Re: Why the Flood can not be in Mesopotamia

Glenn Morton (grmorton@psyberlink.net)
Mon, 10 Feb 1997 22:53:51 -0600

At 08:58 AM 2/10/97 -0500, Bill Hamilton wrote:
>At 5:17 PM 2/8/97, Glenn Morton wrote:
>>Can the Mesopotamian Flood account for these facts? It can
>>account for 8 people on the Ark and animals on the Ark. But it
>>can not explain how the Flood could last for an entire year nor
>>can it account for where the Ark landed at the same time.
>
>Allow me to respectfully point out that whether "Foundation, Fall and
>Flood" accounts properly for the landing place of the ark is debatable.
>You had the ark landing on the North African shore of the Mediterranean,
>which would have looked to Noah, living in the deep valley that was the
>Mediterranean before it flooded, like a mountain range. You speculated
>that perhaps that "mountain range" was known to Noah as the mountains of
>Ararat. If you allow such a change in the names of geographical features,
>perhaps you shouldn't insist that other accounts mean the region around Mt.
>Ararat in present day Turkey when they say "the mountains of Ararat".

Thanks Bill.

As I mentioned to you in my private note to you, I have begun to think I
made a big mistake doing that. My courage failed me. Here is why. The
reason is that now the occurrences of H. Erectus appears to be centered on
Turkey. He is found in Spain at 1.8 myr, Africa at 1.8 myr, Java at 1.8
myr, Pakistan at 1.8 myr, Georgia (former soviet union) at 1.6 MYR . I may
have really blown it and your note has properly made me regret not staying
with what I probably should have. From now on I will only advocate a Turkish
landing site.

Thank you for pointing out this inconsistency on my part..

However, if you will note, in my reply to Terry, I said that a couple of my
criticisms of a Mesopotamian flood would be molified if the ark landed in
Iran. But such a flood still could not last a year. Mine can.

glenn

Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm