"Daryl Krupa" wrote in message
m...
"Honus" wrote in message
news:PHSqd.12858$lv6.2417@trnddc03...
"Daryl Krupa" wrote in message
om...

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

I can find 'em.

I'm not going to let your demurral stop me, because there are really
only 2 on the 'net:

Ballard, R. D. Fred Hiebert, Dwight Coleman, Cheryl Ward,
Jennifer Smith, Kathryn Willis, Brendan Foley, Katherine Croff,
Candace Major, Francesco Torre
2001
Deepwater Archaeology of the Black Sea of the Black Sea:
The 2000 Season at Sinop, Turkey
American Journal of Archeology, v. 105, no. 4, pp. 607-623

http://www.ajaonline.org/archive/105...54.pdf#ballard

There you will see, on p. 615, the supposed habitation site:
Table 1.
Radiocarbon Analysis of Samples Collected from the Surface of Site 82

The dates range from 250 to 120 BP, i.e.
no earlier than the 17th Century A.D..

Right, but they also state that all of those things were surface items
recently deposited on the site. They weren't claiming that they were left
there by the inhabitants. Did you catch the bit about the "concentrations of
zinc and copper"? That one really caught me off guard! I'm usre that they
didn't mean for it to be as funny as I found it. g

Also, on the previous page,
"Two samples were taken of the top 5-7 cm of deposit from within Site
82 ...
Both samples contained ... no ceramics, stone debitage, or diagnostic
artifacts."

I'm missing your point. They didn't find anything diagnostic...that's all.
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, as they say. And they do note
that more sampling and collection of baseline data is needed. Seems to be
the proper stance to me.

Whatever it may be, the "habitation site" is not proof of a BSFlood.
It could easily be 12,000 years old, which is about when the level
of the Black Sea dropped to its lowest point.

That's a possibility. It sounds like the jury is still out; I can wait for
the verdict, albeit a bit impatiently.

By the way, thanks again for that link. It was a neat one. I loved those
pictures! I didn't expect them, and was quite pleasantly surprised to find
them. But am I the only guy around that loathes pdf's?

Sad to say, Ballard didn't find Noah's house.

There's just one mo

Further evidence of abrupt Holocene drowning of the Black Sea shelf.
Ballard, R.D, Coleman, D.F., Rosenberg, G. D.
2000
Marine Geology. 170; 3-4, Pages 253-261

There used to be more, but his archaeolologist Hiebert's pages on
the subject are gone, even from his own professional site, which
otherwise seems not to have been updated for more than a year:

http://www.museum.upenn.edu/Sinop/SinopIntro.htm

Ballard's latest report on his 2000 season in the Black Sea
mentions the BSFlood, but notes that it is controversial, and says
nothing at all about Noah's address, Site 82.

I keep getting "cannot find server" error messages when I try to navigate
from that page. I'll continue with my attempts, though. That looks like
interesting reading.


http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/lin....00002.x/full/


http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/ope...ssue=1&spage=2



http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/...100901.141249?

Abstract:

http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/....100901.141249

Nuts. Those are pay sites. I'm not about to give them $15 regardless of
how interested I am, so I'll just have to take your word for it. g

Hmmm ... what's that subtle taste? I remember it from long ago,
but I so rarely encounter it nowadays ... HAH! That's It! It's
Rationality!

It's a rare beast, more's the pity. Anyway, that's the flood that the
original poster was referring to. Whether it happened or not is a different
matter. My mind's made up on the Noachin one, though.

"Honus" wrote in message news:pTcrd.4219$wr6.1893@trnddc04...
"Daryl Krupa" wrote in message
m...
"Honus" wrote in message
news:PHSqd.12858$lv6.2417@trnddc03...
"Daryl Krupa" wrote in message
om...

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

I can find 'em.

I'm not going to let your demurral stop me, because there are really
only 2 on the 'net:

Ballard, R. D. Fred Hiebert, Dwight Coleman, Cheryl Ward,
Jennifer Smith, Kathryn Willis, Brendan Foley, Katherine Croff,
Candace Major, Francesco Torre
2001
Deepwater Archaeology of the Black Sea of the Black Sea:
The 2000 Season at Sinop, Turkey
American Journal of Archeology, v. 105, no. 4, pp. 607-623

http://www.ajaonline.org/archive/105...54.pdf#ballard

There you will see, on p. 615, the supposed habitation site:
Table 1.
Radiocarbon Analysis of Samples Collected from the Surface of Site 82

The dates range from 250 to 120 BP, i.e.
no earlier than the 17th Century A.D..

