Oard’s Ice Age and Settlement of Northern Europe on Masoretic and Septuagint Timelines

Introduction

Most secular geologists1 believe that there were 20 to 30 ice ages on the earth over the last 2.6 million years (or more; see the notes regarding ice cores and seabed cores) the so-called Quaternary Period. Based on variations in the earth’s orbit that appear to have a period of about 100,000 years, they hypothesize glacial ages on the same rhythm (see for example, Hayes et al. 1976; Muller and MacDonald 1997; 2000). This is called the Astronomical Hypothesis, which Oard (2007) has disputed. In his initial publication, Oard (1979) reproposed (see Clark 1946) that there was one Ice Age caused by the cataclysmic disruptions of the Flood.

Creationist consensus is that any evidence of a pre-Flood ice age would not have survived the catastrophic upheavals of the Flood, so the existing evidence of extensive glaciation must be from post-Flood events (Oard 1979; 1990; 2024; Whitcomb and Morris 1961; Worraker 2020, 85), although some posit a pre-Flood ice age (for example, Jorgensen 1994). From that starting point, our concern is whether or not all of these are consistent: accepted historical glacial extents, (but not conventional timelines), Oard’s model as he parameterized it, settlement traditions for northern Europe, and the Masoretic biblical timeline. Note that the issue of the Ice Age timing is addressed from a slightly different perspective by Snelling and Matthews (2013), which will be discussed briefly as well.

Oard has revised his model modestly over the years since he first proposed. He initially proposed a 600-year period divided into a 500-year buildup followed by a 100-year meltdown (Oard 1979). In his current model, his estimates for duration include a total of 700 years (Oard 1990; 2024), a 500-year buildup followed by a 200-year meltdown. He proposes that the meltdown of the edges was fast, as little as 70 years.2 We will use his current model here.

Placing Oard’s relative timeline for post-Flood glaciation alongside an absolute timeline of Genesis events ought to be easy except for the fact that we do not have a single biblical timeline to which everyone agrees. This controversy is discussed briefly below. The timelines based on the Masoretic Text (MT) and the Old Greek translation of the Scriptures (called the Septuagint, or LXX) have been chosen for comparison. The timing of the Dispersion on each of these timelines is not textually bound by Scripture and is subject to considerable scholarly disagreement, so certain assumptions are made for analysis. The implications of the Oard Ice Age model are examined against the timing of the founding of Trier, Germany and the colonization of Ireland according to the dates of these events proposed by Griffith and White (2022b, Durations 15 and 16).3 Finally, some variations in the Oard model on the LXX timeline are considered which provoke some challenging speculations regarding post-Flood settlement of the Americas and Europe, and flood waters c. 2350 BC.

Background

Competing biblical witnesses

The timeline of Oard’s model is relative in the sense that it is tied to the end of the Flood, the Flood being the cause of the Ice Age in his model. We do not have complete freedom in placing Oard’s Ice Age just anywhere in time because the time of the Flood is attested in Scripture. However, even in God’s Word, ambiguity creeps in, and multiple readings of Genesis chapters 5 and 11 have been transmitted to the present, leading to multiple Genesis timelines. 

It comes as a surprise to many Christians that most translators of the Bible consider multiple manuscript sources when attempting to determine just what they should translate. That is, they must decide what ancient language sources (in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) actually form the Scriptures. For the Old Testament, most translators believe that the Masoretic Text, a consolidated set of manuscripts in Hebrew and Aramaic, is the best overall representation of what God actually spoke through His servants the prophets when they produced the Old Testament Scriptures. This text was collected and standardized by a group of Jewish scribes called the Masoretes. The standardization of this text started near the time of Christ and was codified in the eighth through tenth centuries. The Masoretes standardized the text, added margin notes to assist with interpretation, and added vowels to what was initially a consonantal text. This standardized text has been carefully transmitted with constant attention from the Masoretes and their successors.4

However, manuscripts from other sources do exist, and at times they conflict with the Masoretic Text. Some of those other sources include the Old Greek translation from the Hebrew (often called the Septuagint, abbreviated LXX), the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Aramaic Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, the Dead Sea scrolls, and the Judean Desert scrolls. The Book of Jubilees is a deuterocanonical book that also sets forth a creation timeline. Translators will also consider targumim, interpretations of the Scriptures historically used in teaching, such as in the shul (synagogue).5 When a conflict arises between the MT and another source, translators use a set of disciplines called textual criticism to decide which version (reading) is probably the most accurate rendition of what God spoke. In some cases, translators may decide that a text other than the MT seems more appropriate, and they will translate that text instead of the MT. A good translation, regardless of the decision made on a conflicting reading, will document the decision in what is called a text note and inform the reader of what the other possible readings are and from what sources they come.

One important alternative textual tradition for the Old Testament is the Old Greek translation made by certain Jewish scribes in the third to second centuries BC. This collection is called the Septuagint (from the Latin for 70) for the possible translation of the Pentateuch by 70 (or 72) scribes in Alexandria in the third century BC. This text is considered important because it seems to have been a version of Scripture to which both Jesus and New Testament writers were familiar and was used extensively by the Roman Church up to the Reformation. This version is the official version of the Old Testament for most of the Orthodox community worldwide.

The LXX is not a cohesive unity but a collection of Greek translations made during the Second Temple period. At the textual level, the LXX differs from the MT in substantial ways, but to our point, it differs significantly in Genesis chapters 5 and 11, which contain the genealogies of the early patriarchs. It is from these genealogies that certain primordial dates can be derived, such as the date of Creation and the date of the Flood. As a result of differences in the genealogies, the LXX claims the earth is 1,550 years older than the MT, and the Flood occurs at an earlier time in the LXX, as well.

Of the competing readings, we will consider the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Old Greek translation (Septuagint). These two traditions pose the youngest (MT) and the oldest (LXX) earth respectively that the Bible allows without modification (some people have tried to lengthen the age of the earth by inserting additional hypothetical patriarchs into Genesis 5 and 11.) Computed dates for the Flood under the MT and LXX are taken as givens for analysis as are the respective computed dates of Peleg’s lifetime. The date of the Dispersion is acknowledged as biblically indeterminate but for analysis is estimated based on recent scholarly opinion for the MT and chosen somewhat arbitrarily for the LXX consistent with biblical warrant.

The use of the Septuagint timeline is somewhat controversial in that many do not accept its possible inspired status. Others ardently defend the LXX. This is a debate that is not going to be pursued (much less settled) here. The provenance of the MT and LXX texts and the major points of argument as to which contains the legitimate readings of Genesis 5 and 11 (in addition to a host of other textual differences) are summarized elsewhere.6 Within various accessible sources, the calculations of the dates of Creation, the Flood, and the birth and death of Peleg can be found as well as discussions of the relative merits of and differences between the texts.

Masoretic Text

The MT is favored by Eames (2023), Jones (1993),  Oard (1979, 1990, 2004, 2024), Osgood (2023), Snelling and Matthews (2013), Ussher (1650) and many others. Some recent work favoring the MT is a series of papers by Griffith and White (2022a, 2022b, 2023a, 2023b, 2023c). They defend their choice of the MT in Griffith and White (2022a). We will use Griffith and White’s timeline which, while not universally accepted, is close to most other estimates based on the MT and is synchronized with their identified settlement dates for northern Europe. Griffin and White (2022b, Durations 15 and 16) identify the settlement dates for Trier, Germany, and Ireland as 2053 BC and 2035 BC respectively. The MT timeline sets 4004 BC  for the date of Creation, 2348/7 BC as the time of the Flood, and 2247–2008 BC as the lifetime of Peleg.

