‘Extreme Natural Disaster’: Scientists Find Evidence Supporting Chinese Account of Great Flood

Ocean waveQINGHAI PROVINCE, China – A new report suggests that China’s Great Flood legend is based on a real event, leading others to ponder if similar flood legends around the world are rooted in real history.

In an article published last week in the journal “Science,” a team of 16 researchers examine a prominent Chinese flood story. According to the legend, which is described in several ancient Chinese texts, a devastating flood destroyed China’s Yellow River region some four thousand years ago.

Since the 1920s, many scholars have doubted the historicity of the Chinese flood legend and dismissed it as mere myth. Others, however, have searched for evidence of it, and—according to this recent report in “Science”—may finally be vindicated.

“Here, we present geological evidence for a catastrophic flood in the early second millennium BCE and suggest that it may be the basis of the Great Flood,” the researchers wrote.

The article, titled “Outburst flood at 1920 BCE supports historicity of China’s Great Flood and the Xia dynasty,” documents evidence of “an extreme natural disaster” that occurred along the Yellow River.

“The evidence found in our investigations along the Yellow River in Qinghai Province includes remains of a landslide dam, dammed lake sediments upstream, and outburst flood sediments downstream that allow us to reconstruct the size of the lake and flood,” the researchers wrote.

Widespread flood sediments have been discovered in Jishi Gorge and Guanting Basin, both of which straddle the Yellow River. The sediments are 65 feet deep in some places and include boulders nearly 7 feet in diameter—apparent evidence of a catastrophic flood. Other features, including mudrock and water deposits, are also telltale evidence of an enormous flood, the researchers explain.

  • Connect with Christian News

In addition to geological evidence, manmade ruins evidently dating back to the flood have been discovered. These include collapsed cave dwellings, pottery sherds, and other cultural materials that were ravaged by flood waters. Using radiocarbon dating methods, the scientists believe the event occurred around 1920 B.C.—a date that is compatible with previous reckonings.

“The discovery and reconstruction here of the massive outburst flood originating in Jishi Gorge provide scientific support that the ancient Chinese textual accounts of the Great Flood may well be rooted in a historic natural event,” the scientists stated.

These recent revelations regarding China’s Great Flood account are causing scientists to reconsider the validity of other flood legends around the world. David Montgomery, a professor of Earth and space sciences at the University of Washington, says he is “impressed with how the geography of seemingly curious details in many local myths was consistent with geological processes that cause disastrous floods in different regions.”

“Great floods and other natural disasters were long seen as the work of angry deities or supernatural entities or powers,” Montgomery wrote in an article published last week on TheConversation.com. “But now that we are learning that some stories once viewed as folklore and myth may be rooted in real events, scientists are paying a little more attention to the storytellers of old.”

Dr. Monty White, a chemist who has written extensively on topics pertaining to science and the Bible, believes the world’s different flood legends ultimately point to the catastrophic worldwide flood described in the Bible.

“If only eight people—Noah’s family—survived the Flood, we would expect there to be historical evidence of a worldwide flood,” White wrote in an Answers in Genesis article. “If you think about it, the evidence would be historical records in the nations of the world, and this is what we have. … Stories of the Flood—distorted though they may be—exist in practically all nations, from ancient Babylon onward. This evidence must not be lightly dismissed. If there never was a worldwide Flood, then why are there so many stories about it?”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Fayadi Limpid

    This is a different flood from the great flood of Noah. This is the flooding that occurs when God split-up the continent during the time of Peleg

    • Robert_Saunders

      This is nonsense. The geological evidence is clear: No such flood has ever occurred [1]. And the Peleg tale is fiction.

      1. Senter, The defeat of flood geology by flood geology. Reports of the National Center for Science Education, May- June 2011. (Available through their website.)

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    The Chinese characters(letters) have the Genesis stories of God’s creation and Noah’s flood. It is amazing. Races and tribes and clans only tried to keep and remember the ancient true stories of their forefathers, but God provided the whole accuracy into the Hebrews. Israel is the miracle on Planet Earth through whom mankind find their root. Those who read the Holy Bible discover the the most astonishing vital truth entirely.

    • Pererin

      I’ve read about Chinese letters describing the creation event and other Biblical history, it’s very interesting and would love to see more research made.

