Re: AiG and radiocarbon dating


goozlefotz wrote:
> Rolf wrote:
> >
> > In a recent article from the Washington Post, explorer Robert Ballard
> > (discoverer of the Titanic) led a team to the Black Sea in search of
> > evidence for Noah's Flood. About 550 feet below the surface, they found
> > evidence of a 'sudden, catastrophic flood around 7,500 years ago-the
> > possible source of the Old Testament story of Noah.'
> > They captured sonar images of a 'gentle berm and a sandbar submerged
> > undisturbed for thousands of years on the sea floor.' Then using radiocarbon
> > dating, they determined that the remains of the freshwater mollusks found on
> > this submerged beach were 7,500 years old and that the saltwater species
> > were only 6,900 years old.
>
> I would not be surprised if the Black Sea flood data were accurate.
> That hardly translates to a worldwide flood with Noah and his ark
> floating around on it.

Agreed, on the worldwide flood, but the Black Sea Floode data
are only accurate up to a point.
That is, the dates are good enough (though one may quibble
with the correction factor used to approximate calendar dates),
but they do not record a catastrophic flood.
Rather, they record a change in salinity at depth in the
Black Sea, at a time when its level was the same as global sea
level, which did not involve any sudden rise in Black Sea level.

Note that that the National Geographic site on the subject
has not been updated for about five years,
e.g. no mention of the refutations of the hypothesis,
and no mention of the disappointing 200-year-old date
for the supposed "habitation site", and no mention
that Ballard didn't revisit the site when he went
back to the Black Sea to look at submerged shipwrecks
again.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html

Please allow me to grace you with my standard rant
on this subject:


Those who came up with the claim of catastrophic flooding
of the Black Sea have retreated from that claim.
It was based on the "sudden" appearance of salt-water shelly
organisms deep in the Black Sea, but the claimants now agree
that the "sudden" immigration of such shells just marks a change
from freshwater to salty water deep below the surface of the Black
Sea, and didn't involve any change in the level of the surface of
the Black Sea, i.e. it does not mark any "flooding" of the Black
Sea at all. And there is abundant evidence that at the time of
the supposed "BSFlood" the level of the Black Sea was the same as,
or higher than, the level of the Mediterranean Sea (which was
supposed to have broken through an imaginary dam in the Bosphorus
and overflowed into the Black sea basin). Ergo, the Black Sea was
overflowing into the Mediterranean Sea at the time of the supposed
"catastrophic flood", i.e., the water was actually flowing in the
opposite direction.
Ryan and Pitman got it backwards. At best.

<ENGAGE RANT MODE>

Sorry, there was no sudden flood in the Black Sea basin.
It was all a publicist's dream.

Parts of the modern Black Sea Flood claim are total
fantasy, like the imaginary dam that supposedly broke
7500 years ago. Somebody wrote that down, and suddenly
it was established as a "fact".

The trouble is, altogether too many people have the
mistaken idea that a catastrophic flood in the Black
Sea was the inspiration for the Noah's Flood story in
the Bible.
The TV programs on that topic are outdated and overly
sensational and can be safely ignored.

Sadly, you, and maybe millions of other people,
have been misled on this subject.

Alas, there was no "Noachian" Black Sea Flood, and
the science in William Ryan's and Walter Pitman's book
"Noah's Flood: the event that changed history" has in
several cases been superceded by better information that
indicates that there was no such event, and was in most
cases preceded by evidence that indicated that there was
no such event.
Ryan and Pitman set out to overturn the orthodox view
of the history of the Black Sea, but they have apparently
abandoned their hypothesis, if more recent articles
co-authored by Ryan are any indication.
The orthodox view has prevailed, subject to some recent
modifications.

There is evidence that there was an _outflow_ southward
from the Black Sea through the Bosphorus into the
Mediterranean from more than 10000 years ago
(well before Ryan and Pitman's initial 5600 BCE flood date),
continuously until the present day, though there may have
been a relatively short interruption.
And evidence from the south shore of the Black sea shows
that the level of the Black Sea was only 18 m below the
present level at the time of the supposed flood.
The more recent claim by Ryan puts the flood date at
8400 BP, or about 9000 years ago, but then the "floodwaters"
through the Bosphorus channel would have been only about
5 metres deep. 9000 years ago is when everybody else
always thought that Mediterranean saltwater first entered
the Black Sea. At about that time, the last phase of
Glacial Lake Agassiz, in central Canada, finally found an
outlet to the sea through or under the remnants of the
Laurentide Ice Sheet, and so out into the North Atlantic,
raising sea level an appreciable amount, and _perhaps_
triggering a sudden inflow of saltwater into the Black Sea
basin.
But probably not sudden or great enough to inspire a
Noachian Flood myth.
Better candidates are widespread inundation of low-lying
parts of the Persian Gulf associated with the final draining
of Glacial Lake Agassiz, and similar flooding of the Tigris-
Euphrates delta, and (most likely) simultaneous flooding of
the Tigris and Euphrates, which would have looked like a
flooding of the entire world from the viewpoint of a person
near present-day Baghdad. These candidates could each or all
have inspired the flood myth in the epic of Gilgamesh, which
predates the first known appearance of the Noachian Flood myth.

