Tuesday, November 4, 2014

For Your Information


I delete comments that use the "B- - - -" and F- - -  words. I delete comments that are not related to the topic.

I delete comments that suggest an irrational mind. I delete comments from people who simply want to rant and offer nothing constructive to the conversation.

I make no apologies for the research here. It is an on-going project and I adjust as new information becomes available.

I accept responsibility for posts from 6 and 7 years ago that are not up to my present standard. I hope to revisit and improve them after I retire.

Finally, I thank the many readers who have stuck with me in this project and offered thoughtful comments and helpful feedback. God bless you!

Alice C. Linsley


Related reading: The Apostle Paul: Rules for Blogging; Thoughts on Blogging; Alice C. Linsley's Research on Genesis

11 comments:

DDeden said...

FYI: Just about every post you write, I find disagree-able.

But I rarely find anything here un-interesting.

Thanks.

Alice Linsley said...

O come on! We agree on more than you think. We simply have different starting points and different worldviews. That's why we find each other's ideas interesting, even if we don't agree.

wtanksley said...

Your work is quite compelling -- I can't say I believe it, but it's worth the effort you're putting into it.

I suspect you've read Carol Hill's work on the mechanics of the flood (and her other papers), right?

Alice Linsley said...

Carol Hill is a geologist who has written for the American Scientific Affiliation, and organization to which I belong. Here is a piece on the hydrology of Noah's flood.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF6-06Hill.pdf

Perhaps you have read this?

DDedan would love this, I think, but I don't agree with Hill's placement of Noah in Turkey/Armenia. There is no sense in this when Noah was a Nilo-Saharan and the region where he lived near Lake Chad was a huge flood during the Neolithic subpluvial.

Wordsmyth said...

What piece(s) of evidence first brought you to the conclusion that Noah was a Nilo-Saharan?

Alice Linsley said...

Here are a few reasons.

The words Nod (נוד) and Nok (נוך) are virtually identical and related to Enock/Anock/Hanock (or Enoch, Anoch/Hanoch. Cain, a sent-away son, went to the territory of Nod/Enoch which was "east" or "quimat" of Eden. Quimat is not a Hebrew word. The word is qma and it means place of bull rushes in Ancient Egyptian.

Since this account comes from people after the time of Abraham who thought their ancestors originated in Mesopotamia, it is clear that the land of Nok/Enoch was a place known for rushes east of there. That suggests the Nile.

Also, Enoch is a royal title found among the peoples of the Nile and Sahara. See this:
http://biblicalanthropology.blogspot.com/2011/11/is-enoch-royal-title.html

Analysis of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the rulers listed in Genesis 4 and 5 reveals that Cain and Seth married Enoch's daughters and they named their first born sons after their father. See this:
http://biblicalanthropology.blogspot.com/2011/02/genesis-king-lists.html

Further, there is only one place on the surface of the earth where the people claim the land to be that of Noah, that is Borno (meaning "Land of Noah") in the region of Lake Chad. Climate studies and anthropological studies of the rulers of this region confirm a time of flooding (Neolithic Subpluvial) and that the Proto-Saharan rulers kept personal menageries, as would have Noah who protected the animals from the rising waters.

For more information check the INDEX of Topics. of Eden. Since this account comes from people after the time of Abraham who thought their ancestors originated in Mesopotamia, it is clear that the land of Nok/Enoch was east of there. Enoch is a royal title found among the peoples of the Nile and Sahara. See this:
http://biblicalanthropology.blogspot.com/2011/11/is-enoch-royal-title.html

Analysis of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the rulers listed in Genesis 4 and 5 reveals that Cain and Seth married Enoch's daughters and they named their first born sons after their father. See this:
http://biblicalanthropology.blogspot.com/2011/02/genesis-king-lists.html

Further, there is only one place on the surface of the earth where the people claim the land to be that of Noah, that is Borno (meaning "Land of Noah") in the region of Lake Chad. Climate studies and anthropological studies of the rulers of this region confirm a time of flooding (Neolithic Subpluvial) and that the Proto-Saharan rulers kept personal menageries, as would have Noah who protected the animals from the rising waters.

For more information check the INDEX of Topics.

Alice Linsley said...

Wordsmyth, This article has more information related to Eden:
http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2009/03/edens-flood-east-and-west.html

wtanksley said...

Wow, thank you for posting such a tidy summary in response to a mere comment! That's very useful, and although I'd read the articles in question your shorter explanation helps me understand your case.

I clearly see your areas of disagreement with the Hills, and of course there's no reason her ideas and analysis couldn't be applied to the land you propose.

One of the problems she proposes a solution to is the 15 cubit prevalence and the "mountains". Is your most likely solution similar -- that the "mountains" were religious structures?

Thank you for interacting!

DDeden said...

Hill's paper is as erroneous as the others claiming that Noah's flood occurred in the Mesopotamia region.

Merely based on the fact that Lake.Chad sounds similar to Ak.kad, I'm willing to allow AL's hypothesis as barely plausible.

Akkad/chaldy/Haldi/celtoi/corn-cane(farmers)

Alice Linsley said...

Noah was not a Kushite. It is not possible to speak of Kushites until after the time of Kush, Noah's grandson. Kush was the son of Ham and the father of Nimrod (Gem 10:6, 7).

Alice Linsley said...

Akkad is not Tchad, but a variant of Agades, a very old settlement in Niger.

I don't believe that the Black Sea has bulrushes. Too cold.