    • Robert_Saunders

      Re Kwon, above: “God provided the whole accuracy…” Not only is this demonstrably false, but it can be shown that there can exist no means of showing that a god provided anything whatever.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        God entrusted His Word exclusively to the Jewish people according to His covenant so that all mankind will hear the vital Good New of Jesus Christ and get saved. Christian West translated it and spread it. All the inventions were for the transmission of the life-saving Christianity on earth. Now the Chinese Christians want to finish the world mission by going back to Jerusalem. Everyone has roles. God’s way is awesome!

  • axelbeingcivil

    The Chinese flood account isn’t an all-consuming flood of the land; it’s the diversion of a river system. The Chinese story talks about a diversion of the river flooding certain regions and a local king actually hiring engineers to build means of diverting it over a period of about fifty years. There are no arks, no gathering of two of every animal, nothing resembling the Noahic flood.

    This is still interesting, though. It shows how a big natural event can become the seed of myths.

  • Tangent002

    Interesting how science is all but ignored unless/until it supports a particular aspect of the Christian faith.

    • Pererin

      Science is not ignored by Christians. Pseudo-science, science with no observable evidence is viewed with extreme scepticism however.

      • Tangent002

        Well, this discovery in China has no observable evidence and y’all seem to accept it as Gospel.

        • Pererin

          Do I? How presumptuous of you,

          • Tangent002

            Do you think this story is ‘bunk’?

          • Pererin

            No, I wouldn’t call it bunk. It is a report on scientific research.

      • Sharon_at_home

        If for no other reason, Christians feel that Science wouldn’t exist if God didn’t allow it. As far as the “Big Bang Theory” IMHO IF there was a big bang, it was when God was creating Heaven and Earth.He was the one that made the Big Bang happen. So some of us do ignore what you call science and think of it as God’s Work. God Bless!

  • Robert_Saunders

    There are flood stories from most ancient civilizations, as floods are a recurring phenomenon most everywhere. However, it is known for an absolute fact that no global flood has EVER occurred: the evidence is conclusive and indisputable.

    • Tangent002

      Most civilization grew up around rivers or large bodies of water, either for agriculture or as a trade route or both, where floods were a real danger. It is likely that flood catastrophe myths would be commonplace.

      • Robert_Saunders

        Re Tangen007, above: Exactly correct.

    • Amos Moses

      If you are not going to believe scriptures first ten words ……. the rest will do you no good …. you will completely miss it ……..

      • Robert_Saunders

        Re Moses, above: I see no reason to believe ANY part of the bible.

        Exercise: Choose ANY event alleged in the bible, and show, by independent evidence (NOT in the bible), that it actually occurred as described in the bible.

        • Amos Moses

          Choose ANY event alleged in science, and show, by independent evidence (NOT in a science book), that it actually occurred as described in science.

          Kind of like saying …. you do not believe is swords …. so put your sword down and show me they exist ………..

          • Robert_Saunders

            Re Moses, above: This is absurd. It is an absolute prerequisite for ANY scientific demonstration that it be repeatedly observable by anyone who is interested. Of course, scientists do not often repeat development of the entire chain of evidence supporting a scientific conclusion, but the ability to do so is always there — and, if further work which relies on any such conclusion works as expected, the conclusion continues to be considered to be valid.

          • Americans Wake Up

            There are sea shells at the top of the Rockies. I would say they were covered by water at some point. And if the water was deep enough to cover them that I would have been a global flood.

          • Robert_Saunders

            Re above: There are sea shells on many mountains — because such mountains were pushed up from sea beds by tectonic forces. (This process continues today: the Himalayas are higher now than they were years ago.) Examination of the species involved shows that these eruptions happened at different times. That no global flood has ever occurred is a proven fact, based on piles of evidence from all over the planet. To suppose otherwise simply shows a lack of knowledge of the relevant data.

        • Amos Moses

          “Defend the Bible? I would as soon defend a lion! Unchain it and it will defend itself.”
          – C.H. Spurgeon

          Only an idiot defends the lion …………….. come over here and pet the little “kitty” …….. or are you afraid …………….. nancy boy ………..

        • Amos Moses

          Mumps outbreak in Long Island likely caused by vaccine-resistant virus; majority of those affected were immunized

          YEAH SCIENCE ………… youtube;com/watch?v=avrJYkcLBk0

        • Amos Moses

          So when you watch the weather report ….. do you have a conniption over the weatherperson saying “The sun rose at ……….” or “Sunrise was at ……….”