Right, but they also state that all of those things were surface items
recently deposited on the site. They weren't claiming that they were left
there by the inhabitants.

Well, if you look at the National Geographic journal of the 2000
expedition, they were sure hoping that they we

"We were able to see that this structure more or less is in
the shape of what we would think is an ancient house. It had
ceramics. It had these ground stone implements. It had the
clear remains of walls made out of mud with sticks and beams
as their major construction."

Dispatch 10, 2000 (Sept, 9)

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


From a NatGeog press release:

"Today Ballard, famous for finding Titanic, confirmed that his
research team, sponsored in part by the National Geographic Society,
has identified a wooden structure on a gently sloping shelf near the
convergence of two submerged ancient river beds.

"This is an incredible find," Ballard said in a telephone call to the
National Geographic Society from the expedition ship Northern Horizon.
"It consists of [the remains of] a single building with a hewn beam
and wooden branches that formed the walls and roof of a structure—most
likely a house. We have also found and photographed stone tools,
possibly a chisel or an axe, and ceramic storage vessels, all
untouched since the flooding of the Black Sea."

The find represents "the first concrete evidence for the occupation of
the Black Sea coast prior to its flooding," says expedition
archaeologist Fredrik Hiebert, of the University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. "This is a major discovery
that will rewrite the history of civilizations in this key area
between Europe, Asia, and the Middle East."

The wooden structure is the only building sighted so far during the
expedition. As the search continues, the team hopes that additional
finds will suggest a settlement pattern along the ancient coastline.
Using sonar profiles, Ballard's team has identified more than 50
potential search areas similar to the site of the structure."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...0blacksea.html


Did you catch the bit about the "concentrations of
zinc and copper"? That one really caught me off guard! I'm usre that they
didn't mean for it to be as funny as I found it. g

No, I didn't; which page is it on, please?

Also, on the previous page,
"Two samples were taken of the top 5-7 cm of deposit from within Site
82 ...
Both samples contained ... no ceramics, stone debitage, or diagnostic
artifacts."

I'm missing your point. They didn't find anything diagnostic...that's all.
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, as they say. And they do note
that more sampling and collection of baseline data is needed. Seems to be
the proper stance to me.

Yes, except that it negates the earlier claim by Hiebert:
"It had ceramics. It had these ground stone implements.
It had the clear remains of walls made out of mud with sticks and
beams as their major construction."
It's an admission that the earlier claim was inflated.

Whatever it may be, the "habitation site" is not proof of a BSFlood.
It could easily be 12,000 years old, which is about when the level
of the Black Sea dropped to its lowest point.

That's a possibility. It sounds like the jury is still out;
I can wait for the verdict, albeit a bit impatiently.

Look again at Ballard's and Hiebert's words, and their current
opinions on the site:

"Black Sea Trip Yields No Flood Conclusions
....
Hiebert had hoped wood pieces from the suspected homestead would prove
it was built before the flood, which would help date the event
conclusively.
But some of the retrieved pieces dated to after the flood, meaning no
one
can say exactly when the settlement had been built.

Also, scientists found nothing that could have established whether the
site was a human settlement.

"We didn't find a farmer or his tools," Ballard said."

http://www.puresupply.com/newap/D8458SGG3.html

The prosecution of the case has been dropped by the claimants,
due to lack of evidence. That's the only verdict you'll ever see.

By the way, thanks again for that link. It was a neat one. I loved those
pictures! I didn't expect them, and was quite pleasantly surprised to find
them. But am I the only guy around that loathes pdf's?

You take what you can get.

Sad to say, Ballard didn't find Noah's house.

There's just one mo

Further evidence of abrupt Holocene drowning of the Black Sea shelf.
Ballard, R.D, Coleman, D.F., Rosenberg, G. D.
2000
Marine Geology. 170; 3-4, Pages 253-261

There used to be more, but his archaeolologist Hiebert's pages on
the subject are gone, even from his own professional site, which
otherwise seems not to have been updated for more than a year:

http://www.museum.upenn.edu/Sinop/SinopIntro.htm

Ballard's latest report on his 2000 season in the Black Sea
mentions the BSFlood, but notes that it is controversial, and says
nothing at all about Noah's address, Site 82.

