|
In 5600, the Mediterranean flooded into the Black Sea lake with so much force, it drove the many peoples around it far away. Some carried civilization to Sumeria and Egypt, others built the world's largest buildings along their path to modern-day Paris. Come face the starvation, theft and wars these people encountered. |
|
Group News
Arguments Against It
~ Aug 30, 2008 - 19:46 An article has come out strongly against the flood being of catastrophic proportions. But I find it hard to accept in the way it's presented. more... An Update On the Controversy About the Flood ~ Aug 24, 2004 - 22:23 A controversy still rages about whether the flood was cataclysmic or more mild, and whether it was the source for the Biblical Flood and the Gilgamesh Flood. This new article discusses the state of the controversy over whether it was cataclysmic or not. more... Another Hittite Article ~ Jan 25, 2004 - 19:02 How were women treated by the Hittites relative to men? more... Read the November Issue of Discover ~ Dec 14, 2003 - 01:34 It has an article about a city that was born about 5700 BC (a hundred years before our flood) and which is now under a lake. With all this in common, it's interesting that this little village is about 20 miles from Rome. more... |
An Update On the Controversy About the Flood
dateline: Aug 24, 2004 - 22:23
A controversy still rages about whether the flood was cataclysmic or more mild, and whether it was the source for the Biblical Flood and the Gilgamesh Flood. This new article discusses the state of the controversy over whether it was cataclysmic or not.
There is a short article in the August 12, 2004 issue of "Nature", titled "Noah's Flood commenting on the ongoing controversy, all based on the book of the same title by Ryan and Pitman (and upon which this group is based). It is essentially a 'study' of the 'studies', only 2 pages long. Most of the participants in this branch of the controversy neglect the aspect that this could be the source of both the Biblical and Gilgamesh flood stories. They are simply addressing whether the flood was cataclysmic or much less drastic. Ryan and Pitman claimed the flood raised the water level by 510 feet. Robert Ballard (et al) agreed on the depth, and they both claim to have found the original coastline. According to this article, most recent experts feel the water rose by between 50 and 150 meters. The least difference in the levels mentioned is by Namik Cagatay, head of marine geology at Istanbul Technical University, who says it was more like 18 meters. The article is actually centered on a new group of scientists, who have been studying the shape of the basin and the sediments in it for traces of how much effect the Coriolis Force had. The Coriolis effect is due to the rotation of the Earth, and causes the rotation of waters (clockwise in the northern hemisphere, counter-clockwise in the South). It can be seen in the rotating currents of the seas as well as the contents of a basin of water when the plug is pulled or the toilet is flushed. If the Coriolis force is shown in the shape and sediments of the Black Sea, then the flooding was of less force (though I think it could still have caused serious problems for the inhabitants). If the momentum of the flow of water overpowered the Coriolis force, the sediments and shape of the bottom would be more random. The main study referred to in this article was by one of this group of scientists named Mark Siddall. His computer models support the idea that the Black Sea flood must have been cataclysmic. His more technical analysis of the flood has changed Ryan and Pitman's estimates of the flood duration up to 33 years. He also feels that the flow over the Bosporus sill was about 20 times that of the Niagara Falls rather than 9 times like Pitman suggested. by: Apiladey ApilSin |