        • Amos Moses

          The Washington Times Reports On New US Plan To Lift Moratorium On Cross-Species ‘Chimera’ Research; US Taxpayers To Fund Creation Of Part-Human, Part-Animal “BEINGS” As It Was In The Days Of Noah

          NPR is reporting the NIH plans to lift that reprieve and allow scientists to conduct so-called “Chimera” experiments… “They want to take human stem cells and put them inside these animal embryos, in the hopes that the human stem cells, which can become any kind of cell or tissue in the body, will become integrated into the embryos and then develop into animals that have partially or even fully human parts in their bodies,” said NPR health correspondent Rob Stein on Thursday.

          YEAH SCIENCE ………… youtube;com/watch?v=avrJYkcLBk0 – Replace the ; with a .

          But yeah ……. scripture is not true …….. sure ………. whatever you want to believe ……. This is Genesis 6 and Matthew 24 coming to pass ……….. stay in your protected cocoon but its not going to help you …………..

          • Robert_Saunders

            Re Moses, above: Irrelevant. And anyone who assumes that a YouTube post is necessarily factual is simply being silly: anyone can post anything there, and all too many post demonstrable nonsense.

          • Amos Moses

            It was a silly utube ………. from Breaking Bad …………. “YEAH MR. WHITE … YEAH SCIENCE …” get a little humor in your life ……………… it is only 6 seconds ……..

          • axelbeingcivil

            Those chimeric organism experiments are being done to produce animals with human organs for use as transplants. You can, in theory, inject a pig with stem cells from an adult and have, within a few months, a healthy heart or kidneys or liver that you can give to the donor. No risk of rejection, no need for immunosuppressants, no need for a donor list.

          • Amos Moses

            There are other implications to that experimentation ……….. it is not as simple nor as benign as you try to explain it …………..

          • axelbeingcivil

            The only other implications I’d see are the potential risk of zoonosis, which is real but can be controlled. I don’t see the spiritual implications you do.

            Even if I did, I’d point out that the cross-breeding in Genesis isn’t humans and animals; it’s humans and elohim, producing the nephilim. I’d also point out that this isn’t any form of cross-breeding; the chimera would have both human and animal cells, not mixtures.

          • Amos Moses

            ” the chimera would have both human and animal cells, not mixtures.”

            So lets set aside the spiritual aspects for a moment ………… at what point does the percentage endow the animal with rights ….. i do not accept that there is no “mixture” as adding any foreign DNA to the animal is a mixture ….. but fine ….. at what point does the animal acquire humanity …. or sentience …… or human rights …. and what right do we have to remove those rights or even grant they have any ….. and when this “accidentally” mixes into the food chain …. and we are eating human flesh …… because no matter how much “control” you may think we have ….. that is just an illusion and a lie …….. what then ….

          • axelbeingcivil

            Human rights aren’t granted on a genetic basis; definitions of personhood are more complex than that. If, through whatever medical marvel, you placed a pig brain in a human body, it wouldn’t suddenly be considered a human being or worthy of human rights.

            Likewise, there’s no genetic mixture because that’s not how this works. The pigs are altered so as to not be able to produce a heart or kidneys normally and the fetus is injected with human cells from the donor. The human cells will then grow into the desired organ, if the process works.

            No pig cells get human DNA or vice versa. That’s really the point.

            As for these entering the food chain, unless you eat offal, there’s no risk. Even if you do, though, these pigs wouldn’t be grown on meat farms and wouldn’t be destined for butchers anyway. There’s a separation of these processes that makes contamination so unlikely as to effectively be zero.

          • Amos Moses

            We are not talking about a pig brain in a human body …… we are talking about putting human DNA in an animal …….. what results from that is what is the problem ….. we are talking about stem cells that can take on the characteristics of the host …….. human stem cells in animals …… and we have no guarantee that it there will be no mixing …. none whatsoever …… CRISPR/cas9 kits can be bought for a few hundred $ …… there is nothing to prevent a “rogue” individual from doing this ……

            indiegogo;com/projects/diy-crispr-kits-learn-modern-science-by-doing#/

          • axelbeingcivil

            We’re talking about human CELLS in an animal. There’s no transfer of human DNA into pig cells. That’s a really significant difference. Eukaryotic cells don’t swap DNA like bacteria do. Viruses sometimes accidentally carry DNA over but you risk that anyway. Even if it did happen, it wouldn’t matter; the animal will be slaughtered and the human who receives the heart will not transfer the animal tissue into their genitive cells.

            The risk here is basically zero from this particular endeavour.

            If you’re worried about what other people can do with simple genetics kits, that’s a different story. These things aren’t related.

