Nope, not a jot. There are, however, many credible scientific reasons why such a flood could not have happened.

No. The Great Flood was nothing more than a retelling of folktales about the formation of the Black Sea (when the natural dam that separated it from the Mediterranian wore down).

If it's in the Bible, chances are it doesn't have much credible evidence.

Yes. Scientists today do agree that a great flood took place about the time that the Bible states. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070907150931.htm 'Says Weil, "We found that indeed a flood happened around that time. From core samples, we see that a flood broke through the natural barrier separating the Mediterranean Sea and the freshwater Black Sea, bringing with it seashells that only grow in a marine environment. There was no doubt that it was a fast flood -- one that covered an expanse four times the size of Israel. It might not have been Noah, as it is written in the Bible, but we believe people in that region had to build boats in order to save their animals from drowning. We think that the ones who survived were fishermen -- they already had the boats."'

Yes, for the mountains and valleys were created by the Flood, for it was not a local flood. Noah would not have created an ark if it was a local flood. If it was local, God would have told him it was, and he could spared himself the trouble of building an ark, when all he had to do is to move him and his family to a different region.

There were huge floods. It could have been any one of them - or the biblical flood could have simply been written as fiction. There is no evidence of a true global flood while humans walked the globe, though.

None. There is not a credible scientist out there in the relevant sciences that believes there was ever a world wide flood, let alone one around 2300 BC.

I do not think that there is. I suspect that the story is an exaggeration of a one or more smaller local floods in Mesopotamia 5000 years ago. Another source for legends of a universal flood in the distant past may be the flooding of low lying coastal areas by rising sea levels several thousand years ago at the end of the last Ice Age.

who needs evidence? its written down. its history. . just because it doesnt make sense to you doesnt mean it didnt happen. . men walked on the moon. believe it or not.

I know a doctor who knows a lot concerning in this sort of archeological evidence. He has given talks against evolution, and they incidently include evidence supporting the Great Flood or some other widespread natural disaster(an flood makes the most sense.) One example he gave was an ancient(very old) tree that you can see the trunk surrounded and buried halfway up with the layers of dirt archeologists tend to say mean it took millions of years to develope. Unfortunately for them, there is proof that this was a sudden event, seeing as there is no evidence of this tree growing or aging between the layers of dirt. The Great Flood would explain some such a naturaly disaster that would cause this sort of layering in the earth. - I am no scientist, however, so I think if you looked into this for yourself you would find more convincing arguments than that of a random ABer.

As a geologist, no. There is no evidence for a great worldwide flood in anywhere in recent geologic history. As a historian, the flood story is taken from an older tale regarding a ruler in what is today Egypt who built himself a boat to survive the annual flood that occurs in the Nile River floodplain. Look it up.

It's probably a waste of time to attempt to provide "proof" of ANYTHING mentioned in the bible, because the "non-believers" and "nay-sayers" will ALWAYS find ways to disprove this "proof"--REGARDLESS if its authenticity!!!

Billions of dead things buried in rock layers scattered all over the world. See answersingenesis.org The evidence that we see is the same for everyone. The understanding of that evidence is based upon your worldview. My worldview is that the Bible is the only basis for understanding what goes on.

Yes, there is vast amounts of evidence this Flood occured anywhere from 5,000 to 20,000 years ago. It ended society and the world that was then known.

None at all. The flood was a regional flood and not world wide. :-)

No. Really, the fact that strata layers exist even after the time when such a flood was supposed to take place shows that it didn't happen. It's not like a flood would know how to deposit sediment in layers, and deposit the proper fossils in the right sediment layers too. The story of the Great Flood can probably be traced back to one of the many flood stories coming from people who lived on the coast or near rivers. This would be typical of the Bible, since most of the stories in it are taken from other people.

There is no evidence of a global flood any time in the last 150,000 years (roughly the time humans have been on Earth). There may never have been one - but if there was it would have been billions of years ago - long before mammals existed. There have been many locally devastating floods within the last 10,000 years, of course. And any one can be chosen as "The Biblical One". But of course - that's not a very big deal. I've seen 3 major floods with my own eyes. People died, property was destroyed. And if they took place several thousand years ago they all could have wiped out several villages or towns.

I saw a documentary on it once and there is evidence that what scientists think could only be the ark, has in fact been found. here is a link I found about it.. hope it helps http://www.squidoo.com/noahsarkfound

Yes and no ... There is some scattered evidence of numerous smaller floods. There is very clear evidence of sea floors rising to become high mountain plateaus. There is evidence of mountain walls that were acting like dams & dykes eroding and letting the lower land get covered in a sudden deluge. There are many stories from many different civilizations that tell of some sort of water disaster. But there is no credible evidence of any global flood that left no dry land for a short period of time.

YES. do you want the evidence.

1) "Proponents of flood geology contend that the biblical deluge, Noah's ark, is to be taken literally in which most observed geological processes, like fossilization and sedimentary strata, are a later result of this event. While some people hold the belief there was a worldwide flood, flood geology itself has been rejected by mainstream geologists, biologists, and historians, many of whom consider it pseudoscience. Though at one time even prominent workers in biblical archaeology were willing to argue support for flood geology, this view is no longer widely held." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(mythology)#Flood_geology 2) "Modern geology, and its sub-disciplines of earth science, geochemistry, geophysics, glaciology, paleoclimatology, paleontology and other scientific disciplines utilize the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community. Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying this principle, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale). In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists." "Historical records: The dates of a number of ancient cultures (such as those of Egypt and Mesopotamia) have been established by the analysis of historical documents supported by carbon dating to be older than the alleged date of the Flood. - Erosion: The flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly. - Geochronology: Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is at least 4.5 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood 6000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years. - Paleontology If the flood were responsible for fossilization, then all the animals now fossilized must have been living together on the Earth just before the flood. Based on estimates of the number of remains buried in the Karoo fossil formation in Africa, this would correspond to an abnormally high density of vertebrates worldwide, close to 2100 per acre. In addition, carbonate hardgrounds and the fossils associated with them show that the so-called flood sediments include evidence of long hiatuses in deposition that are not consistent with flood dynamics or timing. - Geochemistry Proponents of Flood Geology also have a difficult time explaining the alternation between calcite seas and aragonite seas through the Phanerozoic. The cyclical pattern of carbonate hardgrounds, calcitic and aragonitic ooids, and calcite-shelled fauna has apparently been controlled by seafloor spreading rates and the flushing of seawater through hydrothermal vents which changes its Mg/Ca ratio." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_geology#Scientific_evidence_against_a_global_flood

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/item_KSVcJUoawxktxk6UzgGFtK/1 Check out this Article...SWEETTTTT!!! dated 1 October 2009

Yes!...they have found seashells on the tops of mountains...And also we must consider that the earth then may not have been as mountainous as today...and we can see how quickly the earth can change due to earthquakes...

No, the evidence is all the other way. If the creation was in 4004BC as calculated by Bishop Ussher, then Noah's flood can be dated by the very clear ages of the patriarchs in Genesis chapter 5 and from chapter 7 verse 11. That puts it about a century after the completion of the three big pyramids at Gizeh. These can be dated from Egyptian records to within about 15 years. Curiously, if you divide the approximately 1000 years from Alfred the Great of Anglo-Saxon times to Queen Victoria by the numbers of English monarchs, including Lady Jane Grey and the Cromwells you get an average length of reign for English monarchs before modern medicine really got going. Multiply this average reign length by the number of Egyptian monarchs from Cheops to Cleopatra and you get the same dates for the pyramids to within a few years, which indicates that they are probably accurate. Since the pyramids were never full of mud and the Egyptians never noticed that they were all drowned, then either the flood happened a good while before or not at all. It's pretty clear from the Epic of Gilgamesh etc that it is an exaggerated version of a flood in the Tigris and / or Euphrates rivers, probably in the delta of the combined rivers. It isn't necessary to go to the Black Sea for this, southern Iraq is essentially the flood plain of these rivers.