[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference hydra::dejavu

Title:Psychic Phenomena
Notice:Please read note 1.0-1.* before writing
Moderator:JARETH::PAINTER
Created:Wed Jan 22 1986
Last Modified:Tue May 27 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2143
Total number of notes:41773

1641.0. "Parting of the Red Sea." by CADSYS::COOPER (Topher Cooper) Fri Mar 13 1992 14:21

From: clarinews@clarinet.com
Newsgroups: clari.tw.education,clari.tw.science,clari.news.religion,clari.news.top
Subject: Study examines how Red Sea parting might have happened
Keywords: higher education, education, marine science, science,
	organized religion, religion
Date: 12 Mar 92 17:04:36 GMT
Slugword: redsea
Priority: major
Format: regular
ANPA: Wc: 547; Id: z3594; Sel: xxndh; Adate: 3-12-1210pes
Codes: yndhrxx., ynsmrxx., ynrorxx.


	TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (UPI) -- The parting of the Red Sea described in the
Bible could have been caused by strong winds that pushed water away from
the shoreline, a study released Thursday by Florida State University
says.
	The study was conducted by FSU oceanography professor Doron Nof and
Nathan Paldor, atmospheric sciences professor at the Hebrew University
of Jerusalem.
	``We developed a computer model that represents the Red Sea in a
physical way,'' Nof said.
	The model recreated a crossing site at the northern edge of the Gulf
of Suez, just north of the Red Sea. Scholars believe this site near the
town of Suez is where the Israelites escaped from Egypt into Canaan in
present-day Israel, Nof said.
	The researchers studied the potential result of 40 mph to 45 mph
winds blowing over the site for 10 to 12 hours -- much like the Biblical
account of the night before the parting.
	``Where the crossing might have occurred is really long, narrow and
shallow,'' Nof said. ``We tested it to see what would happen to the
shoreline. We found out the shoreline could recede about a mile and
together with this, the sea level drops about 10 feet.''
	Such conditions would allow someone to cross the narrow passage on
foot, the study concluded.
	``What we are saying is it's physically possible that a storm could
produce something that could be viewed as a parting,'' Nof said.
	Because the area is geographically very long and extremely shallow, 
``the wind can lift a lot of water. It's like blowing across the top of
a cup of coffee. The coffee blows from one end of the cup to the other,''
Nof said.
	The study also could explain the Biblical account of the sea
swallowing up the Egyptian soldiers in pursuit, Nof said.
	``When the wind relaxes, obviously this water is going to slash back,
'' Nof said. ``Our calculations estimate it would slash back at about 12
feet per second. You could not escape that. The entire area would be
reflooded in a matter of minutes.''
	The researchers also said the Biblical account of Israelites being
surrounded on both sides by water could be explained by the presence of
an underwater ridge exposed during the crossing.
	Although the Bible tells of an east wind, the study is based on a
northwesterly wind, the prominent wind direction in the area surrounded
by mountains. The discrepancy may be explained by locally variable
winds.
	``Because of the region's geography, particularly lower mountains
near the northern edge of the gulf, it is quite possible that in the
relatively small area of the crossing that the wind was from the east,''
Nof said. ``Over the much larger gulf, the wind could have been from the
northwest.''
	The idea for the study, scheduled for publication in the March
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, ``just came out of the
blue,'' Nof said.
	The research has not attracted attention from the religious
community, and Nof said he was unsure what kind of reception it would
get.
	``The study went through the regular scientific review process,'' Nof
said. ``Some people may say 'Well, it's just a natural process.' Others
may say 'Well, maybe it's a miracle.' We're not making a judgment on
whether this event took place.''
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1641.1Not a new idea.CADSYS::COOPERTopher CooperFri Mar 13 1992 14:247
    I should add that this is very much not a new hypothesis -- what is new
    is the computer modeling.  In fact, Ripley (as in "Believe It Or Not",
    neither the most nor least reliable source around) claimed that
    Napolean found these conditions and crossed the Red Sea on dry -- OK,
    probably soggy -- ground.

				    Topher
1641.2Well, according to some accounts ...HELIX::KALLISPumpkins -- Nature's greatest giftFri Mar 13 1992 14:318
Re .0 (Topher):

When a stripling, I read that Napoleon crossed the Red Sea in a similar manner
to what was explained above.  Seems that before the Suwz Canal, a specific
set of conditions involving both wind and Spring Tides could produce the 
temporary-dry-land effect.

Steve Kallis, Jr.
1641.3The whole world waits with baited breath, master...UNDEAD::WARD_FRMaking life a mystical adventureFri Mar 13 1992 14:5112
    re: .2 (Steve)
    
        "When a stripling,"...
    
         Is that before or after streaking?  Does being naked change the
    way you read things?  Is it different nuding on dry versus wet land?
    Do you think Napolean would have approved of your strip-tease act
    as a precursor to reading about him?  And finally, is the Suwz Canal
    as amenable to skinny-dippers as the Suez Canal is?
    
    Frederick
    
1641.4Creating your own frivolityHELIX::KALLISPumpkins -- Nature's greatest giftFri Mar 13 1992 16:0129
Re .3 (Fredrick):

    
>         Is that before or after streaking? 
 
If you bathe thoroughly enough, particularly in soft water, there's no streaking.

> ..............................................Does being naked change the
>    way you read things?  

No, though often what I read.

>    ........................Is it different nuding on dry versus wet land?

Nuding changes.

>    Do you think Napolean would have approved of your strip-tease act
>    as a precursor to reading about him? 

I think the basic strip-tease act Napoleon approved of was Josephine's

>    ...................................... And finally, is the Suwz Canal
>    as amenable to skinny-dippers as the Suez Canal is?