          • Amos Moses

            The revolutionary gene-editing technology CRISPR/Cas9 has the potential to eradicate disease or invite a new wave of eugenics, depending on who you ask. Now, through an Indiegogo campaign, anyone can purchase their own kit to try the science themselves at home.

            The campaign, called “DIY CRISPR Kits, Learn Modern Science By Doing” was started by Josiah Zayner, a synthetic biologist and research fellow at NASA Ames Research Center. It had raised $31,365 at the time of writing, three times its funding goal.

            For a donation of $130 or more, backers are promised a kit that includes “everything you need to make precision genome edits in bacteria”: a laboratory grade pipette, media and plates; bacteria and DNA; and detailed written and video instructions. For a donation of $160, you can edit the genome of yeast. And for $5,000, Zayner will work with you to create “a unique desired trait for your own, personal, original, unique, genetically engineered organism.”

            The kits will be distributed over the next year, Zayner said. “Everyone will be able to use these kits,” he wrote on the campaign page. “I believe that the only way that this works is if science is democratized so everyone has access.”

          • Amos Moses

            “We’re talking about human CELLS in an animal. There’s no transfer of human DNA into pig cells.”

            You are misinformed …… we are talking about using CRISPR/cas9 to use bacteria to edit genomes ……….. intercellular editing ……

          • axelbeingcivil

            Yes, CRISPR is used. It’s not used on human cells, though, or to transfer DNA. It’s used on the pig embryo to target the removal of the genes that would let the pig develop the organ of interest. That way, the pig doesn’t grow a pancreas or liver or what have you. The human stem cells are injected into the pig embryo; they develop into whatever tissue the pig is missing the capacity to produce (in theory).

            Again, no DNA whatsoever is transferred between human or pig cells.

          • Amos Moses

            Scientific American

            New Discovery Moves Gene Editing Closer to Use in Humans
            The gene editing method called CRISPR is already used in the lab to insert and remove genome defects in animal embryos

          • Amos Moses

            $3000 USD
            Your Own Genetics Lab
            WHATTTT! I know crazy right? We will set you up with everything you need to start your own extensive home lab to do synthetic and molecular biology (pipettes, centrifuge, PCR machine, gel electrophoresis, reagents, chemicals, &c.). We will guide you through setting it up and we will also provide you with a CRISPR kit and other kits to get you started! Available only in the US unless you are willing to pay much extra for shipping fees. Please contact us with any questions about contents.

          • axelbeingcivil

            Those kits aren’t sufficient to properly engineer human cells. They’re great educational tools but they’re basically pre-made experiments. Someone would need the proper skills and training to know how to design plasmids and order them, choose the right tracr RNA sequence…

            Still, yeah, people could genetically engineer organisms more easily in the future. I don’t think that’s relevant to the particular attempt to create chimeric pigs for transplants.

          • Amos Moses

            “Those kits aren’t sufficient to properly engineer human cells. ”

            Yes ………. they are ………..

          • axelbeingcivil

            As someone who actually works with this stuff… No, they aren’t. They don’t have the right culturing medium, they don’t have the right vector for delivering DNA for integration into human cells, they don’t even remotely have sufficient sterility…

            Not all microorganisms are created equal. This is a Baby’s First Genetic Engineering Lab. While some of the tools are useful, they’re really not all you need to engineer human cells, yet alone germ line cells.

          • Amos Moses

            CRISPR/Cas gene-editing technique holds great promise, but …
            29 Jul 2015 … Jeff Bessen receives funding from the NIH and DARPA for research into genome editing … CRISPR-Cas9 via

          • Amos Moses

            Abstract

            Genetic circuits require many regulatory parts in order to implement signal processing or execute algorithms in cells. A potentially scalable approach is to use dCas9, which employs small guide RNAs (sgRNAs) to repress genetic loci via the programmability of RNA:DNA base pairing. To this end, we use dCas9 and designed sgRNAs to build transcriptional logic gates and connect them to perform computation in living cells. We constructed a set of NOT gates by designing five synthetic Escherichia coli σ70 promoters that are repressed by corresponding sgRNAs, and these interactions do not exhibit crosstalk between each other. These sgRNAs exhibit high on-target repression (56- to 440-fold) and negligible off-target interactions (< 1.3-fold). These gates were connected to build larger circuits, including the Boolean-complete NOR gate and a 3-gate circuit consisting of four layered sgRNAs. The synthetic circuits were connected to the native E. coli regulatory network by designing output sgRNAs to target an E. coli transcription factor (malT). This converts the output of a synthetic circuit to a switch in cellular phenotype (sugar utilization, chemotaxis, phage resistance).

