Quranic twist. Past posts:
TDLS:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:As I've pointed out the laws of physics in this universe make it not only implausible but impossible, if you want to live in a collectively-solipsistic world where if you can believe it: it's real I want to make sure you're aware how much of a douche bag you would be.
If reality doesn't support your world view: just keep shouting MAGIC DUNNIT, until the proponents of reality get bored and wander off.
I don't think you're like that though, what's your view on the flood?
I'm not really arguing that the flood is real but that arguing from a scientific point of view doesn't make sense against a divine intervention. You can say there is no proof of the existence of such a flood but saying that it's impossible to happen wouldn't mean much against a figure that's claimed to be omnipotent.
For my views on the flood, see below:
I do not really have my mind completely set on one side of the story. I don't think something of similar magnitude is impossible to happen but I believe it's highly exaggerated.According to the geneologies outlined in the bible, the greatest length of time possible fo the flood to have accured is 4600 years ago, generally though it's believed to be 4400 years ago.
http://www.spiritrestoration.org/Chu...nt%20Bible.htm
If you're a biblical literalist, science has no role in revealing the truth about the age of the earth.
You may find this article interesting:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:Evidence of the Flood?
Nearly all people who reject the notion that there was a `global flood` point to the lack of any physical evidence to support a sudden and mass extinction of all life on Earth which is to be expected had such an event occurred.
The question that needs to be asked is not `where is the evidence` but `when is the evidence`?
That a sudden mass extinction took place on Earth (as would result from a global flood) is already a well known and universally established scientific fact...It has been catalogued and documented and is being taught in every science book throughout the world.
"The Permian-Triassic (P-Tr) extinction event, sometimes informally called the Great Dying, was an extinction event that occurred 251.4 million years ago (mya),[1] forming the boundary between the Permian and Triassic geologic periods. It was the Earth's most severe extinction event, with up to 96 percent of all marine species[2] and 70 percent of terrestrial vertebrate species becoming extinct.
The causes for the extinction event are similar to those found for the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event and has centered on large or multiple impact event(s) or increased vulcanism. However, other, though less-understood, events may have separately or in combination led to the extinction event."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian-Triassic_extinction_event
The main reason people do not link between the overwhelming extinction evidence and the story of the global flood is the preconceived and unsupported notion that humanity has only been around for a few thousand years.
How Old Was Noah?"And We had sent Noah to his people, so he stayed with them one thousand less fifty years. Then the flood took them while they were wicked." (29:14)The above verse provides a key to understanding events in their correct time context.
No reason exists nor evidence presented that shows human life-spans are getting shorter. Therefore, if a person in the best of health can now reach 120-130 years, then the people of ancient times cannot be far from that life-span range. Therefore, how can Noah be amongst his people for nearly 1,000 years and still be treated as a normal person? (nowhere do we read that his people were surprised by his age nor did they shun him for it...In-fact, they denied his messengership throughout).
The answer may be found by looking into a simple and well known scientific fact: The Earth is constantly slowing down.
Therefore, keeping in mind the basic definition of a year being: `1 complete rotation of the Earth around the sun`, then it may very well be possible that Noah and his people had normal life spans like we do today, however, because they lived at a time when the Earth was moving in its orbit around the sun much faster, then the length in the count of their years differed from the length of our count of today.
This view on the Quranic information would indeed place Noah closer to the event of mass extinction that occurred over two hundred million years ago.
Continental Drift.
Another fact worth pointing out by looking at any surface map of Earth is that the continents are drifting away from from each other at a steady rate.
We are told that the global flood wiped out all life (except that saved by Noah). The continental drift further supports the understanding that this event took place millions of years ago as the only surviving animals would have been those that were with Noah on the ark. Thus, for animal life to be found in a stand-alone continent such as Australia, it would mean that the surviving animals were able to make their way from the ark and then multiply and travel until they reached the lands of Australia before the continent began to drift from the mainland. Otherwise, we would have found animal life concentrated in 1 or 2 continents as the others would be unreachable for animals by land.
The last time our land-mass was connected (dubbed "Pangea") was during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras about 250 million years ago, before each of the component continents were separated into their current configuration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea
Himster:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:The magnitude claimed in the bible is quite impossible, mass extinctions happened a lot in our planets history, but a global flood is impossible: Here's why:I'm not really arguing that the flood is real but that arguing from a scientific point of view doesn't make sense against a divine intervention. You can say there is no proof of the existence of such a flood but saying that it's impossible to happen wouldn't mean much against a figure that's claimed to be omnipotent.
