Probabilities in reference to question of finding fossils all three major levels (PMC) a place

I had a debate with Tony Reed (upcoming in sorted version) in which he had said “since the chances are basically nil to get a fossil preserved anyway, just forget about finding it in two or three major levels”.

Let us get to Pascal’s Triangle. First of all, very unrealistically, as it works out with an equal chance of finding or not finding a fossil at any given level.

0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
1 level 1 1
2 levels 1 2 1
3 levels 1 3 3 1

Now, how about 1 chance in 4? 1 chance for, 3 chances against finding a fossil at any given level?

0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
1 level 3 1
2 levels 9 6 1
3 levels 27 27 9 1

Notice a thing? In first, unrealistic, example, the 1:1 for each level came back as 3:3 for 1 vs 2 levels out of three. In second, equally unrealistic, or nearly so, example, the 3:1 for each level came back as 27:9 for 1 vs 2 levels out of three.

Now, what if there were one chance in 10 or in 100? That would mean 9:1 or 99:1 against a fossil being there in each level.

0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
1 level 9 1
2 levels 81 18 1
3 levels 729 243 27 1

Before reaching third line, I needed to do some counting:

0 = 81 1 = 18 2 = 1
not next * 9 729 162 9
next * 1 81 18 1
0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
729 162 9
81 18 1
729 243 27 1

And for 99:1 against a fossil?

0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
1 level 99 1
2 levels 9801 198 1
3 levels 970299 29403 297 1

Before reaching third line, I needed to do some counting:

0 = 9801 1 = 198 2 = 1
not next * 99 970299 19602 99
next * 1 9801 198 1
0 levels 1 level 2 levels 3 levels
970299 19602 99
9801 198 1
970299 29403 297 1

For 9:1 per level we get 243:27 = 9:1 for one vs two levels.

For 99:1 per level we get 29403:297 = 99:1 for one vs two levels.

The curious thing is, when we check my older post “How Fossils Superpose”*, and look at how many you have per pure Palaeozoic, pure Mesozoic, pure Cenozoic, and how many you have on two of these levels, we are seeing a ratio not too far from 99:1 – as far as modern, Geological and Palaeontological classifications are concerned.

If these were correct, one would expect also to find about 1 in 99 places a fossil at each level.

But the problem is – does it really look like a superposition of faunas where we find two of the three major levels? No. In Yacoraite we see rather same fauna below and above a K/T boundary. In Karoo we find the Permian/Palaeozoic and Triassic/Jurassic/Mesozoic faunas … side by side. As if they were in reality different faunas from same Pre-Flood world.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris XV
XI Lord’s Day after Pentecost

* Creation vs. Evolution : How do Fossils Superpose?

Sorry for about a day, or near two, when the footnote was attached to the calendar numeric date, corrected Tuesday./HGL


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page

Why Curse of Ham Became Negroes among Muslims

I am reading a somewhat longer article than just answering this one, and one which errs in considering that the account in Genesis were a fabrication from the times of David or Solomon to justify slavery of Canaanite neighbours.

It also adds that to Jews, towards beginning of Christian era, Canaanites were more prone to be Black (Kushim) or Slavs. And that to Christians, at first there was no predeliction of ethnic nature as to who were next in line for what was really a penal servitude, then later Slavs were to West Europeans targetted well before Negroes – but that the sugar plantations started to change this near 1500.

Now, as I already spoke about Jews, what the article has to say about Muslims is very interesting.

Black Slavery, according to William McKee Evans*, was not a Muslim priority stemming from the Quran.

It started to become so when light skinned slaves, very rich in supply up to Muhammed, had become scarce since the permanent state of internal warfare between Arab principalities had ceased with Muhammed.

This means that up to Muhammed, Arabs on the Peninsula had been hunting each other for slaves, much as Negroes in Africa up to Western Colonisation, and sometimes beyond.

This confirms a bit what St Thomas said** about what people were first to examine the credentials of Muhammed as “prophet”:

[4] On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.

Let me highlight:

What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms.

Well, if they hunted each other for slaves up to the time of Muhammed, as William McKee Evans* said, then it is not possible to deny they were so.

Not by race, but by the culture in those days indigenous – somewhat like that of Swedes prior to Olof Skjötkonung or perhaps even more like that of Ashantis prior to Brazza.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Pantaleon

* Evans, William McKee. “From the Land of Canaan to the Land of Guinea: The Strange Odyssey of the “Sons of Ham”” The American Historical Review 85.1 (1980): 15-43. Web.

** Contra Gentiles, Book I, chapter 6
[quoting paragraph 4], by St Thomas Aquinas, OP.


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page

Cardinal Lavigerie Fought Slavery

Here is a quote after the information on his trying to convert Algerians:

This action, however, did not meet with the approval of Marshal MacMahon, governor-general of Algeria, who feared that the maghrebian would resent it as an infraction of the religious peace, and thought that the Muslim faith, being a state institution in Algeria, ought to be protected from proselytism; so it was intimated to the prelate that his sole duty was to minister to the colonists. Lavigerie made it clear that he had come to serve the whole population of Algeria.

Contact with the natives during the famine caused Lavigerie to entertain exaggerated hopes for their general conversion, and his enthusiasm was such that he offered to resign his archbishopric in order to devote himself entirely to the missions. Pope Pius IX refused this, but granted him a coadjutor, and placed the whole of equatorial Africa under his charge. In 1870 Lavigerie warmly supported papal infallibility.

From 1881 to 1884, his activity in Tunisia so raised the prestige of France that it drew from Gambetta the celebrated declaration, L’Anticléricalisme n’est pas un article d’exportation, and led to the exemption of Algeria from the application of the decrees concerning the religious orders. On 27 March 1882, the dignity of cardinal was conferred upon Lavigerie, given the titulus of Sant’Agnese fuori le mura, but the great object of his ambition was to restore the see of St Cyprian; and in that also he was successful, for by a bull of 10 November 1884 the metropolitan see of Carthage was re-erected, and Lavigerie received the pallium on 25 January 1885.

The later years of his life were spent in ardent anti-slavery propaganda, and his eloquence moved large audiences in London, as well as in Paris, Brussels and other parts of the continent. He hoped, by organizing a fraternity of armed laymen as pioneers, to restore fertility to the Sahara; but this community did not succeed, and was dissolved before his death. In 1890, Lavigerie appeared in the new character of a politician, and arranged with Pope Leo XIII to make an attempt to reconcile the church with the republic.

He invited the officers of the Mediterranean squadron to lunch at Algiers, and, practically renouncing his monarchical sympathies, to which he clung as long as the comte de Chambord was alive, expressed his support of the republic, and emphasized it by having the Marseillaise played by a band of his Pères Blancs. The further steps in this evolution emanated from the pope, and Lavigerie, whose health now began to fail, receded comparatively into the background. He died at Algiers on the 26th of November 1892.

Cardinal Charles Martial Allemand Lavigerie (31 October 1825–26 November 1892)
on The Wickipeejuh

Obviously, the same Pope who had written and indulgenced the prayer about God taking away the curse of Cham from the hearts of men (unless it was written by Lavigerie and indulgenced by the Pope) was also one of the Popes who supported Lavigerie and therefore also the efforts of ending slavery in Africa.

Other note, Lavigerie only joined the support of the Republic (il s’est rallié seulement) after the Comte de Chambord, the Legitimist pretender to the French throne, who should have been Henri V, had died without direct heirs.

Also, his opponent about mission to Algerians, Patrice de MacMahon, Duke of Magenta, has been at least considered a Freemason.

In this “dictionary of Freemasons of commune of Paris”, I find the entry:

Patrice de <Mac-Mahon, comte de Mac –Mahon, duc de Magenta (1808-1893) :

But I find nothing after the colon, unlike other entries where I do find:

Bernard Pierre Magnan (1791-1865) : Franc-maçon. Maréchal de France. Il est un des principaux organisateurs du coup d’Etat du 2 décembre 1851. En 1862, alors qu’il n’est pas franc-maçon, Napoléon III le nomme Grand Maître du Grand Orient de France, pour écarter le Prince Lucien Murat. Il fut initié et reçut le 33 degrés en 48heures.

So, if there was more specific information about MacMahon being a Mason of such and such a lodge, as for certain others, this was deleted for some reason.

Anyway, it seems Lavigerie was not a Mason.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Feast of Blessed Virgin Mary as Queen

PS, H/T to Dymphna for the article:

Blessed Mary Theresa— someone you should know
from Friday, July 12, 2013, on Dymphna’s Road

If Mary Teresa Ledochowska fought slavery, it was because of Lavigerie, which is why I found him./HGL


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page

Did Catholic Church Ever Teach any Curse of Cham?

Peter Roman [I am currently adhering to his non-Feeneyite rival Pope Michael] miscited one word, replacing “Central Africa” with “Central Asia” in his translation, I cite it after him.

Prayer to Implore the Conversion of the Descendants of Cham in Central Africa

Oremus et pro miseririmis Africae Centralis populis Aethiopum, ut Deus omnipotens tandem aliquando auferat maledictionem Chami a cordibus eorum, detque illis benedictionem, unice in Jesu Christo, Det et Domino nostro consequendam.

Let us pray for the most wretched Ethiopians in Central Africa, that Almighty God may at length move THE CURSE OF CHAM from their hearts, and grant them the blessing to be found only in Jesus Christ, our God and Lord.


Domine Jesu Christi, unicus salvator universi generis humani, qui jam dominaris a mari usque ad mare, et a flumine usque ad terminos orbis terrarum: aperi propitius sacratissimum cor tuum etian mesierrimis Africae interioris animabus, quae adhuc in tenebris et umbra mortis sedent; ut intercedente piissima virgine Maria matre tua immaculata, ejusque sponso gloriosissimo beato Joseph, relictis idolis, coram te procidant Aethiopes, et Ecclesiae tuae sanctae aggregentus. Qui visi [=qui vivis], etc.

Lord Jesus Christ, the only Saviour of the entire human race, who ready rulest from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the each, open propitiously thy most sacred heart also to the most wretched souls of Central Asia [=Africa], who are still seated in the darkness and the shadow of death, that, through the intercession of the most pious Virgin Mary, thy immaculate mother, and of her most glorious spouse, S. Joseph, the Ethiopians, having abandoned their idols, may prostrate themselves before thee, and be joined to thy holy Church. Who livest, etc.

Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory be to the Father.

His Holiness, Pius IX., by a decree of the S. Cong. of Rites, Oct. 2, 1873, granted to all the faithful, every time that, with at least contrite heart and devotion, they shall say these prayers, with the Our Father, the Hail Mary, and the Glory be to the Father:
An indulgence of three hundred days.
A plenary indulgence, once a month, to all who, having said them with the above dispositions, at least once a day, for a month, shall, on any day, being truly penitent, after confession and communion, visit a church or public oratory, and pray there, for some time, for the intention of his Holiness.

The Raccolta: Or, Collection of Prayers and Good Works, to which sovereign pontiffs have attached holy indulgences. Published by order of His Holiness, Pope Pius IX. Maryland: Woodstock College, 1878, pp. 413-415.

Applied to Central Africa, the expression “curse of Cham” is probably an euphemism for “curse of Nimrod”, that is, the curse of slave hunting (along with Paganism).

Obviously, like the curse of “may his blood come upon our heads” this is not a curse which makes each and every member of an ethnic or slightly biological race cursed, it is a curse from which anyone can free himself by conversion and by leading a better life.

In the case of 1873 slave hunters in Central Africa, by becoming Christians and hunting slaves no more.

It very much does NOT mean European Catholics should hunt slaves in Central Africa – especially not in 1873, a few decades after King Charles X (a Rex Christianissimus) had taken Algiers and hanged pirates precisely for hunting slaves./HGL

Faking History:

From where, then, did the black race come? From Ham’s other sons, Cush and probably also Put, whose descendants settled in Africa. But, as we have seen, the Bible says absolutely nothing about the black descendants of these men being cursed! Yet it was incorrectly assumed that they were. When did church commentators begin applying the curse to Ham?

A churchman of about 1,500 years ago, Ambrosiaster, applied it thus, saying: “Due to folly Ham, who foolishly ridiculed the nakedness of his father, was declared a slave.” And John F. Maxwell observes in his recent book Slavery and the Catholic Church: “This disastrous example of fundamentalist exegesis

continued to be used for 1,400 years and led to the widely held view that African Negroes were cursed by God.”

Even up to a hundred years ago the Catholic Church held the view that blacks were cursed by God. Maxwell explains that this view “apparently survived until 1873 when Pope Pius IX attached an indulgence to a prayer for the ‘wretched Ethiopians in Central Africa that almighty God may at length remove the curse of Cham [Ham] from their hearts.’”

From : What Is the Bible’s View? Are Blacks Cursed by God?
Religion of Sunday, 29 April 2007
Source: kwabena Frimpong Amankwah


  • 1) St. Ambrosius or according to others Ambrosiaster (the expression means “fake Ambrosius” or a writing falsely attributed to St Ambrose, so it is not a precise alternative authorship from antiquity) says absolutely nothing in the quote of this implying any curse damning blacks to slavery.

    Church fathers had a lot to say about setting an example of crimes meriting slavery. It’s a precedent for prison punishment, not for black slavery.

  • 2) The prayer was about Pagan blacks in Central Africa.

    Even if “curse of Cham” were curse of Chanaan, the idea is not that one could treat blacks as such worse, because of the curse. It was that blacks were sometimes behaving so as to merit it and this was due to bad education and that was a misfortune due to the curse (citing from memory a dialogue between two Jesuits, either of Brazil or of Moçambique, back in 1500’s or perhaps around 1600). Also, I have not found this precise reasoning in earlier texts than this, and certainly not in above quote from St Ambrose.

  • 3) Maxwell is thus wrong in implying that “This disastrous example of fundamentalist exegesis” was disastrous for the blacks.

    Trying to free someone from a curse by praying for him is not exactly disastrous – unless you pray for very specific things in very clumsy ways, which the above Catholic prayer did not. However, he is perfectly right that the blacks come from Kush, perhaps also Put./HGL

A Non-Catholic Non-Fundie exegesis which was perhaps more disastrous:

By Japhet, Gomer and Magog Africa is meant, and by Tiros Persia.

Magog is a Biblical baddy, but more usual traditional condidates are Russia and Turkey. Here they say Africa?

The sexes of both man and the lower animals were meant [changing to p. 59] to be separated in the ark during the deluge. This is clear from the way in which they entered the ark: first Noah and his three sons went in, and then their wives separately (Gen. vii. 7). But when they came out of the ark after the flood, God commanded Noah, “Go out of the ark, thou and thy wife, thy sons and their wives” (Gen. viii. 16), thus putting the sexes together again. Ham among the human beings, and the dog among the lower animals, disregarded this injunction and did not separate from the opposite sex in the ark. The dog received a certain punishment, and Ham became a black man; just as when a man has the audacity to coin the king’s currency in the king’s own palace his face is blackened as a punishment and his issue is declared counterfeit.

So, Cham was cursed, and that precisely to blackness of face, before he was sinning against his father?

Or this:

Slaves do not, as a rule, bring blessings on their master’s house, but Joseph’s master’s house was blessed because of Joseph. Slaves are not remarkable for being scrupulous, but Joseph gathered in the silver in Egypt for his king. Slaves are not distinguished for their chastity and modesty, but Joseph would not listen to a sinful suggestion.

Potiphar showed the subtlety for which the Egyptians were famous where their own interest was concerned. He boasted to his friends that as a rule a white man has a Cushite, a colored man, for his slave, whilst he, a Cushite, contrived to obtain a youth of the white race for a slave. Hence it became [p. 67] a saying in Egypt, “The slaves sold (i.e., the Ishmaelites who sold Joseph); the slave bought (alluding to Potiphar, Pharaoh’s servant); and the freeman has become the slave of both.”

It is a cultural and historical fact that Egyptians from time to time held Kushites – that is black people – as slaves.

It is possible, but not necessary that Potiphar was one.

However, including this here can have had repercussions by setting an example.

We are not allowed to say any portion of Holy Writ by heart, but must always read it from the Scroll. Thus when Rabbi Meier was once in Asia on Purim, and was unable to find a copy of the book of Esther, he wrote the book out from memory (as he knew it by heart), and then made another copy from which he read to the congregation.

This is against the practise of the Catholic Church. And as you may see by now, the exegetes I am citing are Jewish.

Sleepiness and laziness in a man are the beginning of his misfortune.

Man in celibacy is in sublime ignorance of what is meant by the words “good,” “help,” “joy,” “blessing,” “peace,” and “expiation of sin.” He is, in fact, not entitled to the dignified name of man.

The Catholic Church honours celibacy while not dishonouring marriage and considers sleeping with gentleness : who sleepeth does not sin.

So, the exegesis is clearly non-Catholic.

But what about non-Fundie?

The deluge in the time of Noah was by no means the only flood with which this earth was visited. The first flood did its work of destruction as far as Jaffé, and the one of Noah’s days extended to Barbary.

A Fundie – and Catholic – exegesis is of course it extended all over the world.

Job was born when the Jews went down to Egypt; he married Dinah, Jacob’s daughter, and he died when the Israelites left Egypt.

Job probably never existed, and if he did exist, the events recorded concerning him never took place. The whole narrative is intended as a moral lesson.

So, one rabbi was a Fundie and another wasn’t. Hence all of the source is Non-Fundie. Church Fathers are all fundies, and Moralia in Job by St Gregory takes for granted that Job actually existed.

This is not the Church Fathers, not the Patrologia by Migne. It is called the Genesis Rabba or Bereshit Rabba and is the Judaising Midrash on Genesis.

You can find it here:

I am not linking directly./HGL


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page

Four Rivers

I wonder, this morning of Ascension Day as I write this, whether the four rivers of the Greek Netherworld may correspond to the four rivers of the Biblical Paradise.

After the Flood all men were aware of the fact that four rivers had flown from the rivers in Paradise, and all men were or became aware that you could not find a walled garden anymore, where the gates were guarded by Cherubs with flaming swords.

Can Greeks be partial heirs to a speculation that Paradise had been covered and was now in the Netherworld?

Is that where the four rivers of the Netherworld come from?

What if they are right and there is a Netherworld connected to the Earthly Paradise?

But actually I think the four rivers are still there. On the surface.

Euphrates and Tigris are undisputedly two of them. Nile or Blue Nile [Gihon] is one of them. And the fourth, [Pishon], well, the candidates are Ganges, Syr-Daria and Amu-Daria [No, that was Gihon!] and the Danube.

Let’s take this fourth river first. Could a river have flown in so bent a fashion that all the candidates could be correct [and the Daria rivers mixed with name of Gihon]? Let’s suppose it started somewhere were now is Persia, then flowed Eastward into Nod (if I am right this is India) and part of the course inthe riverbed also known as Ganges (or as part of it) but as India[/Nod] was not yet a triangle jutting into the Sea between two Oceans (or whatever) [actually two parts of one Indian Ocean], instead of Ganges flowing into the [same], the Paradisal river bends “upwards”, North, and follows part of what is now Amu-Daria and Syr-Daria into [what is now] Lake Aral, then goes onto some stretch now covered by Black Sea, then flows from Roumania to Switzerland (reverse direction of Danube)…

Coordinates of Switzerland are not exactly on the Sea shore, now. I was tempted to say “in that case, the ‘reverse-Danube’ must have continued into Rhone or Rhine” but the fact is that parts of what is now Austria ([Nußdorf] across the border from Switzerland [and 707 km East, less than North Spain from Pamplona to Santiago]) shows fossiles like whales [Cetotherium ambiguum] and seals [Praepusa vindobonensis] (“from the Palaeocene” [sorry, Miocene]) not far from Vienna [there are other Nussdorfs too, but the Viennese one is the relevant one]. So it could have been a Sea [and a shore] in pre-Flood times.

During Flood, part of this riverbed is then covered with sediment, some parts also sink into deep seas (like Ganges flows into the Sea now), parts are disrupted by rising mountains: Himalayas now separate Ganges from Persia, and Alps now ensure the Danube is higher at Vienna than at Black Sea shore of Roumania. Finally, Black Sea would have been added as a basin collecting water from Flood so as to allow land to rise and dry.

The reason I thought of the Greeks is that I first thought of “the Hyperborean Era” in Rober E. Howard. In his map for “10,000 B.C.” the river “Styx” first flows North like the Nile and then flows West … we get a “Western Nile” instead of a Mediterranean. And that can have been how the Paradisal river [Gihon] flowed in pre-Flood times.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
Sts Yves and Dunstan
Thursday of Pentecost Octave

What I put in [square brackets] are my additions or once replacement when writing this on a computer. Some things I could check here, but could not check back in Ascension Day while writing this./HGL


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page

Reviewing Sarfati on Shallow Pre-Flood Seas

Sarfati had answered Don P. from U.S.

CMI Feedback : Noah did not take fish on the Ark!
First published: 16 July 2013 (GMT+10)
Re-featured on homepage: 23 July 2016 (GMT+10)

Don P. “How did the many sessile species, from sponges and corals to anemones and barnacles, detach themselves and waddle through however brief a trip it may have been?”

Sarfati answers adequately that sea creatures remained in the sea.

Don P. “A problem analogous to that of terrestrial arctic and desert dwellers would be the exotic inhabitants of the abyssal and hadal zones of the ocean depths. To postulate only shallow seas before the deluge precludes the very existence of deep-sea dwellers.”

Here Sarfati answers, less adequately, this:

“Who said anything about the seas all being shallow? Seems like you have invented your own straw men to knock down.”

Actually, not quite.

If deeper seas is where Flood water was drained off into, forming after Flood, or end stage of Flood, obviously shallower seas must have been there before the Flood. Precisely as mountains were less high too, Flood water was not 15 cubits above present height of Andes or Himalaya, as these mountains were as yet not so high.

Obviously, the kinds whereof all present species are deepsea dwellers now need not have been so pre-Flood.

If Noah confindently could write or formulate orally a thing like …

Genesis 7:[19] And the waters prevailed beyond measure upon the earth: and all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered. [20] The water was fifteen cubits higher than the mountains which it covered.

… Then we must presume that Noah knew either the height of all high mountains (since he was six hundred years old, this is no problem) or at least THE highest mountain, THEN that he was, from the Ark, in a position to measure how high water had risen above one of them.

This would be the case if Noah had either gone to one of several mountains all of equal height, or to the one which was higher then the rest, and had taken a fathoming from the Ark and last fathoming was 15 cubits.

If Calvary or Mount of Olives were as high as pre-Flood mountains got, or one of them being the highest, then we can see how this works out.

But if the highest mountains were more like Mount Everest, it might have been nearly as hard to save mountains to the level of that top as to save them from the Flood after it. So, we must presume that Mont Blanc, Mount Everest, Lake Titicaca are on heights which before the Flood did not even exist.

“Another straw man is presupposing that the Ark was in the land we now call the Middle East, overlooking the drastic continental reshaping in the Flood.”

Is Sarfati trying to squeeze in a case for a pre-Flood Pangea as reconstructed by today’s geology and palaeontology?

I would say the different pieces of land were reshaped in different portions. Some places mud was not being slid above the river beds from the four paradisal rivers, which is why these are identified as identic – we must presume in some parts of the beds, not in their totalities – to post-Flood rivers.

On which matter, see here:

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Four Rivers

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St James the Greater
Apostle and Martyr*

* Sancti Jacobi Apostoli, qui exstitit beati Joannis Evangelistae frater; et, prope festum Paschae ab Herode Agrippa decollatus, primus ex Apostolis coronam martyrii percepit. Ejus sacra ossa, ab Hierosolymis ad Hispanias hoc die translata, et in ultimis earum finibus apud Gallaeciam recondita, celeberrima illarum gentium veneratione, et frequenti Christianorum concursu, religionis et voti causa illuc adeuntium, pie coluntur.


Please use the URL to access the cached copy of this page