A rational explanation for Noah's flood.

Sybarite

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 Dec 2002
Messages
27,781
Location
France
Visit site
This story has long bothered my credulity as a Christian and a sailor. There is just not enough water to cover the Earth after just 150 days of rain – no matter how hard it rains.

Suppose though that the flood story takes place on the shores of the Black Sea instead of in Sumeria in Mesopotamia.

In the past, the Black Sea was much smaller than it is today. There was a land sill which prevented the Aegean (and thus the Mediterranean Sea) from communicating with the Black Sea. Then around 5600 BC there was a build-up of Mediterranean Sea levels which led to the breaching of the sill, like a dam bursting, and water flowed in at a catastrophic rate. This could of course be associated with the heavy rains mentioned in the Bible.

Suppose Noah had built his Ark on the pre-flood western shores of the Black Sea. Within weeks or months the new shoreline would have been over a hundred miles further west - around Constanza in present day Romania – and of course out of their sight. Suppose again that the Ark drifted then with the prevailing westerly winds, they would have drifted the 700 miles across the Black Sea following the clockwise currents generated by the wind, all the time remaining out of sight of land. When they finally touched land it would have been on the Eastern side of the Black Sea in present day Armenia. Also supposing that the flood waters surged above present day levels before settling back down again over time, this would have placed the Ark in the foothills of the Ararat mountain range. QED…!


Extracts from Wikipedia

“The Black Sea deluge is a hypothesized catastrophic rise in the level of the Black Sea circa 5600 BC due to waters from the Mediterranean Sea breaching a sill in the Bosporus Strait.” …

“In 1997, William Ryan and Walter Pitman published evidence that a massive flooding of the Black Sea occurred about 5600 BC through the Bosporus, following this scenario. Before that date, glacial meltwater had turned the Black and Caspian Seas into vast freshwater lakes which were draining into the Aegean Sea. As glaciers retreated, some of the rivers emptying into the Black Sea declined in volume and changed course to drain into the North Sea. The levels of the lakes dropped through evaporation, while changes in worldwide hydrology caused sea level to rise. The rising Mediterranean finally spilled over a rocky sill at the Bosporus. The event flooded 155,000 km2 (60,000 sq mi) of land and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline to the north and west. According to the researchers, "Ten cubic miles [42 km3] of water poured through each day, two hundred times what flows over Niagara Falls ... The Bosporus flume roared and surged at full spate for at least three hundred days."

Samplings of sediments in the Black Sea by a series of expeditions carried out between 1998 to 2005 confirmed the conclusion of Pitman and Ryan. These results were also completed by the Noah project led by the Bulgarian Institute of Oceanography …. Furthermore, calculations made by Mark Siddall predicted an underwater canyon that was actually found.”
 
It's not an unreasonable hypothesis, especially since a similar deluge (albeit in reverse) will happen when Nigara Falls finally erodes away to ?Lake Superior and drains it.

<<Slight digression alert>>

I can't for the life of me remember where they were supposed to have found remains of "the ark", but I have a hunch it was in Turkey. However, take that particular bit of "evidence" with a pinch of salt for 2 reasons:
1) Those types of archaeologists are, what we refer to in the trade as, nut jobs
2) The technology available to build anything sizeable enough to merit interpretation as an ark is higly unlikely to have existed around 5600BC - Middle Eastern societies were only just starting the change over from hunter-gatherer to sedentary farming cultures, so it's unlikely they'd be building big boats.

By contrast, the Dover boat that was found a few years ago was an estimated 12-14m in length and was dated to 1500-1300BC, ie, 3500 years old, as opposed to 8700 years old. It was constructed in oak planking, and stitched together with some rather funky double-ended dovetail joint-like things. It must have leaked like a sieve!
 
I'm treading on sensitive ground and have no wish to offend anyone but are you sure you should be considering biblical accounts as fact.

I amagine that biblical accounts have, over the years, been told and retold, translated innumerable times, re-interpreted just as many times and, while I have no doubt the core messages are there if you want to look, as a historical document it must be flawed.

The Black Sea flood is as good an account of the Flood as any I suppose as, after all, the Mediterranean has also emptied and refilled via the Straits of Gibraltar, albeit in prehistoric times.

Tom
 
Last edited:
I don't see why any reasonable person would be offended by the idea that folk tales change with time and the older they are the more they get changed. Whilst I'm no thelogian, I think the main message in any of the OT stories is one of the conduct that is being expected, rather than the fact of things.