For my views on the flood, see below:
I do not really have my mind completely set on one side of the story. I don't think something of similar magnitude is impossible to happen but I believe it's highly exaggerated.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:So, here are the calculations:
First, Everest:
V = 4/3×pi×r3
= 4/3×pi×6387.248 km3
= 1.09151×1012 km3
Now, the Earth at sea level:
V = 4/3×pi×r3
= 4/3×pi×6378.4 km3
= 1.08698×1012 km3
The difference between these two figures is the amount of water needed to just
cover the Earth: 4.525×109 Or, to put into a more sensible number,
4,525,000,000,000 cubic kilometres. This is one helluva lot of water.
For those who think it might come from the polar ice caps, please don't forget
that water is more dense than ice, and thus that the volume of ice present in
those ice caps would have to be more than the volume of water necessary.
Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you
think that is? Well, water at STP weighs in at 1 gram/cubic centimetre (by
definition), so:
4.525×109 km3 of water,
×109 (cubic meters in a cubic kilometer),
×106 (cubic centimetres in a cubic meter),
×1 g/cm3 (denisty of water),
×10-3 (kilograms),
(turn the crank)
equals 4.525×1021 kg
Ever wonder what the effects of that much weight would be? Well, many times in
the near past (i.e., the Pleistocene), continental ice sheets covered many of
the northern states and most all of Canada. For the sake of argument, let's say
the area covered by the Wisconsinian advance (the latest and greatest) was
10,000,000,000 (ten million) km2, by an average thickness of 1 km of ice
(a good estimate... it was thicker in some areas [the zones of accumulation]
and much thinner elsewhere [at the ablating edges]).
Now, 1.00×107 km2 times 1 km thickness equals 1.00×107 km3 of ice.
Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.525×109 km3 of
water for the Flood? Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice
(which is frozen water, remember?) would be precisely 0.222% [...do the math]
(that's zero decimal two hundred twenty two thousandths) percent of the water
needed for the flood.
Well, the Wisconsinian glacial stade ended about 25,000 YBP (years before present),
as compared for the approximately supposedly 4,000 YBP flood event.
Due to these late Pleistocene glaciations (some 21,000 years preceding the supposed
flood), the mass of the ice has actually depressed the crust of the Earth. That
crust, now that the ice is gone, is slowly rising (called glacial rebound); and
this rebound can be measured, in places (like northern Wisconsin), in centimetres-
per-year. Sea level was also lowered some tens of meters due to the very finite
amount of water in the Earth's hydrosphere being locked up in glacial ice sheets
(geologists call this glacioeustacy).
Now, glacial rebound can only be measured, obviously, in glaciated terranes, i.e.,
the Sahara is not rebounding as it was not glaciated during the Pleistocene. This
lack of rebound is noted by laser ranged interferometery and satellite geodesy [so
there], as well as by geomorphology. Glacial striae on bedrock, eskers, tills,
moraines, rouche moutenees, drumlins, kame and kettle topography, fjords, deranged
fluvial drainage and erratic blocks all betray a glacier's passage. Needless to say,
these geomorphological expressions are not found everywhere on Earth (for instance,
like the Sahara). Therefore, although extensive, the glaciers were a local (not
global) is scale. Yet, at only 0.222% the size of the supposed flood, they have had
a PROFOUND and EASILY recognisable and measurable effects on the lands.
Yet, the supposed flood of Noah, supposedly global in extent, supposedly much more
recent, and supposedly orders of magnitude larger in scale; has exactly zero
measurable effects and zero evidence for it's occurrence.
Golly, Wally. I wonder why that may be...?
Further, Mount Everest extends through 2/3 of the Earth's atmosphere. Since two
forms of matter can't occupy the same space, we have an additional problem with the
atmosphere. Its current boundary marks the point at which gasses of the atmosphere
can escape the Earth's gravitational field. Even allowing for partial dissolving of
the atmosphere into our huge ocean, we'd lose the vast majority of our atmosphere
as it is raised some 5.155 km higher by the rising flood waters; and it boils off
into space.
Yet, we still have a quite thick and nicely breathable atmosphere. In fact, ice
cores from Antarctica (as well as deep-sea sediment cores) which can be
geochemically tested for paleoatmospheric constituents and relative gas ratios; and
these records extend well back into the Pleistocene, far more than the supposed
4,000 YBP flood event. Strange that this major loss of atmosphere, atmospheric
fractionation (lighter gasses - oxygen, nitrogen, fluorine, neon, etc. - would
have boiled off first in the flood-water rising scenario, enriching what remained
with heavier gasses - argon, krypton, xenon, radon, etc.), and massive
extinctions from such global upheavals are totally unevidenced in these cores.
Even further, let us take a realistic and dispassionate look at the other claims
relating to global flooding and other such biblical nonsense.
Particularly, in order to flood the Earth to the Genesis requisite depth of 10
cubits (~15' or 5 m.) above the summit of Mt. Ararat (16,900' or 5,151 m AMSL), it
would obviously require a water depth of 16,915' (5,155.7 m), or over three miles
above mean sea level. In order to accomplish this little task, it would require
the previously noted additional 4.525×109 km3 of water to flood the Earth to this
depth. The Earth's present hydrosphere (the sum total of all waters in, on and
above the Earth) totals only 1.37×109 km3. Where would this additional
4.525×109 km3 of water come from? It cannot come from water vapour (i.e., clouds)
because the atmospheric pressure would be 840 times greater than standard pressure
of the atmosphere today. Further, the latent heat released when the vapour
condenses into liquid water would be enough to raise the temperature of the
Earth's atmosphere to approximately 3,570 C (6,460 F).
Someone, who shall properly remain anonymous, suggested that all the water needed
to flood the Earth existed as liquid water surrounding the globe (i.e., a "vapour
canopy"). This, of course, is staggeringly stupid. What is keeping that much water
from falling to the Earth? There is a little property called gravity that would
cause it to fall.
Let's look into that from a physical standpoint. To flood the Earth, we have
already seen that it would require 4.525×109 km3 of water with a mass of
4.525×1021 kg. When this amount of water is floating about the Earth's
surface, it stored an enormous amount of potential energy, which is converted to
kinetic energy when it falls, which, in turn, is converted to heat upon impact
with the Earth. The amount of heat released is immense:
Potential energy: E=MgH, where
M = mass of water,
g = gravitational constant and,
H = height of water above surface.
Now, going with the Genesis version of the Noachian Deluge as lasting 40 days and
nights, the amount of mass falling to Earth each day is 4.525×1021 kg/40 24-hr.
periods. This equals 1.10675×1020 kilograms daily. Using H as 10 miles (16,000
meters), the energy released each day is 1.73584×1025 joules. The amount of energy
the Earth would have to radiate per m2/sec is energy divided by surface area of the
Earth times number of seconds in one day. That is:
e = 1.735384×1025/(4×3.14159×((63862)×86,400))
e = 391,935.0958 j/m2/s
Currently, the Earth radiates energy at the rate of approximately 215 joules/m2/sec
and the average temperature is 280 K. Using the Stefan-Boltzman 4th-Power Law to
calculate the increase in temperature:
E (increase)/E (normal) = T (increase)/T4 (normal)
E (normal) = 215
E (increase) = 391,935.0958
T (normal) = 280.
Turn the crank, and T (increase) equals 1,800 K.
The temperature would thusly rise 1,800 K, or 1,526.84 C (that's 2,780.33 F...
lead melts at 880 F...). It would be highly unlikely that anything short of fused
quartz would survive such an onslaught. Also, the water level would have to rise
at an average rate of 5.5 inches/min; and in 13 minutes would be in excess of six
feet deep.
Finally, at 1800 K water would not exist as liquid.
It is quite clear that a Biblical Flood is and was quite impossible. Only fools
and those shackled by dogma would insist otherwise."
Interesting, no?
If you accept the doctrine of divine intervention to make sense of biblical scripture, you also have to accept the doctrine of divine revelation, which means the flood had to happen 4400 years ago, as outlined in the divinely revelealed bible.
You can believe humanity has been civilised for millions and millions of years and Noah was on Pangaea (lol) and we just didn't realise because our concept of what a years constitutes is subject to minor fluctuation, but you'll find practically all people agree that is just silly.