          • Amos Moses

            Even if what you say is true ….. the tools are available and the individual could make it happen with a little research and effort ….. your assertion of “control” is a lie and an illusion ………..

          • axelbeingcivil

            CRISPR can indeed be used for gene editing. It’s a fantastic biological tool and will be used to great effect in the future. We weren’t talking about CRISPR in general, though; we were talking about the chimeric pigs in specific.

          • Amos Moses

            We are talking about the unfettered use of a technology that we have no ability to “control …… and the whole purpose is to merge animal and human DNA ….. your assertions to the contrary ….. DARPA is funding this ….. DARPA funds weapon systems and “soldier improvment” ……….. what better way than to give their soldiers animal characteristics like being able to see in the dark …… no equipment ….. just a little tweak to the DNA ……

          • axelbeingcivil

            Can you try and stick to one post? It makes it easier to reply to.

            We were talking about a very specific process, one in which no human or animal DNA will be exchanged. It’s simply not how that process works.

            In future, in some other experiment, will human and animal DNA be exchanged? Maybe. But it’s unlikely. What you’re talking about – wholesale alteration of an organism’s biological structures – is science fiction, not science fact. Genes aren’t like blueprints where a cat’s eyes or a shark’s gills can just be instantly copy-pasted; they’re exceptionally complex webs of interacting proteins.

            Something like CRISPR might be used to correct for genetic illnesses, but wholesale modification of an organism can have extreme and far-reaching effects. Living creatures are massively complicated systems. At present, we don’t even have the technology to modify an adult organism extensively; it’s why gene therapy is so difficult.

            In short, I can pretty much guarantee that’s not what DARPA is going to be using it for.

          • Amos Moses

            DARPA is not interested in just making replacement parts for injured soldiers …………. they want new weapon systems and super-soldiers ………… not to the tune of 32 million $ ………

            Inside DARPA’s Attempts to Engineer a Futuristic Super-Soldier …
            Sep 23, 2015 … Inside the Pentagon’s efforts to create a super-soldier—and change the future of the battlefield.

            ……….. and your attempts to minimize what is being done is falling on deaf ears as far as i am concerned …… what you are spreading is propaganda at best ………. and outright lies you have been told at the worst ……………. sorry ….. not buying this disinformation of yours …..

          • axelbeingcivil

            DARPA is designing cybernetic prostheses and enhancements for soldiers, not genetic augmentation. Genetics is not a simple science; you can’t just inject someone with something and have the cellular structure of their body change in a pre-determined way. Biology is messy. Cybernetics, less so.

            Even the article you just referenced shows it: DARPA’s working on cybernetics and drugs, not genetic augmentation.

          • Amos Moses

            “not genetic augmentation.”

            Wrong ………………

          • Amos Moses

            Biological Robustness in Complex Settings (BRICS)
            darpa;mil/program/biological-robustness-in-complex-settings
            Biological Robustness in Complex Settings (BRICS)
            Dr. Justin Gallivan
            The Biological Robustness in Complex Settings (BRICS) program seeks to develop the fundamental understanding and component technologies needed to engineer biosystems that function reliably in changing environments. A long-term goal is to enable the safe transition of synthetic biological systems from well-defined laboratory environments into more complex settings where they can achieve greater biomedical, industrial, and strategic potential.

            The development of techniques and tools to rapidly sequence, synthesize, and manipulate genetic material has led to the rapidly maturing discipline of synthetic biology. Potential applications of synthetic biology range from the efficient, on-demand bio-production of novel drugs, fuels, and coatings to the ability to engineer microbes capable of optimizing human health by preventing or treating disease.

            To date, work in synthetic biology has focused primarily on manipulating individual species of domesticated organisms. These species tend to be fragile—they require precise environmental controls to survive, and they are subject to losing their engineered advantages through genetic attrition or recombination. The costs of maintaining required environmental controls and detecting and compensating for genetic alterations are substantial.

            If applications such as those highlighted above are to come to fruition, methods to increase the biological robustness and stability of engineered organisms must be achieved while maintaining or enhancing assurances of safety. While this program will support the development of technologies that would be prerequisite to the safe application of engineered biological systems in the full range of environments in which the Department of Defense (DoD) has interests, all work performed in this program will occur in controlled laboratory settings.