That said, using archaeological evidence for political/ historical justification is something that certain groups have used from time to time, such as the Nazis, Israel and others. Oops, did I say that out loud? :D
 
I remember reading somewhere that most cultures have a folk "flood memory" story similar to the biblical account. Sea levels have risen & fallen over the aeons with ice ages & warm spells, plus land falling and rising at the tectonic plate level. The English channel was dry land once (within Human existence) as was much of Cardigan Bay. Many of the biblical Mediterranean ports (plus some off India) are now underwater.


As to upsetting people, there are Christian Fundamentalists who will tell you that the Bible is the literal word of their God & to doubt its accuracy is a heinous crime. They don't believe in archeology or carbon dating tho'.:confused:
 
I thought that faith was meant to be an alternative to rational, scientific, empirical,etc explanation and that you only needed one or the other but not both. Indeed if you feel you need both doesn't that weaken the confidence you are expressing in both schemes?
 
Then around 5600 BC there was a build-up of Mediterranean Sea levels

But the Bible has the worlds age as only 4000 years so how does that pan out ?

And if the Bible can be wrong wrt the age of the world, then what is the point of asking about Noah's ark ?

Boo2
 
As we are now more knowledgeable of the way erosion effects our world, your thoughts and those of others that the flood story takes place on the shores of the Black Sea instead of in Sumeria in Mesopotamia is to me very plausible.

As for the accuracy of the story in its present form, I would also think that the base of such a story would remain correct, in so much that it would have been quite a catastrophic event which would have effected a substantial population.

Also someone surviving such an ordeal having escaped on a platform that floated, boat/ raft, would be talked about and IMO enter into legend.

Re-tracing a story such as this is for me always fascinating and for most of us that can see through those that hype it up and those that dismiss it out of hand will always find this feat of some ancient mariner (intended or not) of great interest.
 
But the Bible has the worlds age as only 4000 years so how does that pan out ?

And if the Bible can be wrong wrt the age of the world, then what is the point of asking about Noah's ark ?

Boo2

Not 4000 years old but created in 4000BC (October 26, 4004 BC, 9:00 am to be precise) so 6000 and some years old. Pay attention, there will be a test.
 
Noah and the flood

The idea that the Flood covered the world as we know it today is one of the areas with which I would take issue. When the story of Noah was originally written, the World as the writer knew it was very much smaller. It seems unlikely that he knew anything of the Americas, of China or of Asia. His view of the World would have been very confined by comparison to our understanding of it. Therefore the idea that there was a Flood that covered the whole of the Earth is mistaken.

There appears to be archealogical evidence that there was a major flood at some time and it seems likely that the story of this was handed down the generations as verbal history before being committed to writing at some point, almost certainly, hundreds if not thousands of years after it happened.
 
But the Bible has the worlds age as only 4000 years so how does that pan out ?

And if the Bible can be wrong wrt the age of the world, then what is the point of asking about Noah's ark ?

Boo2

Strictly speaking, the bible doesn't say anything about the age of the world. Some bishop (in the middle ages?) attempted to calculate the age of the earth by working back thro the generations of people mentioned in the bible to the "creation of Adam". That is where that date comes from, but there are several assumptions involved that are not confirmable. However, the Christian Fundamentalists in the American Bible Belt believe it in preference to current technology & science.
 
the Christian Fundamentalists in the American Bible Belt believe it in preference to current technology & science.

I've met a couple of these in the US and they are scary. Always struck me as loud mouths with closed minds.

Always seemed keen to proselytise and save me from myself despite my indications that I am prefectly happy with my own beliefs and feel no need to share them with others.

Tom
 
Noah’s flood ?

He was one of many to comment on flooding in the Middle East, and was giving his version of other, earlier flood stories, e.g. that of Gilgamesh, amongst others.

Archaeologists have variously placed the flooding to the Med, the Black Sea and more recently the Persian Gulf. No-one really knows the where and when of it.

Obviously a well remembered oral history of many tribes that, as usual, gets a bit garbled along the way - and none the worse for it…..but by no means Noah’s.
 
There are in fact over 190 different versions of the Great Flood legend in different cultures around the world, including Atlantis (destroyed in a flood cataclysm) and of course the epic of Gilgamesh that the Noah story is based on.

What this tends to confirm from an archaeo-historical perspective is that there probably was some great deluge in very distant past, but that it must have been at a very early period in man's history in order that so many cultures have retained essentially the same legend in their folklore despite being sundered by distance and time from other cultures with the same legend.
 
If the YBW forum had existed at the time of the Flood, would Noah have posted his story on Scuttlebut or PBO? Or would he have been very daring and chosen the Mobo dark side?
 
Top