Evolutionary historiography of..."Noah's raven's tracks"

Salah

Forum Staff
Oct 2009
23,284
Maryland
#2
The ark was supposed to have landed in the mountains of Ararat in Armenia. Whether one takes the biblical story seriously or not, either way this pastor's claim is nonsense.
 

Recusant

Ad Honorem
Sep 2009
2,624
Sector N after curfew
#3
The ark was supposed to have landed in the mountains of Ararat in Armenia. Whether one takes the biblical story seriously or not, either way this pastor's claim is nonsense.
Salah ad-Din, I have a lot of respect for you, and appreciate the many fine contributions you make here, so please don't take this badly:

The author of the article was pointing her finger at credulous historians who don't do proper research, not at the pastor and "farmer" from whom the story of the tracks being those of "Noah's raven" supposedly originated.;)
 
Dec 2009
19,933
#4
' "Connecticut farmer Pliny Moody discovered foot-long, three-toed tracks in a sandstone ridge on his land, his pastor identified them as from Noah's raven, which had 'rested on that ledge and probably slept there before resuming the dangerous journey back to the ark'." '

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/27/noahs-raven-flight-fancy
Thanks a lot for sharing this clever & useful article, Corro.

Skepticism (self-skepticism included) is always warranted.
 
Oct 2007
8,434
Borneo~ that big Island in S.E. ASIA
#5
The author of the article was pointing her finger at credulous historians who don't do proper research, not at the pastor and "farmer" from whom the story of the tracks being those of "Noah's raven" supposedly originated.;)
Exactly...as per her statement:

I began with scorn for bygone credulous countryfolk and their slipshod Biblical literalism. I ended with scorn for credulous modern historical authors and their slapdash research. How is that better? Now the scorn is based on data and not quasi-academic hearsay. Yet the easy belief in hearsay surely arose from scorn.
One forgets how credulous scientists and physicians were throughout the 19th century (my current researching on phrenology, mesmerism and uniform layered geology reveal the oddities of "logical leaders" of the day) yet way too often moderns only remember how equally gullible religious folks were....Conveniently.

PLUS the author may ruffle the feathers of moderns as well, as she shows how "slapdash" and "quasi-academic" the original article she criticizes is....
 
Dec 2009
11,340
Ozarkistan
#6
An authoritative book on the geology of Massachusetts, published in the 1830s or 1840s (geologist Hitchcock was the author, as I recall), blandly listed witchcraft as a possible causative agent in the formation of mineralized veins. Scientists and physicians are still credulous, just generally much less so, and much more rational, than the generality of non-scientists and non-physicians. Everything is relative. And all "facts" remain forever susceptible to disproof, as do all disproofs. We're only human, and we can't know and understand everything. It's probably safe to say that we are incapable of absolutely knowing and utterly understanding anything. To some, this translates as "whatever I choose to believe is true", but....
 
Oct 2007
8,434
Borneo~ that big Island in S.E. ASIA
#10
Too bad, Corro...would have given your idea some credence.

You may be confusing Hitchcock with someone else: I own both of his books, and he never used the word "witchcraft" nor suggested anything like that, as far as I can ascertain.

Perhaps you mean ""Pendleton's Geology & Scenery of Massachusetts" of 1833.

My best friend, a librarian, lives in Amherst where Hitchcock was President of Amherst College: should I send him to find your evidence? He is an utter rationalist and atheist, and would be glad to comply.