Probably more so.  ("Why" is left as an exercise to the student)

Steve Kallis, Jr.


1641.5DWOVAX::STARKUse your imaginationFri Mar 13 1992 16:222
    <----------- 
    mmmmm .... you really *do* need that vacation, don't you Steve. :-)
1641.6MICROW::GLANTZMike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng LittletonFri Mar 13 1992 16:2818
  I think it's interesting that there might be people who find it easier
  to accept a "natural" explanation such as high winds, than a
  "supernatural" explanation such as a miracle. 

  In this particular case, my first question is: ok, if it could've been
  high winds, how often did such winds occur in those days? I mean, it's
  fine to say that it was high winds, and not a miracle, but what were
  the chances that these Israelites are all sitting around at the edge
  of the sea, with the Egyptians in pursuit (well a couple of days
  behind, anyway), and all of a sudden, this wicked wind whips up, the
  sea recedes, and they dash across to safety? And then the sea returns
  to prevent the Egyptians from pursuing them. Common weather pattern?
  Coincidence? Miracle?

  What does the explanation of high winds buy you, even if true? I guess
  maybe it serves to convince people that at least the event actually
  occurred. But it doesn't do much, in my opinion, to explain it in
  "natural" terms.
1641.7Nothing wrong with some of eachHELIX::KALLISPumpkins -- Nature's greatest giftFri Mar 13 1992 16:3934
Re .6 (Mike):

  >I think it's interesting that there might be people who find it easier
  >to accept a "natural" explanation such as high winds, than a
  >"supernatural" explanation such as a miracle.

The two are not mutually exclusive. 

  >In this particular case, my first question is: ok, if it could've been
  >high winds, how often did such winds occur in those days? I mean, it's
  >fine to say that it was high winds, and not a miracle, but what were
  >the chances that these Israelites are all sitting around at the edge
  >of the sea, with the Egyptians in pursuit (well a couple of days
  >behind, anyway), and all of a sudden, this wicked wind whips up, the
  >sea recedes, and they dash across to safety? And then the sea returns
  >to prevent the Egyptians from pursuing them. Common weather pattern?
  >Coincidence? Miracle?

If what I read was valid, it was a _very rare_ combination of circumstances that
would provide the conditions for such an event (if it were common, for that
matter, it would have been foolish for the Egyptian troops to follow; they'd
know better).  Thjat the Israelites could have arrived at just the right time
to make use of a rare natural event seems miraculous enough as it is.


  >What does the explanation of high winds buy you, even if true? I guess
  >maybe it serves to convince people that at least the event actually
  >occurred. But it doesn't do much, in my opinion, to explain it in
  >"natural" terms.

Among other things, it might eventually help archeologists establish a date for
the event.  Not yet, but when more is determined just beyond tidal conditions.

Steve Kallis, Jr.
1641.8Providence (other than the capital of Rhode Island)CUPMK::WAJENBERGHarvey/Dowd in '92Fri Mar 13 1992 16:5022
    Re .6: "Common weather pattern? Coincidence? Miracle?"
    
    I think I might call it "providential."  That is, an act of God working
    within the natural system rather than beyond it.  Of course, it's hard
    to distinguish providential acts from ordinary ones unless you have
    someone like Moses at hand, making explanatory commentary, though
    especially apt timing is liable to give you strong suspicions.  You
    can't distinguish providential acts from ordinary ones by scientific 
    examination because both kinds are perfectly natural.  In fact, a good 
    case can be made, theologically, for regarding all natural acts as 
    providential -- some just more obvious to the observer.
    
    Perhaps this is an instance (a spectacular one) of what Jungians call
    "synchronicity"?
    
    As a matter of reference, the passage in question is Exodus 14:21 --
    
    	Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord
    	swept the sea back by a strong east wind all night, and turned
    	the sea into dry land, so the waters were divided.
    
    Earl Wajenberg
1641.9Providential, my dear, providential! (Thanks Earl!)TNPUBS::PAINTERlet there be musicFri Mar 13 1992 19:385
    
    Like the night my car just happened to break down at the exit to 
    Kripalu two Christmas's ago.
    
    Cindy
1641.10Still a matter of Faith.STRATA::RUDMANAlways the Black Knight.Tue May 05 1992 20:3927
    But, Mike (.6), look at it another way: a computer model says
    the event was possible, and (except for the wind direction) matches
    what 14:21 says about the wind blowing sea floor clear of water.
    This moves the probability of such an event happening another step
    closer to skeptical acceptance.  (Oops; make that "acceptance by
    the skeptics".)  
    
    What they didn't have the computer do is feed it enough area weather
    data for it to predict how often such an event would take place, nor
    did they have it compute the odds of it occuring at one particular
    point in time.  (As you pointed out.)  Somehow I'd expect a lot of 
    zeroes to be involved.
    
    A coincidence like that would certainly be classed as a miracle in
    most everyone's book.  Who are any of us to try to convince you it
    was just a freak of nature--the ultimate example of being in the right
    place at the wrong time (or the wrong place at the wrong time, if you
    were the chasee). 
    
    With practically every religious controversy, in the end it boils
    down to belief.  
    
    Did Moses, standing on that windy shore, raise his hands towards Heaven 
    and pray to God for help, or was he shaking his fists in the air in 
    frustration, when, suddenly, the wind shifted...
    
    							Don
1641.11Majority wins, and we can settle this one and for all! (;^)TNPUBS::PAINTERwe've got to live togetherTue May 05 1992 21:054
    
    Shall we all vote on it?
    
    Cindy