₦airaland Forum

Mattswaggz:
Okay explain that flood event Scientifically let's see the depth of this madness you're insisting on. .

Lol, relax, I was once like you, or even worse.

There is a scientific theory called The Black Sea Flood (7,600 years ago)
At the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose globally.
Geological evidence suggests the water level rose hundreds of feet and submerged large inhabited areas.
For people living there, it could be perceived as the whole world flooding, because their “world” was limited to what they could see.

Flood Myths Worldwide Point to a Shared Human Memory.
More than 200 cultures have flood myths.
Mesopotamian, Greek, Chinese, Native American, African, Indian, etc..

Moveittothem:
Lol, relax, I was once like you, or even worse.

There is a scientific theory called The Black Sea Flood (7,600 years ago)
At the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose globally.
Geological evidence suggests the water level rose hundreds of feet and submerged large inhabited areas.
For people living there, it could be perceived as the whole world flooding, because their “world” was limited to what they could see.

Flood Myths Worldwide Point to a Shared Human Memory.
More than 200 cultures have flood myths.
Mesopotamian, Greek, Chinese, Native American, African, Indian, etc..

Flood myths by diversified cultures/people doesn't verify the Flood event in the Bible.....The flood event was premeditated,prewarmed caused to happen by the Lord and only those who were in the ark were saved (both humans and Animals)....The Flood was worldwide according to the Bible and every land Animal that wasn't in the ark died. That's what I asked you to explain not to justify the belief in comparism to that of others....I already know it was a belief and I care less if it's spread across different cultures and religions...floods are normal thing that happened across different locations and different quantities globally.

So I repeat again explain the flood event Scientifically because as far as science is concerned as at now, such thing couldn't have happened in history.

Mattswaggz:
Flood myths by diversified cultures/people doesn't verify the Flood event in the Bible.....The flood event was premeditated,prewarmed caused to happen by the Lord and only those who were in the ark were saved (both humans and Animals)....The Flood was worldwide according to the Bible and every land Animal that wasn't in the ark died. That's what I asked you to explain not to justify the belief in comparism to that of others....I already know it was a belief and I care less if it's spread across different cultures and religions...floods are normal thing that happened across different locations and different quantities globally.

So I repeat again explain the flood event Scientifically because as far as science is concerned as at now, such thing couldn't have happened in history.

There is a scientific theory called The Black Sea Flood (7,600 years ago)
At the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose globally.
Geological evidence suggests the water level rose hundreds of feet and submerged large inhabited areas.
For people living there, it could be perceived as the whole world flooding, because their “world” was limited to what they could see

The above is what I said earlier.

But have you thought it from the angle that they didn't explain that part well because of their limited knowledge of geography and geology?

Moveittothem:
There is a scientific theory called The Black Sea Flood (7,600 years ago)
At the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose globally.
Geological evidence suggests the water level rose hundreds of feet and submerged large inhabited areas.
For people living there, it could be perceived as the whole world flooding, because their “world” was limited to what they could see

The above is what I said earlier.

But have you thought it from the angle that they didn't explain that part well because of their limited knowledge of geography and geology?

You still haven't explained anything yet..... because your write up is suggesting the author of the verse in the Bible (which is assumably inspired by the Lord) was lying.

The biblical event was premeditated, prewarmed and caused to happened and it was said to kill every living land Animal except for those in the ark.....which means that those people you're talking about in other places in the world wouldn't have survived to tell the story...only the chosen one's in the ark could've told the story.

So I ask again for the last damn time...... explain that flood event Scientifically or accept that you've lied.

Mattswaggz:
You still haven't explained anything yet..... because your write up is suggesting the author of the verse in the Bible (which is assumably inspired by the Lord) was lying.

The biblical event was premeditated, prewarmed and caused to happened and it was said to kill every living land Animal except for those in the ark.....which means that those people you're talking about in other places in the world wouldn't have survived to tell the story...only the chosen one's in the ark could've told the story.

So I ask again for the last damn time...... explain that flood event Scientifically or accept that you've lied.

I have told you how I reconciled it with science.
It may be subjective because understanding differs.
Moses was probably writing the History that was passed down to him.
The downside of oral history is that it changes slightly over the years. 2,000 years before Moses is not beans.

Assuming Moses lied about it, it's just history, he wasn't there, that's what he was told, and it isn't his fault if it turned out to be a lie due to the way he wrote it down. It can't be totally dismissed, after the ice age, sea level rose globally.


Even classical physics conflicts with quantum mechanics, and no scientist has been able to unify it.
So that doesn't mean that Christian religion is against science orr contradicts it.

It's not a solid ground to disbelief in the existence of God.

Moveittothem:
I have told you how I reconciled it with science.
It may be subjective because understanding differs.
Moses was probably writing the History that was passed down to him.
The downside of oral history is that it changes slightly over the years. 2,000 years before Moses is not beans.

Assuming Moses lied about it, it's just history, he wasn't there, that's what he was told, and it isn't his fault if it turned out to be a lie due to the way he wrote it down. It can't be totally dismissed, after the ice age, sea level rose globally.


Even classical physics conflicts with quantum mechanics, and no scientist has been able to unify it.
So that doesn't mean that Christian religion is against science orr contradicts it.

It's not a solid ground to disbelief in the existence of God.

Lol....stop using classical physics and quantum whatsoever to compare here.... science has never claimed to be 100% right....it either works with facts or it maintains certain theory.

Now back to the topic.....are you admitting that the story is a lie and the writer (Inspired by ur lord) was lying as well?......if "No" then you haven't proven the event Scientifically then and neither can it be proven....which also means that you've failed to back ur earlier claim that science goes hand in hand with ur beliefs. .

Mattswaggz:
Lol....stop using classical physics and quantum whatsoever to compare here.... science has never claimed to be 100% right....it either works with facts or it maintains certain theory.

Now back to the topic.....are you admitting that the story is a lie and the writer (Inspired by ur lord) was lying as well?......if "No" then you haven't proven the event Scientifically then and neither can it be proven....which also means that you've failed to back ur earlier claim that science goes hand in hand with ur beliefs. .

I didn't say Moses lied, I said even if it turned out to be a lie, that it wasn't his fault because stories evolve, and can be misrepresented. I was talking hypothetically.

Oral history isn’t the same thing as scientific documentation.
Ancient people preserved events the best way they could, and stories can evolve. That doesn’t make them lies, it just means they weren’t doing modern science.
A story can come from a real event but still be recorded in symbolic or exaggerated form.

Science doesn’t confirm the literal details, but it does confirm large regional floods after the Ice Age and rising sea levels.
So the foundation is plausible even if the exact ancient narrative isn’t a scientific report.

Expecting ancient writers to produce classroom reviewed science is unrealistic. Their goal wasn’t scientific precision.

When you said I should stop comparing classical physics and quantum physics, you missed what I meant.
The analogy wasn’t about physics itself.

It was about how even within science, two accurate systems can conflict and still both be valid in their own domains. So conflict alone doesn’t make something FALSE.

I’m not claiming the Noah story is scientifically proven. I’m saying it’s not scientifically impossible that ancient people remembered a real catastrophic flood and preserved it in the way ancient cultures did; through narrative, symbolism, and oral tradition.
Science supports widespread floods after the Ice Age; it doesn’t verify the Noah's ark story. Those two can coexist without contradiction.

You don't expect to see a dy/dx prove of how it tallies with science. Moses didn't study in Harvard.

Moveittothem:
I didn't say Moses lied, I said even if it turned out to be a lie, that it wasn't his fault because stories evolve, and can be misrepresented. I was talking hypothetically.

Oral history isn’t the same thing as scientific documentation.
Ancient people preserved events the best way they could, and stories can evolve. That doesn’t make them lies, it just means they weren’t doing modern science.
A story can come from a real event but still be recorded in symbolic or exaggerated form.