TDLS:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:It's still a logical fallacy to use that argument for the reasons I've explained before.The magnitude claimed in the bible is quite impossible, mass extinctions happened a lot in our planets history, but a global flood is impossible: Here's why:
I'm not arguing about the Christian version of events. I'm arguing about the general idea of a flood.If you accept the doctrine of divine intervention to make sense of biblical scripture, you also have to accept the doctrine of divine revelation, which means the flood had to happen 4400 years ago, as outlined in the divinely revelealed bible.
You can believe humanity has been civilised for millions and millions of years and Noah was on Pangaea (lol) and we just didn't realise because our concept of what a years constitutes is subject to minor fluctuation, but you'll find practically all people agree that is just silly.
Well, the article kinda puts the flood around 250 million years ago. It makes sense from the viewpoint that all the landmass was close enough for the animals to redistribute again and it's consistent with the extinction event shown on the graph. Even if humans were not there an extinction even happened 250 million years ago and the overall landmass was close to each other enough for re-population by animals.
Himster:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:How is it a fallacy to calculate the ammount of water required to flood the world to cover the highest mountains?It's still a logical fallacy to use that argument for the reasons I've explained before.
Aha. Well I'm pretty much just arguing against the christian version. A global flood when the tectonic plates were drastically different isn't quite as impossible.I'm not arguing about the Christian version of events. I'm arguing about the general idea of a flood.
Well, the article kinda puts the flood around 250 million years ago. It makes sense from the viewpoint that all the landmass was close enough for the animals to redistribute again and it's consistent with the extinction event shown on the graph. Even if humans were not there an extinction even happened 250 million years ago and the overall landmass was close to each other enough for re-population by animals.
ok. What about the neccessary water needed for a global flood, keeping in mind the atmosphere can only hold 1 inch of liquid (and has been that way for 2 billion years). It'd be a rather extraordinary event for enough water to appear to flood the earth, an equally extraordinary event would be the disappearance of this water and leave no trace of it.
Anyway, that period generally is associated with vast amounts of coal ash, it makes more sense that that extinction was caused by a super volcano in Siberia called the Siberian traps. The low oxygen levels of the period are generally attributed to the rapid burning of fossil fuels caused by the siberian traps. Whatever happened, this extinction is what allowed the rise of the dinosaurs, every cloud has a silver lining.
edit: Dudes, we is getting off topic, yo, fer realz.
Because you're arguing against a divine intervention. There could be no oceans whatsoever on Earth and there could be a great flood made by God.How is it a fallacy to calculate the ammount of water required to flood the world to cover the highest mountains?
The flood was created by Allah. So, the amount of water available for him to use was infinite. I believe the waters also receded pretty quickly. So any lasting effects could be negligible.Aha. Well I'm pretty much just arguing against the christian version. A global flood when the tectonic plates were drastically different isn't quite as impossible.
ok. What about the neccessary water needed for a global flood, keeping in mind the atmosphere can only hold 1 inch of liquid (and has been that way for 2 billion years). It'd be a rather extraordinary event for enough water to appear to flood the earth, an equally extraordinary event would be the disappearance of this water and leave no trace of it.
Anyway, that period generally is associated with vast amounts of coal ash, it makes more sense that that extinction was caused by a super volcano in Siberia called the Siberian traps. The low oxygen levels of the period are generally attributed to the rapid burning of fossil fuels caused by the siberian traps. Whatever happened, this extinction is what allowed the rise of the dinosaurs, every cloud has a silver lining.
Also, interesting of you to say volcanoes, from the article:
Could it be possible that waters didn't recede at all or receded very little? That flood could have actually shaped the coastline back then and the proof of it may be actually under water instead of above it.Many researchers argue a comet or asteroid impact caused Earth's worst mass extinction 251 million years ago.
While the above theory may be credible, it is always the testimony of the Almighty that we rely on for the accuracy of knowing past events:"So, when Our command came and the volcano erupted. We said: `Carry in it two from every pair, and your family; except those against whom the word has been issued; and whoever believed.` But those who believed with him were few." (11:40)The Quran tells us that the great flood was caused primarily by lava gushing forth from a volcano. It is very likely that this volcano was underwater (the Quran uses the words `faar altanoor` which is literally: `the oven boiled`) causing the sea water to turn to steam and this producing tidal waves as well as torrential rains.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by TheDarkLordSeth