            The BRICS portfolio will consist of a set of programs that aim to elucidate the design principles of engineering robust biological consortia and to apply this fundamental understanding towards specific DoD applications. The first Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) called for the development of generalizable approaches that may ultimately be integrated into a complex biological system. DARPA anticipates releasing a second BAA comprising specific challenge scenarios that require the integration of capabilities developed within this program.

            Further ………..

            “The Foundry is at the forefront of synthetic biology developments,” said Hans Roubos, the principal bioinformatics scientist at DSM.

            It should be remembered that in 2013, DARPA launched a solicitation effort for the project “Advanced Tools for Mammalian Genome Engineering.” More than just being focused on the engineering of any mammal’s genome, the project was specifically launched for the bioengineering of humans.

            “The successful development of technologies for rapid introduction of large DNA vectors into human cell lines will enable the ability to engineer much more complex functionalities into human cell lines than are currently possible,” states the project’s proposal page.

            In other words, DARPA, for several years now, has been trying to defy what nature can offer by finding ways to solve the limitations of the current gene transfer technologies and how to improve existing approaches in order for science to finally displace natural life.

            Repeating ………

            “More than just being focused on the engineering of any mammal’s genome, the project was specifically launched for the bioengineering of humans.”

          • axelbeingcivil

            Oy vey… Amos, human cell lines are used for all sorts of purposes. Human cells grown in labs are used as a test bed for pharmaceuticals, for producing vaccine antibodies, etc. There’s nothing sinister about trying to develop better tools for engineering human cell lines.

          • Amos Moses

            So you are just going to soft-peddle the evil ………… got it ………

            “There’s nothing sinister about trying to develop better tools for engineering human cell lines.”

            “Engineering human cell lines” is by itself evil ………….. that you do not get that does not surprise me ……

            HINT: another word for that ……………. EUGENICS ……………. been tried in history before …… started in this country ………. led to the abortion industry ……….. the systematic killing of those who were thought to be “less than” they should be ………. but i guess it has your endorsement …… the wholesale denial of others ………. got it ……….

            Good work on your disinfo efforts ………..

          • axelbeingcivil

            You can think it’s evil if you want, but if you’ve ever taken medicine or used a vaccine, odds are good a part of it went through testing with HeLa cells or some other human cell line. If you think developing better medicine is sinful, all I can say is get dunked on, buddy.

          • Amos Moses

            We are not talking about medicine or vaccines ………… we are talking about genetic manipulation ……….. and this stuff you just brought up is just deflection from the topic ……. and an attempt to mislead and put out disinformation ……… AGAIN ……..

          • axelbeingcivil

            Actually, we are; genetic manipulation is used to produce medicine or vaccines. For example, before genetic manipulation was available to us, we produced insulin through mashing up pancreases left over from slaughtering pigs and cows. It took a few tons of animal tissue to make eight ounces of insulin.

            Now, we just use big vats of modified E. coli, which have the human gene for the insulin protein inserted into their geenetic code. Insulin is cheap, plentiful, and readily available for diabetics. It’s been this way for over 30 years now, I think.

            That’s why developing tools for tweaking human genes are important; bacteria have a wide range of uses but there are limits to what they can be made to produce. Modifying human cell lines for use in roles bacteria can’t provide as readily – producing vaccines being a big one – is important research.

            That’s what this tech is for. Not making super-humans.

          • Amos Moses

            “That’s what this tech is for. Not making super-humans.”

            Clearly ………. DARPA has a far different vision of it than you do …..

          • axelbeingcivil

            The very DARPA sources you cited stated explicitly that their direct purpose is to better develop human cell line alteration for the purpose of chemical sensors, vaccine and medicine production, and so forth.

          • Amos Moses

            And it is still eugenics …….. and they know that “if the US does not do it, our enemies will” ….. the very FACT …. that you have stated …. “Engineering human cell lines” …… is the only admission that matters …. there are NUMEROUS sources of cells for that research …… BUT THEY WANT TO AUGMENT HUMANS ……….. they are using sophistry to do it …….. or they would use other sources ….. and you know it ………… you may lie to yourself about it …. but you know it …………

          • axelbeingcivil

            Actually, things like producing vaccine antibodies the right way are something human cells are uniquely suited to do for humans (other cell lines can but there are theoretical benefits to having human cells do it). Likewise, testing drugs or therapies on human cell lines can give us insights and answers only human cell lines can. Altering human cells in the petri dish can give us big insights. There are absolutely reasons to modify human cell lines.

            This isn’t eugenics because none of this is being used on actual human beings or to alter hereditary lines. This isn’t modifying embryos so humans will be born with different genes. This is just modifying cells that will be grown in petri dishes or bioreactors.