I keep getting "cannot find server" error messages when I try to navigate
from that page. I'll continue with my attempts, though. That looks like
interesting reading.

Actually, it's not that interesting. It doesn't have any more on
"Noah's House" than the NatGeog site does.

Abstract:

http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/....100901.141249

Nuts. Those are pay sites. I'm not about to give them $15 regardless of
how interested I am, so I'll just have to take your word for it. g

See if you can get guest access at a university library, one that
has the necessary subscriptions. That's what I do.
But you should have been able to see the abstract, at least:

"Abstract
Decades of seabed mapping, reflection profiling, and seabed sampling
reveal that throughout the past two million years the Black Sea was
predominantly a freshwater lake interrupted only briefly by sal****er
invasions coincident with global sea level highstand.
When the exterior ocean lay below the relatively shallow sill of the
Bosporus outlet, the Black Sea operated in two modes.
As in the neighboring Caspian Sea, a cold climate mode corresponded
with an expanded lake and a warm climate mode with a shrunken lake.
Thus, during much of the cold glacial Quaternary, the expanded Black
Sea's lake spilled into to the Marmara Sea and from there to the
Mediterranean.
However, in the warm climate mode, after receiving a vast volume of
ice sheet mel****er, the shoreline of the shrinking lake contracted
to the outer shelf and on a few occasions even beyond the shelf edge.
If the confluence of a falling interior lake and a rising global ocean
persisted to the moment when the rising ocean penetrated across the
dividing sill, it would set the stage for catastrophic flooding.
Although recently challenged, the flood hypothesis for the connecting
event best fits the full set of observations."

From the body of the article:

"Criticisms of Catastrophic Flooding

The hypothesis of a rapid terminal flooding of the Black Sea
has been criticized (Aksu et al. 2002a, b, Görür et al. 2001).
The initial objection (Görür et al. 2001) noted the presence of
8.1-ky BP peat and 7.2-ky BP wood associated with brackish fauna
(Dreissena polymorpha and Monodacna caspia) in cores from
the Sakarya River and adjacent shelf.
Deposits with these components at a depth of 22 m
conflicted with a lake downed at 7.14 ky BP as originally proposed.
However, a recognition
from the strontium isotopes
that the salinization was initiated earlier at 8.4 ky BP and that
the 7.14 ky BP only reflected a threshold in salinity
resolves the apparent conflict."

I.e., nothing catastrophic at 7.14 ka (or thereabouts),
nothing related to a chage in Black Sea level,
basically a complete capitulation to the critics of
the BSFlood hypothesis.

In 2003, at a conference session devoted to the topic of the
BSFlood,
Ryan mentions nothing about an event at 7.14 ka BP:

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2003AM/fin...ract_64109.htm

And here's another explanation for the lower-than-100-m-down
shoreline:

http://www.geosociety.org/meetings/2003/prAvalon.htm

More he

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2003AM/fin...ract_63243.htm

And he

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2003AM/fin...ract_58733.htm

Hmmm ... what's that subtle taste? I remember it from long ago,
but I so rarely encounter it nowadays ... HAH! That's It! It's
Rationality!

It's a rare beast, more's the pity. Anyway, that's the flood that the
original poster was referring to. Whether it happened or not is a different
matter. My mind's made up on the Noachin one, though.

So's mine.
It was flooding of the area between the lower Tigris and Euphrates
rivers, following years of siltation of the river beds during
a period of reduced flow and increased sediment input due to
erosion in the headwaters after land clearance for agriculture there.
The channels filled up with silt, and the next time that there was
a really large flow of water on the two rivers at the same time, the
channnels could not handle the flow, and the area between them flooded
completely so that no dry land could be seen anywhere.
The "whole world" was flooded.
Except maybe on the occasional tell: Noah's Ark might have been
a pile of dirt.

Daryl Krupa

"Daryl Krupa" wrote in message
om...
"Honus" wrote in message
news:pTcrd.4219$wr6.1893@trnddc04...


Did you catch the bit about the "concentrations of
zinc and copper"? That one really caught me off guard! I'm usre that
they
didn't mean for it to be as funny as I found it. g

No, I didn't; which page is it on, please?

Page 615 of the document, page 43 of the pdf.

"One of the two samples from Site (dive 29) had concentrations of zinc and
copper, which are typically associated with excrement and urine."