There is no uniformity of opinion on the date of the Dispersion among these authors for the MT timeline. Ussher (1650) favors 2242 BC , the fifth year of Peleg’s life. Jones (1993) leans toward a date near the end of Peleg’s life, c. 2008 BC, and many gravitate to 2247 BC, the year of Peleg’s birth on the MT timeline. Griffith and White (2022b) make a case for a main date of 2192/1 with a minor dispersion preceding the main body at 2198/7 BC. For simplicity, we will use the date of 2191 BC for the Dispersion on the MT timeline to keep in alignment with Griffith and White’s settlement dates, granting that considerable variation of opinions exists. Under our assumptions for the MT timeline, the approximate date of the start of glaciation would be 2347 BC, and meltdown would begin 1847 BC. Ice coverage would be down to approximately present day levels around 1647 BC. While Oard argues that the edges melted quickly, 70 years, we have chosen 100 years, the half-way point in the meltdown, as the average time when glaciated land would again be habitable.

Septuagint

The Old Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (LXX) is favored by Habermehl (2011; 2013), Rudd (2019), Smith (2018), Young (2003), and others, regarding the time line derived from Genesis 5 and 11. The LXX timeline puts the Creation in 5554 BC, the Flood in 3298 BC, and Peleg’s lifetime as 2767–2428 BC. Again, there is no uniformity of opinion among scholars as to the date of the Dispersion on the LXX timeline. Many papers simply do not address the fine details of the timeline itself but focus on its possible veracity based on textual criticism (for example, Eames 2023; Smith 2018; Young 2003). One author that does argue for a specific date is Rudd (2019), who argues for a date for the Tower of Babel of 2850 BC from archeological data to align the Tower with Eridu Temple I, similar to Rohl (2002). In his scheme, Peleg would have been born after the confusion of tongues but before the actual partitioning of the earth, so even Rudd does not posit a specific date for the Dispersion, although sometime after 2767 BC (Peleg’s birth) is implied.

For simplicity, we will use the LXX date of Peleg’s birth (2767 BC) to represent the Dispersion on the LXX timeline, which is an arbitrary assumption based on Genesis 10:25. Genesis 10:25 only says that the earth was “divided” in Peleg’s days. The salient expression in Hebrew is “נִפְלְגָ֣ה  . . .” land divided, which is given no further explanation. Under the LXX timeline, the start of glaciation under Oard’s model would be 3298 BC, meltdown beginning 2798 BC, and meltdown completing around 2598 BC. Half-way through the meltdown would be 2698 BC.

The Dispersion

Biblically Speaking

Within the canonical books of the Bible, the Tower of Babel incident and the Dispersion from the Plains of Shinar are described quite tersely in Genesis 11:1–9. This very short passage tells us that people rebelled against God’s will for them to spread out over the face of the earth and subdue it. Instead, they wanted to maximize their power by remaining united and to maximize their self-esteem by executing great engineering feats. To accomplish His will, God confused their language, destroying the collaboration they so desperately desired, forcing the people to scatter. Otherwise, the only other place in Scripture that refers specifically to the Dispersion is Genesis 10, the “Table of Nations,” which describes where some of the initial migrants landed. This text is short on detail and does not tell us how many of each tribe there were, how they traveled, what they took with them, when they left, how fast they traveled, or how long their journeys took. Nor do we find in Scripture where the nations spread from those initial landing places. Beyond these sparse biblical clues, answers to a host of questions, which must be tentative answers at best, must come from extra biblical sources.

Extra Biblically Speaking

The Book of Jubilees, a deuterocanonical book written during the intertestamental period, describes how Noah and his sons came to the point of dividing the earth (at least far as they knew it) into three domains by Noah casting lots. Ham received the hot places on the planet, Japheth received the cold places, and Shem received the hot and cold (temperate) places. A number of details of who went where are given in Jubilees 8 and following, but none of the details reference anything outside of western Asia, which is very understandable unless Noah and his sons had a globe of the earth on their desk. Few consider Jubilees to be inspired, but it may be the only written record of how things unfolded.

Taking only the inspired text, one could assume that no one struck out on his own before the confusion of tongues. However, Griffith and White (2022b) and Osgood (2023) maintain that some people dispersed before the confusion of tongues. Griffith and White (2022b, Durations 13 and 17) claim that both the Chinese and the Peruvians were actually in their allotted territories by 2198/7 BC, six to seven years before the confusion of tongues in 2192/1 BC by their reckoning. Osgood states that early dispersal of people from the central family group might have been the primary motivation for the remaining people to cling together. Both papers infer that the Dispersion was completed within Peleg’s lifetime, which is a reasonable but not the only possible interpretation of Genesis 10:25. Also, the exploits of Nimrod (and possibly Asshur) described in Genesis 10:8–12 could be considered part of the Dispersion, or they could be viewed as the building of local infrastructure.

Another source of data that reflects on the origins of people groups and could give clues as to the migration patterns of the past is chromosomal data, mitochondrial DNA for women and Y chromosome data for men. The number of studies in this area has grown in recent years. However, most of them suffer from worldview bias, and all of them suffer from the unavoidable genomic mix-up of intermarriage through the many generations since the Dispersion. On the conventional side, studies like Cai et al. (2011) start with the assumption of long ages, so they come to the conclusion that Southeast Asia was settled during the Last Glacial Period (LGP, see below) from southwest to northeast. Most of these studies also take the tree of chromosome differences and root it on a hypothetical common ancestor of apes and humans.

A recent study by Jeanson (2021) takes a biblical view. (The discussion in his book is quite technical at times but nevertheless accessible to a layperson. Please see for a fuller discussion.) Accordingly, Jeanson chose to root his Y chromosome tree on a node that very much looks like he has identified Noah and his three sons. Jeanson posits that major events in the history of mankind are reflected in this Y chromosome tree. Through his methodology, he concludes that Southeast Asia was settled from the north, not the other way around. While some major events can be analyzed by Jeanson’s method, short-lived details in the most distant past, like figuring out where Madai’s people went next after settling Persia (Scripture equates Madai with the Medes), are obscured by time.

At some point (we can argue about when), people began to wander off in different directions, perhaps all over the lower latitudes and elevations of the earth, especially in western Asia close to home as related in the Table of Nations. Most of the studies documenting movements and settlements in this age are archeological in nature. Osgood (2023) traces post-Flood use of tools to propose possible migration paths for Noah’s sons throughout western Asia. Weiss and Zohary (2011) trace the spread of early cultivars of important food crops in the region. Griffith and White (2021) notice huge common habitation locales between the early food cultivars and the evidences of “Pre-Pottery Neolithic A” (PPNA) settlements in western Asia (Kenyon and Holland 1981), which they claim may be the predominant culture for the first two centuries after Babel. All three datasets indicate earliest settlements in the same areas of western Asia in a boomerang shape centered on the Mountains of Ararat, sort of a mini Fertile Crescent. These early settlement patterns do indicate fluidity within western Asia but do not nail down a timeframe for a massive breakout to populate the globe. Nevertheless, folks eventually had to reach northern Europe. Griffith and White (2022b) estimate when they arrived for two groups of people.