          • Amos Moses

            Broad Institute-MIT Partnership Nabs $32M DARPA Contract …
            25 Sep 2015 … Since DARPA provided $7 million in seed funding two years ago to … Isothermal RNA Amplification for Detection, CRISPR/Cas9 for Strain ID.

          • Tangent002

            Man-bear-pig!

        • Craig Gorsuch

          “On the whole, the Gospels are excellent [historical] sources. As a matter of fact, they’re the most trustworthy, complete, and reliable sources for [the historicity of] Jesus. The incidental sources really don’t add much detailed information; however, they are valuable as correlative evidence.” – Dr. Edin Yamauichi, “The Case For Christ”, Lee Strobel (C) 1998, ISBN: 0-310-20930-7, p76

          The above quote comes from Dr. Edwin Yamauichi, of Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. Holds Master and Doctorate in Mediterranean Studies from Brandeis University. Awarded 8 Fellowships by: Rutgers Research Council; National Endowment for the Humanities, American Philosophical Society, et al…; Studied 22 languages; has delivered over 71 papers to peer-reviewed journals; has served as the Chairman, then President of the Institute for Biblical Research; has published 80 articles in 37 scholarly journals; and participated in the 1968 first-excavation of the Herodian Temple in Jerusalem which affirmed it’s destruction in 70AD holds to the historicity of the Gospel account. It’s fair to say, his scholarly credentials make his assessment worth more than mine.

          Never underestimate the importance of being able to cite your sources. Even if you accurately cite Biblical sources, many skeptics will not believe a biblical reference simply because the reference is biblical. It is not only important to cite sources, but to cite extra-biblical sources. Most of these sources are ancient historical documentation, though some archaeological evidence will corroborate the biblical account.

          If we remove all biblical reference and are left with only the extra-biblical accounts of Jesus, we have:

          * Jesus was a Jewish Teacher

          * Many people believed that he performed healing and exorcisms

          * Some people believed he was the Messiah

          * He was rejected by the Jewish leaders

          * He was crucified under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius

          * Despite this shameful death, his followers believed he was alive

          * Those believes spread beyond Judea/Palestine so multitudes were in Rome by 64AD

          * All kinds of people from cities and countryside, men and women, slave and free, worshipped him as God.

          And all this was recorded within 30-40 years of the events actually taking place, which is far too short a time for “imaginary mythology” to develop around those events, as eye-witnesses could rebut the so-called “imaginary mythology”.

          So the extra biblical evidence that Jesus existed is very strong.

          • Robert_Saunders

            It is possible that the Jesus of the bible actually existed; Jesus was a common name in the middle East at that time. However, we have no grounds for assuming that ANY of the tales related to Jesus have any factual basis.

          • Craig Gorsuch

            Um… Did you read the post quoting Dr. Edwin Yamauichi who cited EXTRA-BIBLICAL SOURCES for:

            * Jesus was a Jewish Teacher

            * Many people believed that he performed healing and exorcisms

            * Some people believed he was the Messiah

            * He was rejected by the Jewish leaders

            * He was crucified under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius

            * Despite this shameful death, his followers believed he was alive

            * Those believes spread beyond Judea/Palestine so multitudes were in Rome by 64AD

            Which – at the very least – illustrates the New Testament Gospels are historically congruent regarding the identity of Jesus of Nazareth.

          • Robert_Saunders

            Congruency is not synonymous with accuracy.

    • Jimmee41

      If you believe in God and His Word then you WILL accept the Biblical evidence of a World Wide Flood that inundated this whole planet at the same time. Visual evidence of the solar system indicates that similar catastrophes occurred on those planets as well.

      • Robert_Saunders

        The evidence that no such flood has ever occurred is conclusive and irrefutable [1]. There is no possibility, whatsoever, that any such thing could ever have occurred. Hence, it shows (along with a vast pile of other evidence) that the bible is fiction — and can be evidence of nothing whatever..

        It is ALSO provable that there can exist no such thing as “God’s word.” Nor can there exist any reason to believe that any god exists.

        Exercise: Show that any god exists. This can be done by exhibition of any phenomenon, repeatedly observable by anyone who is interested, which NECESSARILY entails the existence of some god — and could NOT have occurred as a result of some natural effect, whether such effect is or is not now known.

