The world is full of people I’d like to see in jail, but it’s not up to me.

It all comes down to power in the end. And manipulation. Prayer is an attempt to manipulate God. And New Atheism is a kind of tantrum.

Who is man to judge?

Well, I’m not asking for anyone’s permission. Much less the permission of an imaginary sky magician from Bronze age middle-eastern mythology.

I reserve the right to judge whatever and whomever I please.

I missed that before my last comment, so, my bad.

Of course because you are unable too. You’re not capable of doing so. All of your “missives” are just saying “well this is so and that is so” you never provide much if any evidence. This is a typical tactic of psychopaths, Jews and other gas-lighting semi-human animals that constantly lie and bullshit about most anything they talk about.

No he’s right.

“…his main points of “proof” are all localized floods that geology already knows about and understands very well…”

This is not true and you are either lying or do not know what you are talking about. There’s floods all over. Randall has shown flooding all over. We also have large, very large areas of mixed fish bones, vegetation and mud in the Arctic. We have almost unbelievable amount of woolly Mammoths that were flash frozen in Siberia. They mined their tusk for hundreds of years and are still digging them up. They have one preserved in the St. Petersburg museum. The best evidence is that a comet hit Greenland, where there’s a corresponding depression found, melted the Ice Age ice sheet and threw up a vast quantity of water, shutting out the Sun and depositing a large amount of snow freezing all those Mammoths. You can not in any way deny these Mammoths. It’s a fact that anyone can look up.

You can not deny the Carolina bays. It’s a fact and you have no other explanation. You are doing nothing but blowing smoke up our asses, a common occurrence with you.

https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-science-space/carolina-bays-and-destruction-north-america-004458

“…I’m very well versed in both of those floods…”

HAHAHHAAHAHHAAA

“…global flood didn’t happen, because those floods happened MUCH, MUCH further in the past than the Genesis flood was…”

So if the Bile says there’s a flood and it doesn’t correspond to when you say, I repeat, you say, the Bible says it happened then it didn’t happen??? For someone who says he doesn’t want to go by the Bible using it to determine what is true or not is…retarded.

“…literally zero geologic evidence for a globe-spanning flood…”

“…there is no proof at all…”

A lie or stupidity. One or the other.

As for humans in the Americas at earlier time periods a stone spear head was found embedded in a Mammoth off the eastern Atlantic coast with the bone tested to, I think it was, 40,000 years ago. Even more interesting is that the manufacture of this particular type spear point was only manufactured the same way in France in the stone age. So it’s likely that they, “came from France”, as the coneheads would say.

Gnon is a genocidal maniac, by our standards. And Gnon doesn’t answer to us, so it really doesn’t matter.

Besides, who is man to judge?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JOpPNra4bw

That's a pretty massive "if". One massive enough that there would be sufficient evidence for it in the geologic column that we'd all see it and recognize it, and it would be scientific fact at this point. The fact that it isn't considered scientific fact at this point is pretty much undeniable proof that this did not happen.

At the time suggested for the flood in Genesis, the global topography would have been close enough to what it is today that we can dismiss any differences as irrelevant. Given that – there isn't enough water on planet Earth to allow for a flood of the magnitude described in Genesis.

The global flood just didn't happen.

1.) The "Flood Myths" that proponents claim are "universal" to every ancient civilization are FAR from universal. The vast majority of ancient cultures do not have a flood myth. Flood myths are common, world wide, granted, but that isn't surprising considering most civilizations started in river valleys where floods would have been common.

2.) There is literally zero evidence of this flood in the geologic column

3.) There isn't enough water on the planet to facilitate this flood

4.) There is AMPLE evidence of MULTIPLE regional, historic floods that were MUCH SMALLER in scale than a world wide cataclysm, and the evidence in the geologic column is myriad, well established, and clear. These floods are almost all MUCH OLDER than the Genesis flood is purported to be, as well. So for there to be no evidence of the world wide flood, half as old as much smaller floods where we DO have evidence… well, draw the conclusion.

Furthermore, and finally… were I Christian, I'd be somewhat relieved to find out that my God is not the genocidal maniac that the Bible portrays him to be. I'd find the conclusion that He never flooded the planet, murdering men, women, children, infants, and every animal, to be reassuring and calming, not something to be disputed and evidence "made up" to prove. It's like Christians actually WANT the genocidal maniac God for some reason.

If the terrain of the Earth were leveled, and the current volume of water were in place, the depth would be over 1 km.

This was widely dismissed for years, until very recently, an impact crater was discovered under the ice in Greenland, which may very well coincide with the timing of the onset of the Younger Dryas.

I would definitely give that hypothesis some merit, given those recent discoveries, and I’m very excited to see how this all pans out.

Additionally, Graham Hancock, I think, has the opinion that the Americas were inhabited by humans much, much earlier than we’d originally expected, and I actually agree with him on that point. More and more archaeological sites are being found that are pushing the origin date back from 10,000 BP to much earlier dates. Monte Verde in Patagonia seems to be reliably and repeatedly dating to 14,000 BP, and if the Beringia migration hypothesis holds out, that means people would have almost necessarily have had to be here sooner thant hat, since the idea that humans would migrate from Alaska to modern day southern Chile in only a few tens of years seems crazy to me. I think there’s a site in Peru that they’re dating to 20,000 BP, and some arguing going on about a mammoth “kill” in California that dates to 130,000 BP (although that one is still hotly debated).

So don’t think I’m just dismissing Hancock, Carlson, etc whole-cloth. I’m not. I just disagree with the things they’ve said relating specifically to the topics at hand.

Randall Carlson is another perfect example of a Hancock, Von Daniken type. Don’t get me wrong, I really LIKE Randall. He’s a genuinely good dude, and extremely eloquent and tells a very compelling story. However, his main points of “proof” are all localized floods that geology already knows about and understands very well. The Missoula and Bonneville floods were grand, catastrophic, large-scale floods, but they were localized to the Columbia River drainage. I’m very well versed in both of those floods, about which he goes into massive detail, while suggesting that they were mroe than they actually were.

In fact, I’d argue that those floods are absolutely perfect examples of WHY the global flood didn’t happen, because those floods happened MUCH, MUCH further in the past than the Genesis flood was purported to have occurred, and the geologic evidence for them is absolutely incontrovertible.

For there to be literally zero geologic evidence for a globe-spanning flood (as well as there simply not being enough water on the planet for that to have occurred), but so MUCH evidence for those much smaller, localized floods that are circa twice as old…. Well, I don’t have any other explanation than to say that the global flood never happened. So, apparently, do all the scientists.

Harry Jones,

Agreed, but when there is no proof at all, as is the case in this situation, that’s hardly subjective. Believing in something for which there is no proof is just faith, and faith has no place in science.

McChuck,

Yes. Sea levels rose after the last ice age. Lots of ancient villages are under water, because lots of ancient villages, much like today, were built on the coasts (which are now 400 feet higher than they were during the ice ages). This is well understood and is not evidence of the floods in Genesis. In places like the North and Black seas, the inundation would have very reasonably been quite rapid. Again, these are evidence of localized flooding with well understood causes, known to science. They are not evidence of the flood of Genesis (which, again, would have been around 6 or 7 thousand years more recent than the inundations of the areas that you’re discussing, anyway, which would have been more along the lines of 13,000 years BPE, as opposed to the 6,000 BPE that the genesis flood is supposed to have happened.)