Science doesn’t confirm the literal details, but it does confirm large regional floods after the Ice Age and rising sea levels.
So the foundation is plausible even if the exact ancient narrative isn’t a scientific report.

Expecting ancient writers to produce classroom reviewed science is unrealistic. Their goal wasn’t scientific precision.

When you said I should stop comparing classical physics and quantum physics, you missed what I meant.
The analogy wasn’t about physics itself.

It was about how even within science, two accurate systems can conflict and still both be valid in their own domains. So conflict alone doesn’t make something FALSE.

I’m not claiming the Noah story is scientifically proven. I’m saying it’s not scientifically impossible that ancient people remembered a real catastrophic flood and preserved it in the way ancient cultures did; through narrative, symbolism, and oral tradition.
Science supports widespread floods after the Ice Age; it doesn’t verify the Noah's ark story. Those two can coexist without contradiction.

You don't expect to see a dy/dx prove of how it tallies with science. Moses didn't study in Harvard.

Stop acting dumb and out of touch with the topic of discussion.....you said science goes hand in hand with your religious beliefs....you disagreed with me that science disapprove major percentage of your belief system to some extent and that's what led us here.

So it's either you admit that religion doesn't go hand in hand with science with one complimenting and amplifying the other or back the event I sited as an example Scientifically........do the necessary and stop beating about the bush.

I've already told you earlier that science and most religious beliefs (including yours) can hardly thrive as one and you said not only can they but they actually do......so establish how and where because as far as I am concerned they're like day and Night.....the method of one is contrary to the method of the other....while religion would mostly require faith and just adherence without basic reasons most of the time,science requires facts, evidences,track records and reasons to follow.

I am still waiting for your scientific proof or your admittance that you've lied.... beating about the bush changes nothing. .

Mattswaggz:
Stop acting dumb and out of touch with the topic of discussion.....you said science goes hand in hand with your religious beliefs....you disagreed with me that science disapprove major percentage of your belief system to some extent and that's what led us here.

So it's either you admit that religion doesn't go hand in hand with science with one complimenting and amplifying the other or back the event I sited as an example Scientifically........do the necessary and stop beating about the bush.

I've already told you earlier that science and most religious beliefs (including yours) can hardly thrive as one and you said not only can they but they actually do......so establish how and where because as far as I am concerned they're like day and Night.....the method of one is contrary to the method of the other....while religion would mostly require faith and just adherence without basic reasons most of the time,science requires facts, evidences,track records and reasons to follow.

I am still waiting for your scientific proof or your admittance that you've lied.... beating about the bush changes nothing. .

I’ve already explained the scientific angle behind the flood story countless times(Rising sea level worldwide, post ice-age floods, which are scientifically proven)

I can’t manufacture a laboratory experiment for an event recorded through ancient oral history.
If you can’t reconcile that, it’s more about your level of open-mindedness, not mine.

I’m not admitting to lying. I’m pointing out that you’re demanding scientific proof for something that belongs to theology, ancient narrative, and cultural memory.
That’s a mismatch of methods, not a moral failure.
Science deals with physical mechanisms; religion deals with meaning, memory, and interpretation.
The two can coexist without one replacing or disproving the other.
I never said the literal ark has scientific proof. I said the origin of the story could come from real catastrophic floods after the Ice Age, which science actually supports. That’s reasonable.
But since you believe every historical claim must be scientifically proven, let me show you the flaw:
Where is the scientific proof of where Socrates’ maternal grandmother came from?
If you can’t provide empirical evidence, does that mean she never existed? Of course not.

That’s exactly the mistake you’re making; trying to force science to verify every ancient narrative as if it were a physics experiment.

So here’s the final point
1)Either define what you consider valid proof, or
2)Stop insisting that every religious or historical claim must meet a scientific standard that even regular history doesn’t meet, that's hypocrisy