Founding of Trier, Germany

In some instances, traditions get passed down in writing with enough information to tie settlement events to specific dates. Griffith and White (2022b) have investigated a number of these traditions, some with more support than others. Two sets of traditions that they have found for northern Europe relate to the founding of Trier, Germany and the colonization of Ireland (Griffith and White 2022b, Durations 15 and 16). They tie both events to a main dispersion of the population following quickly on the heels of the confusion of tongues and estimate a date for the Dispersion of 2192/1 BC based on their methodology called “durations and triangulations” (Griffith and White 2022a; 2022b).

Trier (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 15) is a town in northwest modern day Germany (North Rhine-Westphalia), probably so named after a Keltic tribe called Treveri who were encountered in the area by the Romans. The Romans established an outpost there in the first century AD, probably in response to a rebellion by the Treveri in 30–29 BC (Cassius Dio 1917). Trebeta is credited with Trier’s earlier founding in legends called the “Deeds of the Treven” collected in the twelfth century by monks of St. Matthias’ Abbey in Trier (Zenz 1955–1962). According to these legends, Trebeta was the son of Ninus of Assyria and an unnamed woman who was Ninus’ wife before Semiramis (see more about Ninus and Semiramis in the notes). As the story goes, when Ninus died, Semiramis took control of the kingdom and positioned her son sired by Ninus to be the next king. Trebeta took this as ill for him to remain and fled western Asia, wandering throughout Europe until founding Trier in 2053 BC.

While suspected by some to be a fabrication, this story is consistent with that told about Ninus in classical sources (Ctesias of Cnidus via Diodorus (Diodorus Siculus n.d.), George Synkellos (Adler and Tuffin 2002), and Sura via Paterculus (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 6). It is possible that either the monks or whoever provided them the legend could have used those sources to fabricate the tale. That would indicate a detailed knowledge of classical literature, which would be difficult to explain for anyone in Trier except for the monks. Nevertheless, Trebeta is linked both to folk traditions current to this day in Trier and to classical writings. Trebeta is also linked to Tuisto, a legendary founder of Germany discussed more below.

The Colonization of Ireland

The colonization of Ireland is attested by three ancient witnesses (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 16), all from Irish sources. The Annals of Clonmacnoise (Murphy 1896) are a translation of an ancient Irish Gaelic text that is no long extant. It was translated in 1627 into early modern English (Elizabethan in some parlances) and unpublished until 1896. This collection deals with Irish history from the creation of man through AD 1408.

The Annals of the Four Masters (originally, the Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland) (Ryan 2002) is mostly a collection of previous annals drawn together c. 1632–1636. These Annals span Irish history from the Deluge, which is dated 2242 BC up to AD 1616. The date of 2242 BC in the Annals, coincidentally or not, is the same as Ussher’s chosen date for the Dispersion, the fifth year of Peleg’s life on the MT timeline. Ussher was Irish and wrote at nearly the same time, so possible influence cannot be discounted out of hand. The first publication of these Annals in English may have been in 1846.

The Book of Invasions (or Book of Takings, Macalister 1941) is a collection of poems and prose that relate the history of Ireland from Creation to the Middle Ages. Its provenance is veiled but appears to have settled as a unified text sometime during the twelfth century AD. Eventually redacted into modern Irish Gaelic, it was first translated into English by Macalister between 1937 and its publication in 1941.

These three sources have two things in common. First, they all nominate a person named Partholan (or Partholón) as the first person to set foot on Irish soil, at least after the Flood. The Book of Invasions claims that Ireland was inhabited before the flood by a woman named Cessair and her people (the first of six invasions or takings of Ireland). Based on the idea of the Flood remaking the continents, we could doubt that the island of Ireland existed pre-Flood (see Baumgardner 1994, cf. Snelling and Hodge 2010). Second, the sources all relate significant events in Irish History to biblical events with calculable dates, the most salient of which is the invasion of the Milead, the Gaelic speaking Kelts who invaded Ireland from Spain about the time of David (c. 1000 BC) per the Annals of Clonmacnoise. Griffith and White use the derived synchronisms to calculate a date of 2035 for the first landing of Partholan in Ireland.

Natural History of Glaciation

Shared data and the conventional view

All of the physical data testifying to glacial activity on the earth is held in common between conventional geologists and creationist geologists. The two groups of scientists disagree on when glaciation occurred, but they cannot help but agree on where it occurred based on the physical evidence. Hence, we will borrow freely from conventional troves of data regarding possible past glacial extents without accepting the conventional timeline. We reject the Astronomical Hypothesis that there have been 20 to 30 ice ages over the last 2.6 million years, each lasting approximately 100,000 years. In the discussion that follows, our assumption is that there was a single post-Flood Ice Age (Oard 1990, chapter 7), caused by the Flood, which produced all of the geological evidence of glaciation seen by scientists of any stripe. We also assume that the age of the earth and the date of the Deluge are limited by the testimony of Scripture as outlined above to recent time on the conventional scale. We make no provision for adding any more time to the history of the earth to accommodate long ages.7 

To estimate the extent of glaciation in the post-Flood Ice Age, we will examine the consensus of conventional geology to frame the possible glacial extents in earth history. The maximum extent of all actual glacial activity identified in the world should be explained by Oard’s “single ice age” model. To choose data for estimation, we assume that older data would be less reliable than younger data. Data supposedly referring to times before a certain age are not even considered reliable by conventional scientists. Batchelor et al. (2019) say, “Our understanding of how global climatic changes are translated into ice-sheet fluctuations and sea-level change is currently limited by a lack of knowledge of the configuration of ice sheets prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM).” This could be interpreted as a tacit admission that anything hypothesized before the Last Glacial Maximum (see below) is mostly imaginative and lends credence to the idea that the last ice age was the only Ice Age.8 Hence, we will concentrate on the data for extents of glaciation during the last ice age, focusing on implications for Trier, Germany, and Ireland.

In conventional scientific literature, the last ice age is called the Last Glacial Period (LGP). On the conventional timeline, the LGP is hypothesized to cover approximately 115,000 years before present (YBP) to 11,700 YBP (see, for example, Marshall 2010). Conventional geologists hypothesize the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), that is, the last greatest glacial extent during the LGP, as starting around 27,500 YBP, peaking at 26,000 YBP, with recession starting at 20,000 YBP and lasting to the end of the LGP at 11,700 YBP (see, for example, French 2021). See figs. 1, 2, and 3.9 Note that by conventional reckoning on the Astronomical model, we should be approximately 12,000 to 15,000 years into the next 100,000 year cycle.

Fig. 1. Possible glacial timeline for the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM).

Fig. 2. Extent of last glacial maximum (LGM).

Fig. 3. Europe during the last glacial maximum (LGM). Ulamm, “Europe during its last glaciation, about 20,000 to 70,000 years before present, in northern Europe called Weichselian Glaciation, in the Alpine Region Würm Glaciation. The Extent of glaciation, sea and lakes have been painted freehand according to https://diercke.de/content/europa-landschaft-zur-letzten-kaltzeit-w%C3%BCrmweichsel-vor-18000-jahren-978-3-14-100800-5-88-1?&stichwort=Weichseleiszeit and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Alpine_Glaciations.png,” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Weichsel-W%C3%BCrm-Glaciation.png. Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Europe_topography_map.png. GNU Free Documentation License.

Glacial activity for the hypothesized LGM period would include the Würm/Weichsel glaciations of Europe. The Würm glaciation affected the Alps and surrounding areas (Becker et al. 2016; 2017; Florineth 1998; Kelly et al. 2004). The Weichsel (Northern Polish) glaciation, associated with the Fennoscandian (or Altura) Ice Sheet, affected Ireland, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, Russia, Siberia, the Baltics, and Scandinavia (Mangerud et al. 2004; Patton et al. 2017; Stroeven et al. 2016). Again, physical evidence shows that these glaciations occurred and where they occurred; only the timing is disputed. Europe during the LGP is hypothesized to have had tundra covering the area between the Würm and Weichsel glaciers, extending east into Eurasia (Kirschner et al. 2022).

Note that conventional geologists do not claim that the LGM exhibited the greatest extent of glaciation in earth’s history; in their view the LGM represents only the most recent expansion of several stadial/interstadial fluctuations hypothesized as occurring during the LGP. Also, prior glaciations in the Quaternary Period are hypothesized to have had greater extents. See Batchelor et al. (2019) for a modeling experiment that purports to show what could have happened during the Quaternary Period. Again, we are just borrowing conventional extent data, not accepting their timeline. Thus, the actual extent of the post-Flood glaciation could be somewhat larger than the extent hypothesized for the LGM based on physical evidence of glaciation, some of which is beyond the limits of the LGM. Although they may not be entirely accurate, these conventional glacial extent data for the LGM are readily accessible, are largely unarguable (except for timeframe), and should provide a reasonable approximation for the post-Flood Ice Age extents for northern Europe.

Based on these data for the LGM, northern Germany, including Trier, and all of Ireland, except possibly the extreme southwestern tip, would have been under massive glaciers at the peak of glaciation (see fig. 3). Permafrost would have extended down to Hungary, north of which agriculture would not have been possible. It is also possible that the Würm glaciers could have limited the paths to northern Europe from western Asia to an end run either across northern Africa then up through Spain or from the east via the tundra between the glaciers. The Alpine region would have been impassible. The extent of the Würm glaciers is hypothesized to have been greater for glaciations before the LGM. These larger extents would apply to Oard’s model of one Ice Age.

Brief Summary of Oard’s Model

All considerations here take as starting assumptions that the earth was created by God ex nihilo less than 10,000 YBP. Subsequent to that creation, God judged the earth via a cataclysmic upheaval that completely changed the face of the earth. This catastrophe, which we call the Flood or the Deluge, probably included massive runaway subduction (Baumgardner 1994, cf. Snelling and Hodge 2010) and other tectonic plate movements, extreme volcanic activity, land uplifts, ocean basin depressions, severe erosion from runoff (for example, Austin, Holroyd, and McQueen 2020; Bretz 1923; Jarrett and Malde 1987; Waitt 1985), and perhaps other means of transforming the face of the earth. This was a once in eternity occurrence per God’s promise (Genesis 9:9–17). This upheaval is reckoned to have caused conditions on the earth rife for the formation of glaciers over newly formed land masses.

These conditions include relatively warm oceans caused by deep vents in the earth’s crust and high tectonic activity, leading to high rates of sea water evaporation and thus, high rates of frozen precipitation over relatively cool land masses. This would have begun in favorable places like central Canada and spread from there by positive feedback (snowballing). Conventional scientists (Seltzer et al. 2021; Tierney et al. 2020) estimate that the average temperature of earth during the LGM was 6°C (11°F) cooler than the average for the 2013–2017 period of 15°C (59°F). Vast volcanic activity possibly clouded the skies with ash and aerosols, which led to generally lower levels of solar energy absorption. Clouds and frozen precipitation on the land also would reflect more solar energy back into space at various wavelengths (high albedo). Accumulating frozen precipitation compacted into ice that flowed away from pressure in the form of glaciers.

Finally, decreasing volcanic activity and cooling seas led to changes that allowed the glaciers to melt in all places except Antarctica and Greenland, where they continued to grow. Ocean levels lowered and then rose with the waxing and waning of the ice, and from crustal depression and rebound, which would work in the opposite direction; see Oard (1979; 1984a; 1984b; 1985; 1990; 2004; 2005; 2024) for a fuller discussion of his model.

Following Oard, we will assume that the post-Flood Ice Age started soon after the Flood and lasted approximately 700 years; see fig. 4. Conventional models for the hypothesized LGM (fig. 1) suggest a somewhat bell-shaped curve skewed heavily to the right, the opposite to what Oard proposes for his model. Under the Oard model, meltdown is very quick by comparison after accounting for scale. We assume that under Oard’s Ice Age model the same conclusions are valid as we made for the hypothesized LGM; that is, that northern Germany and almost all of Ireland (possibly all depending on actual extents) would have been under massive ice sheets at the peak of glaciation, and only roundabout paths to Europe might have been available. Specifically this implies under Oard’s model that at a minimum from about 200 years until about 600 years after the Flood, northern Germany and Ireland were largely inaccessible to human habitation or travel. That is, people could have entered northern Europe just after the Flood, but they would have been evicted by expanding glaciers within a relatively short time.

Fig. 4. Possible timeline for the Oard Ice Age.

Analysis

Masoretic timeline

If the extent of glaciation of northern Europe as identified by glacial data for the LGM approximates what actually happened in the post-Flood Ice Age, then the Ice Age dates derived from Oard’s model are inconsistent with the settlement of Trier and Ireland at the times determined by Griffith and White (2022b, Durations 15 and 16). Fig. 5 depicts the Oard Ice Age model on the same timeline with these settlement events. From this we see that the Dispersion occurs during the glacial buildup. Approximately 150 years later, just ahead of peak glaciation, we find the founding of Trier, Germany (2053 BC) and the colonization of Ireland (2035 BC). It might have been possible to skirt the southern edge of the Weichsel glaciers and gain a beachhead on southwestern Ireland at that time (see fig. 3), depending on actual glacial extents, but inhabiting northern Germany at that time seems to be out of the question.

Fig. 5. Oard Ice Age and Genesis events on the MT timeline.

Someone may say that the migrants just could have toughed it out and moved in disrespecting the glaciers. This is hardly possible. At peak glaciation, northern Europe would not have been under a few feet of snow. It would have been under hundreds of feet of ice. By conventional reckoning (Hitchcock 2024), the depth of the Fennoscandian (Altura) Glacier at the peak of the Würm/Weichsel glaciation was 3.8 km thick, or approximately 2.4 mi. Oard argued at one time that secular estimates of glacier thickness are about 1.5 times what his model produces (Oard 1990: 98ff). To use his intermediate numbers would bring the Altura glacier down to 1.6 mi in depth. More recently, Oard (2017) has posited that the Scandinavian and British ice sheet thicknesses were only 40% of conventional estimates, which brings the Altura Glacier down to only 1 mi thick. That depth of ice produces a totally uninhabitable place.

Travel across glaciers is extremely difficult and can be deadly, especially for untrained individuals. See, for example, AlpineSavvy (2024), Thomas and Chelton (2020).10 Massive glaciers would present an impenetrable barrier to migration of even modest numbers of people and would not allow wagons, travois, sledges, or livestock to pass at all. Human presence on the glaciers would be limited to small parties who were both experienced and traveling lightly. The distance of travel into glaciers would be very limited due to complete lack of liquid water, fuel, game, and vegetation on the ice. Habitation around the edges of the glaciers would have been possible for people engaged in hunting and fishing, but agriculture would not have been possible north of the permafrost line. During this time, people could have lived in caves near the glaciers but not on the glaciers or surrounded by them. See more below.

Sensitivity Analysis for the Masoretic Timeline

Assuming the Ice Age starts some years after the Flood on the MT timeline, later than Oard proposes, but not shortening the duration, does not allow settlement at the proposed times. Every decade added to the start pushes out the meltdown by the same amount. Assuming a longer Ice Age is counterproductive for the same reason. On the other hand, if we push the start date of glaciation late enough, or allow settlers to leave Babel early enough, the settlers could make the journey into Germany and Ireland before glacial buildup, but they would be driven out as the glaciation peaked. They would not be able to return at the times proposed by Griffith and White (2022b).

If we shorten the Ice Age, we would have to posit a very short Ice Age that starts right after the Flood and that melts down sufficiently before the end of the migration travel time, about 150 years per Griffith and White (2022b). This model would posit c. 2347 BC for the start of the glaciation and c. 2040 BC for the end, or about 300 years; see fig. 6. This is a major departure from Oard’s chosen parameters for his model, which has a 700-year duration. Oard chose a middle ground estimate of glacial peak from the range factored into his model (Oard 1990, 97), and a start-to-peak duration of as little as 174 years was not out of the question, which would fit these current assumptions and allow for meltdown before these settlement dates.

Fig. 6. Short Ice Age and Genesis events on the MT timeline.

Coincidentally, the 300 years derived above is essentially the same duration for the Ice Age proposed by Snelling and Matthews (2013), who arrived at their timeline by aligning paleontological data to the timing of biblical events on the MT timeline. See fig. 7. Beside the duration, the other main difference from Oard is that they posit a later start for the Ice Age: “So it is reasonable to conclude that the start of the Ice Age in the Northern Hemisphere (the Pleistocene) roughly coincides with the Babel judgment, around a century or so after the Flood (perhaps 2250 BC).” The start of meltdown in the Snelling and Matthews glaciation scenario would be c. 2000 BC, ending c. 1950 BC. These dates are still too late to help the Germans and Irish to get to their respective homes by 2053 BC and 2035 BC.

Fig. 7. Snelling and Matthews Ice Age and Genesis events on the MT timeline.

Another possible adjustment would be to move the assumed date of the Dispersion. Moving it earlier does nothing to help. After 150 years of travel (more or less), the settlers might arrive before glacial peak but still would be pushed out with glacial advances. Moving the Dispersion later to allow for meltdown to occur before settlement seems like it should work, but then we notice that the Dispersion might have to be moved to as late as 1900–1800 BC to ensure a path to Trier and Ireland during or after the meltdown period, 1850–1650 BC. In that case, the Dispersion would overlap biblical events such as Abram’s sojourn in Canaan. Scripture states in Genesis 11:27–12:9 that Abram began his sojourn in Canaan when he was 75 years old. There is some ambiguity about the date of this event, depending on when Abram was actually born to Terah (Genesis 11:26 is somewhat ambiguous), but c. 1981, 1921, 1885, 1855 BC, and other similar dates have been suggested to Abram’s Sojourn in Canaan. Clearly, the Dispersion had to happen a considerable time before Abram departed Haran for Canaan. Otherwise, there would have been no Canaanites or Egyptians to receive him.

Another suggestion would be to question the settlement dates for Trier and Ireland. To be safe from glaciation under our current scenario, the founding of Trier would have to be pushed out to about 1750–1650 BC, which would separate them from Trebeta, son of Ninus (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 15), by nine to twelve generations (assuming begetting ages more akin to ours). The southwestern tip of Ireland (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 16) possibly could have been reached by 2035 BC by skirting the southern edge of the Weichsel glaciers, provided that tip of land was not actually covered in ice. If they did make a beachhead, the Irish would have had to wait until during and after meltdown, possibly c. 1750–1650 BC, to engage the rest of the island.

We consider migration times from Mesopotamia to northern Europe of 150 years to be possible even if somewhat rapid for people just spreading out to find Lebensraum. This average migration time is based on the difference between the triangulated date of the Dispersion (2191 BC) and these arrival dates (2053, 2035 BC) in Griffith and White (2022b), but none of the sources for those migrations into northern Europe names a starting point for its migration except one. Tuisto reportedly left western Asia 153 years after the Flood (2347–153 = 2194), about the same as Griffith and White’s Dispersion date, and went to Europe (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 15). We seem not to have a record of when he arrived. Testimony to Tuisto seems to come originally from Pseudo-Berossus, which conventional scholarship tends to disregard as fabrication (for example, Stephens 2011). Anderson (1732, 442) states that Tuisto was Ashkenaz, son of Gomer, but that idea seems to have no continuing support. Griffith and White (2022b, Duration 15) lay out circumstantial evidence from which one could conclude that Tuisto was Trebeta, son of Ninus. Regardless of his identity, Tuisto could not have done much in Germany until during or after the glacial meltdown.

Septuagint timeline

On the LXX timeline, Oard’s Ice Age would have been at its peak when Peleg was born. See fig. 8. If the Dispersion occurred near Peleg’s birth, about 500 years post-Flood, migrants possibly could have settled northern Europe and Ireland after 150 years of travel time, arriving about 650 years post-Flood (c. 2648 BC), which would have been late in the meltdown. The fact that the arrival dates after 150 years of travel under this scenario would precede those reported by Griffith and White by 600 years is discussed below. If the Dispersion did not occur until somewhat later in Peleg’s life, then the Ice Age as parameterized by Oard would have been over before anyone reached northern Europe, so settlement would have been quite possible.

Fig. 8. Oard Ice Age and Genesis events on theLXX timeline.

On the LXX timeline, various parameters can be changed by hundreds of years without invalidating the Oard model or violating the biblical record and still achieve settlement of northern Europe at the times determined by Griffith and White, or even much earlier as shown above. However, an objection to this scenario is the possibility that access to the Americas by land might be blocked at the time of the Dispersion if it happened during the peak of glaciation. The idea that the Americas were reached by land after the Flood requires the presence of a land bridge, such as the one hypothesized to have crossed the Bering Strait. By Oard’s Ice Age model, this land bridge would have been available from c. 200 to 600 years post-Flood, 2147 to 1747 on the MT timeline, or c. 3098 to 2698 BC on the LXX timeline. The usual scenario is that people crossed before the peak of the glaciation and skirted the east side of the Rocky Mountains (the “ice-free corridor”); Antevs 1935, 302–309) squeeze between two large tracts of glaciers in North America, the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice masses.

A catch-22 exists in this scenario. The appearance of the land bridge depends on sufficient water being locked into ice to cause lower sea levels. That is, a lower sea level is bought by deeper, wider-spread ice over land. Access to the land bridge through Siberia and egress from the bridge into Alaska or Canada would depend on the path not being blocked by glaciers on either end, which may well have happened by the date of the Dispersion that we have selected for the LXX timeline, which would have occurred at the peak of glaciation. The opposite would happen at meltdown. Access to and from the land bridge (no glaciers in the way) might be established only at the expense of higher sea levels, yielding a migration path no farther than the sea shore. Thus, reaching the New World by land bridge seems problematic without the Dispersion happening well ahead of glacial peak, which would exacerbate the problems with settling Europe too soon on the MT timeline, as noted above. That is, arrival before the glaciers means eviction by the glaciers as they peak.

One possible alternative is that the Americas were settled by sea as postulated by Fladmark (1979) and revisited by Braje et al. (2020).11 Reaching the Americas from Asia by sea surely must have been possible. Jeanson (2021, 133–154) shows evidence from Y chromosome data that the current indigenous population of American Indians arrived in the Americas from Asia sometime near the time of Christ, replacing whoever was residing here at the time. No one, conventional or creationist, believes there was a land bridge to the Americas at the time of Christ. Nevertheless, if the late-comers could have crossed the Pacific (evidently, they did), then those they replaced could have done so as well. Thor Heyerdahl showed that the crossing was possible (Heyerdahl 1948), although his crossing was in the opposite direction. As an alternative to risky open ocean travel, another reasonable hypothesis is that the Asians crossed by coast hugging Beringia, island-hopping the Aleutian chain, or by walking on ice (Jeanson 2021, 145).

Notice also that on the LXX timeline, the model proposed by Snelling and Matthews (2013) poses no impediment to settlement of northern Europe at the times put forward by Griffith and White (2022b, Durations 15 and 16). Under their scenario, the Ice Age would begin c. 2767 BC. The glaciers would be off of northern Europe by 2467 BC, well before settlers arrived on the Griffith and White timeline.

Speculation

Migrations and resettlements

The Septuagint scenario above leaves us with the interesting question of why it would take the Germans and the Irish approximately 730–750 years to arrive at their destinations, assuming both parties departed western Asia at Peleg’s birth in 2767 BC. An alternative is that neither party actually left western Asia at that time, at least not without pausing along the way for many, many years. The witnesses summoned by Griffith and White (2022b, Durations 15 and 16) do not necessarily say that the settlers took a direct route and did not settle somewhere else first except for Tuisto. Otherwise, these migrants could have come from anywhere and left at any time so long as they arrived during or after glacial meltdown, 2698 or after.

Let us consider the possibility of resettlement. The history of Europe is replete with wave after wave of resettlement from the east. Jeanson (2021, 77ff) mentions both the Germanic tribes and the Huns coming from the east during the time of the Roman Empire and documents their genetic impact on European men. We also know of the thirteenth century invasion of the Mongols (Cartwright 2019). We also have Suomen (Finns) (Lang 2020, 253–255) and Magyars (Hungarians) (Sugar 1990) to account for, both seemingly originating in present day Russia.

We have no reason to believe that these after-migrations were unique. For any number of reasons, the settlers of Trier and Ireland could have been part of a wave of resettlement. Perhaps they were driven out of western Asia, maybe along with many other people, during the expansionist reign of Ninus (reigned c. 2189–2137 BC by some accounts; see fig. 9 for the supposed extent of his realm). The career of Ninus12 is described by Ctesias of Cnidus via Diodorus (Diodorus Siculus n.d.), George Synkellos (Adler and Tuffin 2002), and Sura via Paterculus (Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 6). Grabbe (2003, 121–122) seems to accept these data as reliable. Alternatively, the northern European settlers could have been the northernmost of the previously dispersed tribes, and then they were driven even further north by refugees fleeing hardships elsewhere, that is, a domino effect.

Fig. 9. Possible extent of Ninus’ empire c. 2137 BC. Busterolf666, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ninus.png, GNU Free Documentation License.

This scenario just painted regarding Ninus could be used to justify the date of Dispersion calculated by Griffith and White just as well by equating Ninus to Nimrod or Asshur (see notes). However, we have already noted above that the Altura Glacier may have been up to 1 mi thick over Germany at the time when settlement would have to occur (2053 to 2035 BC). That is, if the post-Flood Ice Age started in 2347 BC and proceeded as Oard posits, then settlers leaving western Asia c. 2191 BC would not have reached Trier, and probably not Ireland, until 1747 BC earliest. On the other hand, if the Deluge happened c. 3298 BC as on the LXX timeline, then part of a mass exodus from western Asia (or from anywhere else, for that matter) c. 2191 BC very easily could push people into Trier and Ireland 150 years later because the glaciers would be gone, and the Germans very well could have been closely descended from a Ninus through a disaffected son, Trebeta (Adler and Tuffin 2002; Diodorus Siculus n.d.; Duncker 1882; Griffith and White 2022b, Duration 15); that is, a Ninus other than Nimrod or Asshur (see end notes).

Glaciers and Cave Dwellers

Unless the traditions of Trier or Ireland contradict it, some people could have arrived and settled northern Europe during or very shortly after the meltdown on the LXX timeline and settled at the edge of the receding glaciers. Early settlers also could have migrated to Europe before glacial peak, who then were pushed out by glacial advances. In either case, they could have been joined by re-settlers (perhaps Griffith and White’s Germans and Irish) any time thereafter and been absorbed or driven out. Some candidates for first wave settlers that come to mind are the Neanderthal people. (See Oard [2003; 2021a] and Robertson and Safarti [2003] for updates on their rehabilitation.) The Neandertal, a valley in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, is just barely inside the limits of the LGM (see fig. 3), so it could have been settled first wave very quickly after meltdown began, depending on the actual limits of the post-Flood glaciation.

If the Neanderthal people settled before the peak of glaciation, what we see in their dwellings are human remains left behind as the living were driven further south by glacial advances. This scenario is painted by Jordan (2024; citing Lubenow 2004, 263; Oard 2003, 217), who states,

The most ancient human remains found in Europe belong to the Neanderthals, who fled from Babel to Western Eurasia and the plains of Northern Europe. There they lived as hunter-gatherers following the Pleistocene herds of mammoths and red deer while the advancing glaciers of the Ice Age forced them south into France and Spain.

On the other hand, some state that non Neanderthal human remains occur below them in the fossil record wherever Neanderthal remains are found (Snelling and Matthews 2012), which would make Neanderthals second wave settlers perhaps where their remains are found below others.

We should consider under these assumptions when and where the Neanderthal people would have lived in caves. The Neanderthal people lived in many places in the Old World, but here let us restrict the conversation to those living in caves in northern Europe. Note our discussion above on the impossibility of settling on glaciers, which points out that there is no liquid water, game, fuel, or vegetation on a glacier, and glacial travel is potentially deadly—a glacier is uninhabitable. Therefore, cave dwellers could not have survived even in caves if on the glaciers or surrounded by them. However, as previously discussed, they could manage on the edge of glaciers where they could hunt and fish. As noted, the Neandertal (Neander Valley) is situated on the edge of the hypothesized LGM extent of the Weichsel Glacier. Building materials could be scarce on the edges of glaciers (trees do not grow well on tundra), and stone-dressing tools might not have been robust enough (granite is much harder to dress than the sedimentary rock found in western Asia), so cave dwelling seems like a viable alternative to constructed housing.

Floods

Habermehl argues for an Ice Age on the LXX timeline that lasted at least until c. 2350 BC (Habermehl 2011; 2013; pers. comm. January 25, 2024) at which time meltdown flooding began to be noticed and recorded by ancient peoples. See fig. 10 for one possible depiction of her model. This would be a modest deviation from Oard’s model. Habermehl posits that the Ice Age began later than Oard’s model but was over before the Sojourn in Egypt. The implication of her model for settlement is that no one could have settled Trier or Ireland before c. 2350 BC unless they arrived before glaciation peaked, and then they would have been driven off by glaciers until the meltdown. At c. 2350 BC or after, a wave of settlement could have arrived and stayed. In any case, a second wave of resettlements arriving c. 2050 BC seems possible on Habermehl’s timeline.

Fig. 10. Another possible scenario on the LXX timeline.

In Habermehl’s model, water from glacial meltdown could have been responsible for multiple ancient water events in the 2350 BC time frame. Unreported events (not found in ancient literature) could include those associated with the Grand Canyon (Austin, Holroyd, and McQueen 2020; see Oard (2021b) for a disputation), Lake Missoula (Bretz 1923; Waitt 1985), and Lake Bonneville (Jarrett and Malde 1987), just to touch on North America. Events possibly associated with the Holocene Transgression (Oppenheimer 1998), which would be a contemporary event with the meltdown, include Ogyges Flood in Greece (Africanus n.d.: 10.10; Weaver et al. 2003; Africanus dates Ogyges Flood to this timeframe while other ancient witnesses place it about 600 years later). Meltdown could explain the forming of the Nile Delta, the Tigris/Euphrates delta that became Lower Mesopotamia, and other river deltas (Habermehl 2013; Oard 1990). Reported water events for which there is explicit testimony that possibly could fit this paradigm include Ogyges Flood in Greece and the Gun-Yǔ Flood in China (Legge 1865, 105–188; Ssu-ma Ch’ien [Sima Qian] 86 BC/1994 passim; Waltham 1971 passim).

Conclusion

To summarize, consider that we made the following assumptions:

1. Proposition A: Conventional scientists and creationist scientists agree on where glaciers once covered portions of the earth.
2. Proposition B: Oard’s model asserts when the glaciers came and went relative to the end of the Flood.
3. Proposition C: Griffith and White assert when northern Europe, in part, was settled.
4. Proposition D: The Flood, start of glaciation, and Dispersion happened according to the Masoretic Text timeline.

Based on those assumptions, we find that something does not add up. If the glaciers happened where we believe and at the time Oard asserts, then it is very unlikely that the settlement of Trier and Ireland occurred at the stated times. What are the alternatives?

1. The glaciers were not exactly where we think they were. It is possible that Trier and Ireland were ice-free when the proposed settlements took place, even if there was ice elsewhere.

2. Oard’s model does not describe exactly when the glaciers came and went. His model can be parameterized to make settlement possible at the times contemplated.

3. Trier and Ireland were settled at a later time, after glaciers had receded from northern Europe.

4. The Flood, the start of glaciation, and the Dispersion occurred at an earlier time, perhaps according to the LXX timeline.

Under the assumptions made here, simple arithmetic shows that the Oard model for the Ice Age most likely is not compatible with the Masoretic Text and secular settlement traditions for northern Europe without substantial changes to the parameters of the model, such as extreme shortening of glacial duration. Using the Septuagint timeline, Oard’s model can be aligned both with the text of Genesis and with the cited settlement traditions without alteration. The combination of the Septuagint timeline with other assumptions regarding the timing of the Ice Age can lead to some interesting challenges regarding post-Flood settlement of both the Americas and Europe, and possible watery events c. 2350 BC.

References

Adler, William, and Paul Tuffin, trans. 2002. The Chronography of George Synkellos: A Byzantine Chronicle of Universal History from the Creation, 167. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Africanus, Scipio (f. 236–183 BC). n.d (2019). Chronography. Quoted in Eusebius of Caesaria (fl. AD 260/265–339/340). Praeparatio Evangelica (The Preparation for the Gospel). Edited by Paul A. Boer, Sr. Translated by George Lewis. Independently published.

Alley, Richard. 2000. The Two-Mile Time Machine. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

AlpineSavvy. 2024. “Modern Crevasse Rescue Techniques.” https://www.alpinesavvy.com/blog/modern-crevasse-rescue-techniques.

Anderson, James. 1732. Royal Genealogies, Or The Genealogical Tables Of Emperors, Kings And Princes To 1732, From Adam to These Times. Delhi, India: Facsimile Publishers.

Antevs, Ernst. 1935. “The Spread of Aboriginal Man to North America.” Geographical Review 25, no. 2 (April): 302–309.

Archer, Gleason L., and Gregory C. Chirichigno. 2005. Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock.

Armstrong, Edward, Peter O. Hopcroft, and Paul J. Valdes. 2019. “A Simulated Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Climate Dataset for the Past 60,000 Years.” Scientific Data 6, no. 1 (November 7): 265.

Austin, Steve, Edmond W. Holroyd, and David R. McQueen. 2020. “Remembering Spillover Erosion of Grand Canyon.” Answers Research Journal 13 (September 9): 153–188. https://answersresearchjournal.org/remembering-erosion-grand-canyon/.

Barr, Iestyn D., and Chris D. Clark. 2011. “Glaciers and Climate in Pacific Far NE Russia During the Last Glacial Maximum.” Journal of Quaternary Science 26, no. 2 (February): 227–237.

Barrell, David J. A., Peter C. Almond, Marcus J. Vandergoes, David J. Lowe, and Rewi M. Newnham. 2013. “A Composite Pollen-Based Stratotype for Inter-Regional Evaluation of Climatic Events in New Zealand Over the Past 30,000 Years (NZ-Intimate Project).” Quaternary Science Reviews 74 (August 15): 4–20.

Batchelor, Christine L., Martin Margold, Mario Krapp, Della K. Murton, April S. Dalton, Philip L. Gibbard, Chris R. Stokes, Julian B. Murton, and Andrea Manica. 2019. “The Configuration of Northern Hemisphere Ice Sheets Through the Quaternary.” Nature Communications 10, article no. 3713. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11601-2.

Baumgardner, John R. 1994. “Runaway Subduction as the Driving Mechanism for the Genesis Flood.” In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, 63–76. Edited by Robert E. Walsh. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship.

Becerra-Valdivia, Lorena, and Thomas Higham. 2020. “The Timing and Effect of the Earliest Human Arrivals in North America.” Nature 584, no. 7819 (22 July): 93–97.

Becker, Patrick, Martin Funk, Christian Schlüchter, and Kolumban Hutter. 2017. “A Study of the Würm Glaciation Focused on the Valais Region (Alps).” Geographica Helvetica 72, no. 4 (7 December): 421–442.

Becker, Patrick, Julien Seguinot, Guillaume Jouvet, and Martin Funk. 2016. “Last Glacial Maximum Precipitation Pattern in the Alps Inferred from Glacier Modelling.” Geographica Helvetica 71, no. 3 (17 August): 173–187.

Book of Jubilees. n.d. http://www.yahwehswordarchives.org/book_of_jubilees/book_of_jubilees_chapter_08.htm.

Bradley, Raymond S. 1999. Paleoclimatology: Reconstructing Climates of the Quaternary. San Diego, California: Academic Press.

Braje, Todd J., Jon M. Erlandson, Torben C. Rick, Loren Davis, Tom Dillehay, Daryl W. Fedje, Duane Froese, et al. 2020. “Fladmark + 40: What Have We Learned about a Potential Pacific Coast Peopling of the Americas?” American Antiquity 85, no. 1 (January): 1–21.

Brasseaux, Shawn. 2021. “Is ‘Cainan’ in Luke 3:36 a ‘Scribal Error’?” Whatsaieththescriptures.org, May 10. https://forwhatsaiththescriptures.org/2021/05/10/cainan-luke-3-36-scribal-error/.

