Here's a question to ponder for you actually open-minded Atheists and Christians?

Before the flood that killed off all of the world's human life that Noah and his family escaped by building the Ark, just how advanced had man become?



I've been thinking about this, and sometimes I wonder if they weren't somewhere as advanced as we are today, except without the benefits of petroleum or any fossil fuels. I'm assuming for this hypothetical question that crude oil didn't exist at that time. (And for you atheists, I'm also assuming that the flood did actually happen as the bible says.) I watched that documentary that discussed what would happen if everyone just suddenly disappeared. What I found very interesting about it was that withing something like 200 years almost all traces of our existence would be decomposed or buried. Only very few things would still exist just 1,000 years later, and all of those things would be buried deep.



Would their technology and knowledge rival our own similar to the way ancient Egyptian engineering that was required to create the pyramids, who also did not have the benefits of petroleum, rivals our engineering today.



I know that petroleum is not the solve all I'm making it sound like, but petroleum is almost single-handedly responsible for much of what we are able to do today. I mean it's used to make plastics, in all kinds of chemical reactions, to give us the raw power necessary to create many of the things we've been studying in science since the beginning of the modern age, and it has actually made energy cheap and so common that it's a standard of life. Without that energy so readily available, we wouldn't have the technological advances we have today.



I'm thinking like this: If their technology without petroleum or fossil fuels rivaled our own technological breakthroughs, then maybe their construction was similar to ours. Maybe they learned how to use certain kinds of metal to make support beams similar to the ones we have, except not so big or heavy because they would have had to figure how to do it without petroleum or the powerful vehicles we use today to lift things.



My thinking is if they did this, maybe their walls and beams were much like ours. If their materials were like ours, then their evidence of existence too would disappear in only a couple hundred years, and even more so due to such a massive flood wreaking havoc and erosion like nothing we could even imagine. Then a thousand years later, their would be almost nothing left of them. They wouldn't have plastics because we discovered that through our knowledge of petroleum. They wouldn't have nuclear fallout from nuclear power plant waste because they would never have had the power sufficient to manufacture a nuclear power plant. Or perhaps they could have with the power that can be generated from burning wood, I don't know.



I've heard some speculation out of the Christian community that perhaps the Great Pyramid of Egypt was actually created before the flood by one of the children of Adam.



It would make sense that their technology would advance rather quickly since there was a strong need for innovation, being that we were so new to the world, and the fact that they lived for centuries rather than only half to a third of a century. Also their minds were probably far closer to perfect than ours are, which means that probably their intelligence average was at the genius level. (Keep in mind, I don't mean the unrealistic and intangible genius television loves to give to it's characters. I mean the more tangible and realistic form where a man is plowing his field and realizes that there's an easier way that most of us less-than-geniuses would not catch until it was suggested to us by someone who already thought of it or made it work. You know, the kind of person who understands things around him/her well enough to make associations that lead them to possibilities the rest of us non-geniuses may not have realized.) I assume they were probably very smart because they would need to be to survive because assuming this means to assume the bible is correct, which would be to assume that people today are much like people then, which would mean they were soft, weak, and slow, which would mean they'd have to be pretty intelligent to survive starting out as only a single man and a single woman in a hostile world.



Think about this for a bit and tell me what do you think the possibilities are that people before the flood were just as advanced as we are, but without the benefits of petroleum or fossil fuels and all the technologies dependent upon fossil fuels.Here's a question to ponder for you actually open-minded Atheists and Christians?
First of all, there is no logistical way that there was a flood that covered the entire Earth. That would require, on the low end, 5x as much water as there is. Most historians believe that the flood of Genesis happened on the Black Sea, and would have wiped out any civilization existing on the shores.



But if, somehow, there was a flood that covered the entire earth, or at least down to Egypt, it would have wiped out everything. Therefore it is impossible to prove anything that you said; which is the same as it not even happening.Here's a question to ponder for you actually open-minded Atheists and Christians?
Well, the people would have to have been technologically advanced enough to have built an ark but incredibly ignorant of both zoology and seamanship to think that two of every unclean animal could have been fit on the ark along with enough food to last them for a voyage of more than a year. The ark would have been anything but seaworthy.
Lots of people have offered ideas that some ancient peoples had technologies we would consider impressive even today. They have even appeared on otherwise credible sources such as the History Channel. There are relics of antiquity for which we have no current confident explanation. But the set of cases like this gets smaller by the year.



Those who approach this from the perspective of science don't relate it to the various creation and flood myths, unless the myth really gives a useful clue. There is geologic evidence for regional floods, but not one that would be global by today's definition.