Check this out, for a layman-friendly synopsis of the
refutation:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/bs­­­­­­eaflod.htm

On the draining of Glacial Lake Agassiz:

http://tinyurl.com/csmaq

And here's a fairly recent news item on refutation of
Ryan's and Pitman's hypothesis:

<BEGIN QUOTE>
January 14, 2003

Scientists are seriously challenging a recent, fascinating
proposal that Noah's epic story -- setting sail with an ark
jam-full of animal couples -- was based on an actual
catastrophic flood that suddenly filled the Black Sea 7,500
years ago, forcing people to flee.

In a detailed new look at the rocks, sediments, currents
and seashells in and around the Black Sea, an international
research team pooh-poohs the Noah flood idea, arguing that
all the geologic, hydrologic and biologic signs are wrong.

Little that the earth can tell us seems to fit the Noah story,
they say. The new research takes direct aim at the work of
two Columbia University geologists -- William Ryan and Walter
Pitman -- whose proposal in 1997 ignited much new interest,
and much new research, into Middle East history and geology.

<END QUOTE>

Also, Ballard did not find Noah's House, and he has recently
admitted that he didn't find any evidence of human occupation
of the Black Sea continental shelf, let alone any support for
the BSFlood hypothesis.
Here is another recent news article telling you about that
(please be warned that several statements in the article
are erroneous, e.g.
"Scholars agree the Black Sea flooded when
rising world sea levels caused the Mediterranean to
burst over land and fill the then-freshwater lake."):

"Black Sea Trip Yields No Flood Conclusions"

http://tinyurl.com/eylm8

There was no actual ruined building found by Ballard,
but rather just a partly rectangular outline of raised
bed on the continental shelf, that might even be
the outline of
the wheelhouse of a modern freighter.
To the northwest the outline continues, and narrows to a point.
To the southeast, the outline continues for a shorter distance,
and ends in a rounded curve.
Just what you'd expect when a sunken ship's hull is covered with
sediment.
The wood didn't necessarily contaminate the site, it might have
been part of the ship, and so accurately dates the site.
The roughly-worked stones could have been the ship's ballast.

If you wish, I can supply links to the writeups on Ballard's
finds in professional journals.

And here are a couple of scientific papers:

"Is the abrupt drowning of the Black Sea shelf at
7150 yr BP a myth?"

http://tinyurl.com/blart

"Persistent Holocene Outflow from the Black Sea to the Eastern
Mediterranean Contradicts Noah's Flood Hypothesis"

http://tinyurl.com/65yxu

And there's lots more, but you'd need access to scientific journals
to read it, but you could ask me for more details if you want them.
Some of the articles are available on the Web.

<DISENGAGE RANT MODE>

Sorry to splash water in the frying pan.

Daryl Krupa


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 7-Foot Robot Used in Black Sea Expedition
    ... > 2003 paper of AREPS, that is, the same flood suggested by Ryan et al. ... claimed to have occurred, it is the product of Siddall's imagination, ... (8400 BP, global level -30m, Black Sea level -50 m), ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: 7-Foot Robot Used in Black Sea Expedition
    ... > Sidall et al. showed that the filling up of the Black Sea basin ... >> Ryan and Pitman's flood never happened. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Latest Black Sea study says "no flood"
    ... "Ryan remains skeptical about the new paper, ... Giosan said he has invited Ryan to join him in an effort ... Ancient Black Sea Flood: Nuisance or Calamity? ... 2009 -- Something happened along the shores of the Black Sea ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: 7-Foot Robot Used in Black Sea Expedition
    ... Sidall et al. showed that the filling up of the Black Sea basin ... > Ryan and Pitman's flood never happened. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: 7-Foot Robot Used in Black Sea Expedition
    ... it is a Black Sea flood. ... > suggested sudden Black Sea infill 8400 years ago. ... My comparison was in reference to Ryan and Pitman's flood situation. ... How about Ballard's drowned freshwater beach? ...
    (sci.archaeology)