        1. See, e.g. Loulergue, et al, Orbital and millennial-scale features of atmospheric CH4 of the past 800,000 years. Nature, vol. 453, 15 May 2008, p. 383.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Love Jesus

  • blackhawk132

    Was there a flood ? The Bible was writen to help man understand God .Our God does not need to prove Himsely but He offers many proofs to help us know and understand Him. We have a choice.If we believe Him we will know at death OR we will just rot away and know nothing. To not believe and realize in death that He is real must be horrible. There is one thing that is absolute . Nothing begats nothing . Science has tried for many years that they could CREATE some thing out of absolute nothing and failed .However ; You must BELIEVE Him and not only believe IN Him. We have that choice . What will you lose if you do believe AND what do you lose if He is truth ? Look at what mankind accomplished and also destroyed since Creation . Look around and see what He has done or just keep thinking that everything is just some wonderful accident. I Chose GOD.

    • Robert_Saunders

      Re Blackhawk132, above: ” He offers many proofs…” This is provably wrong. It can be shown that NO information, of any sort, can be derived from any god.

  • Jane Albright

    There is only one explanation for the global flood that ties
    together all the evidence – anthropological (such as topic of this article), scientific, geologic, and morphological – into a theory that is both scientifically viable (without resorting to extra-biblical miracles to solve scientific problems) and biblically consistent. That is the Hydroplate Theory (HPT) of Dr. Walt Brown (Mechanical Engineer PhD, MIT – creationscience[dot]com/onlinebook). Many recent discoveries have validated prior predictions based on the HPT. To help understand why the HPT is not currently accepted by the larger creation organizations and some creation geologists (who have competing theories), see interviews 7-22-16; 7-29, and 8-5 and related articles at Real Science Radio (rsr[dot]org).

    On a side note, one commenter states “it is known for an absolute fact that no global flood has EVER occurred: the evidence is conclusive and indisputable.” Hmmm…. I do not believe anyone can ever have evidence that something did NOT happen or state that non-occurrence is an “absolute fact.” All you can to is argue based on the evidence, which is not described. What is indisputable however, that sea life fossils are found on the top of every single mountain range in the world. One has to wonder how in the world sea fossils got on top of mountains if that area of the globe was not at one time covered with water?

  • Jane Albright

    There is only one explanation for the global flood that ties together all the evidence – anthropological (such as topic of this article), scientific, geologic, and morphological – into a theory that is both scientifically viable (without resorting to extra-biblical miracles to solve scientific problems) and biblically consistent. That is the Hydroplate Theory (HPT) of Dr. Walt Brown (Mechanical Engineer PhD, MIT). Many recent discoveries have validated prior predictions based on the HPT. To help understand why the HPT is not currently accepted by the larger creation organizations and some creation geologists (who have competing theories), see interviews 7-22-16; 7-29, and 8-5 and related articles at Real Science Radio.

    On a side note, one commenter states “it is known for an absolute fact that no global flood has EVER occurred: the evidence is conclusive and indisputable.” Hmmm…. I do not believe anyone can ever have evidence that something did NOT happen or state that non-occurrence is an “absolute fact.” All you can to is argue based on the evidence, which is not described.
    What is indisputable however, that sea life fossils are found on the top of every single mountain range in the world. One has to wonder how in the world sea fossils got on top of mountains if that area of the globe was not at one time covered with water?

    • Seen From Space

      The hydroplate “theory” is nothing of the kind. It’s at best a hypothesis, and one that has no basis in the vast body of evidence already gathered about the history of the earth. The same goes for Flood Geology in all its hilarious incarnations, Catastrophic Plate Tectonics et al. The uniformitarian theory of plate tectonics elegantly explains the earth as we find it. There’s far too much observation that CPT and hydroplates doesn’t even attempt to explain. A theory must account for ALL relevant observation, not just a few easy data points. Otherwise you’ve got no theory. There is certainly no evidence in the rocks of a global flood. You’re right, you can’t state absolutely that a thing never happened. But where the data clearly tells a completely different story, you have a right to infer exactly that. If you believe that mainstream story is wrong then you’ve succumbed to misinformation.

      Marine fossils on top of mountains – come on! Plate tectonics and fold mountain building? No? These are not new ideas! The Himalayas are growing measurably because of these processes. Please don’t get all your science information from sectarian websites.

  • archaeologist

    who says that the deceived, blind secular scientists got it right?

  • archaeologist

    “If only eight people—Noah’s family—survived the Flood, we would expect there to be historical evidence of a worldwide flood,”

    but since there was only one global flood how will anyone identify that evidence? They have nothing with which they can compare notes.

    Faith is the key not physical evidence