Okay so almost all adherents of Abrahamic religions believe there was a flood around 2200 BC. They believe it quite strongly. That is to say, if
A = the religion is true, and
B = a flood happened
then A => B strongly. The chronology can be established by the genealogies of Noah, as was done by Ussher.
So if I disprove B, then by contrapositive, I would be disproving A with as much strength as they assign to A => B.
I need “slam dunk” disproofs of B though. This has proved rather hard to do, if we allow any miracles to happen. I have come up with a few categories:
1) Common sense questions … how did intricate ecosystems form over the last 4k years, with predators not eating prey for a while? How did Koalas get back to Australia? But most of these can be answered by a miracle.
2) Historical evidence … pyramids were built by egyptians before and after the flood. Is there any more such evidence? The problem here is, how do we KNOW when they were built? Carbon dating? Or are there numerous methods? I think this is one of the most promising avenues for atheists to demonstrate why they don’t believe in the flood.
3) Random scientific evidence … not sure what would go here. Genetics showing that animals were evolving for millions of years? How would one show that?
You atheists might come up with some really well-researched disproofs here. I need them in order to debate rabbis. Otherwise they seem to shrug things off, saying that by extrapolating “theories” to the past, one gets conclusions they can’t be 100% sure of. And the further into the past we extrapolate, the weaker our conclusions get. For example, Carbon dating does indeed depend on the ratio of concentrations of C14 in the atmosphere, which we cannot possibly know for sure. Even dendrochronology, that we use to calibrate this model, relies on assumptions like “trees grow at the same rate in the same year”, or that “carbon gets stuck in one of the tree rings.” Also I have heard of radiocarbon dating things incorrectly. And how would we date the pyramids of ancient egypt anyway? Seriation? :)
Anyway, I need something that would be backed up by an actual logical argument from start to finish. If we have several independent arguments, the probability of them all being wrong will multiply!
Posted: April 15th 2011
George Locke
The notion of a global flood would be laughable if people didn’t take it so seriously. All the information you need to convince yourself that it’s crock of hooey is here (the first article in particular).
The whole idea is nonsense. Even the simplest objections are sufficient to upend it: where did all the water come from, and where did it all go? Suggesting that a miracle might be responsible is unsatisfactory unless there’s (extraordinary) evidence to prove that something miraculous occurred. You can’t solve a problem by suggesting an explanation that itself demands an explanation!
You should know that it’s going to be practically impossible to convince a rabbi to renounce his faith, and it’s almost surely a waste of your time. It’s kind of a cliche among gnu atheists, but you can’t reason someone out of a position when they didn’t arrive at it by reason in the first place.
Posted: April 18th 2011
Reed Braden www
For one thing, we still have Koalas.
Posted: April 18th 2011