Bretz, J. Harlen. 1923. “The Channeled Scablands of the Columbia Plateau.” Journal of Geology 31, no. 8 (November–December): 617–649.

Bruce, F. F. 1988. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press.

Cai, Xiaoyun; Zhendong Qin, Bo Wen, Shuhua Xu, Yi Wang, Yan Lu, Lanhai Wei, Chuanchao Wang, Shilin Li, Xingqiu Huang, Li Jin, Hui Li, and Genographic Consortium. 2011. “Human Migration through Bottlenecks from Southeast Asia into East Asia during Last Glacial Maximum Revealed by Y Chromosomes.” PLOS ONE 6, no. 8 (August 31). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024282.

Cartwright, Mark. 2019. “The Mongol Invasion of Europe.” World History Encyclopedia, 2 October. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1453/the-mongol-invasion-of-europe/.

Cassius Dio. 1917 (229). Dio’s Roman History. Vol. VI. Translated by Earnest Cary. London, UK: William Heinemann.

Clark, Harold Willard. 1946. The New Diluvialism, 132–170. Angwin, California: Science Publications: .

Cole, Julia E., Robert B. Dunbar, Timothy R. McClanahan, and Nyawira A. Muthiga. 2000. “Tropical Pacific Forcing of Decadal SST Variability in the Western Indian Ocean over the Past Two Centuries.” Science 287, no. 5453 (28 January): 617–619.

Crowley, Thomas J. 1995. “Ice Age Terrestrial Carbon Changes Revisited.” Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9, no. 3 (September): 377–389.

Dane, Kane. 2022. “Should Cainan be in the Genealogy of Luke 3:36?” KJVtoday.org, March 24. https://www.kjvtoday.com/should-cainan-be-in-genealogy-in-luke-336/.

Diodorus Siculus (f. First Century BC). n.d. ΒιβλιοθήκηἹστορική. (Historical Library) II. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/2A*.html#1.

Dorival, Gilles. 2021. “Was the Text of the Septuagint Christianized?” In The Septuagint from Alexandria to Constantinople: Canon, New Testament, Church Fathers, Catenae, 69–92. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Duncker, Max. 1882. The History of Antiquity. London, UK: R. Bentley and Son.

Eames, Christopher. 2023. “The Chronological Debate from Adam to Abraham: In Defense of the Masoretic Text.” Armstrong Institute of Biblical Archaeology, June 27. https://armstronginstitute.org/853-the-chronological-debate-from-adam-to-abraham-in-defense-of-the-masoretic-text.

Fladmark, Knut R. 1979. “Routes: Alternate Migration Corridors for Early Man in North America.” American Antiquity 44, no. 1 (January): 55–69. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-antiquity/article/abs/routes-alternate-migration-corridors-for-early-man-in-north-america/

Florineth, Duri. 1998. “Surface Geometry of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) in the Southeastern Swiss Alps (Graubünden) and its Paleoclimatological Significance.” Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart 48, no. 1: 23–37.

French, Jennifer C. 2021. Palaeolithic Europe: A Demographic and Social Prehistory, 226. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Grabbe, Lester L. 2003. Like a Bird in a Cage: The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE. New York, New York: Sheffield Academic Press.

Gren, Conrad R. 2005. “Piercing the Ambiguities of Psalm 22:16 and the Messiah’s Mission.” Journal of Evangelical Theological Society 48, no. 2 (June): 283–299.

Griffith, Kenneth, and Darrell K. White. 2021. “An Upper Mesopotamian Location for Babel.” Journal of Creation 35, no. 2 (August): 69–79.

Griffith, Kenneth C., and Darrell K. White. 2022a. “Chronological Framework of Ancient History. 1: Problem, Data, and Methodology.” Answers Research Journal 15 (November 16): 377–390. https://answersresearchjournal.org/ancient-egypt/chronological-framework-ancient-history-1/.

Griffith, Kenneth C., and Darrell K. White. 2022b. “Chronological Framework of Ancient History. 2: Founding of the Nations.” Answers Research Journal 15 (December 14): 405–426. https://answersresearchjournal.org/tower-of-babel/chronological-framework-ancient-history-2/.

Griffith, Kenneth C., and Darrell K. White. 2023a. “Chronological Framework of Ancient History. 3: Anchor Points of Ancient History.” Answers Research Journal 16 (March 22): 131–154. https://answersresearchjournal.org/ancient-egypt/chronological-framework-ancient-history-3/.

Griffith, Kenneth C., and Darrell K. White. 2023b. “Chronological Framework of Ancient History. 4: Dating Creation and the Deluge.” Answers Research Journal 16 (September 20): 475–489. https://answersresearchjournal.org/noahs-flood/chronological-framework-ancient-history-4/.

Griffith, Kenneth C., and Darrell K. White. 2023c. “Chronological Framework of Ancient History. 5: The Babylonian Dynasties of Berossus.” Answers Research Journal 16 (December 20): 635–670. https://answersresearchjournal.org/archaeology/chronological-framework-ancient-history-5/.

Habermehl, Anne. 2011. “Where in the World is the Tower of Babel?” Answers Research Journal 4 (March 23): 25–53. https://answersresearchjournal.org/where-is-the-tower-of-babel/.

Habermehl, Anne. 2013. “Ancient Egypt, the Ice Age, and Biblical Chronology.” In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Creationism, Article 37. Edited by M. Horstemeyer. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship.

Hays, J. D., John Imbrie, and N. J. Shackleton. 1976. “Variations in the Earth’s Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages.” Science 194, no. 4270 (10 December): 1121–1132.

Hendel, Ronald S. 1998. The Text of Genesis 1–11: Textual Studies and Critical Edition. New York, New York: Oxford University Press.

Hebert, Jake. 2014a. “Ice Cores, Seafloor Sediments, and the Age of the Earth, Part 1.” Acts and Facts 43, no. 6 (May 30). https://www.icr.org/article/ice-cores-seafloor-sediments-age-earth.

Hebert, Jake. 2014b. “Ice Cores, Seafloor Sediments, and the Age of the Earth, Part 2.” Acts and Facts 43, no. 7 (June 3). https://www.icr.org/article/8181.

Heyerdahl, Thor. 1948. The Kon-Tiki Expedition: By Raft Across the South Seas. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS.

Hitchcock, Don. 2024. “Ice Age Maps Showing the Extent of the Ice Sheets.” https://donsmaps.com/icemaps.html.

Imbrie, John. and Katherine Palmer Imbrie. 1979. Ice Ages: Solving the Mystery. Hillside, New Jersey: Enslow Publishers.

Jarrett, Robert D., and Harold E Malde. 1987. “Paleodischarge of the Late Pleistocene Bonneville Flood, Snake River, Idaho, Computed from New Evidence.” Geological Society of America Bulletin 99, no. 1 (July): 127–134.

Jeanson, Nathaniel T. 2021. Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Jobes, Karen H., and Moisés Silva. 2015. Invitation to the Septuagint. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic.

Jones, F. Stanley. 2014. The Syriac Pseudo-Clementines: An Early Version of the First Christian Novel. Trunhout, Belgium: Brepols.

Jones, Floyd Nolen. 1993. The Chronology of the Old Testament: A Return to the Basics. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Jordan, Marshall. 2024. “Ancient DNA Shows Neanderthals and Denisovans Descending from Noah in the Line of Ham.” Answers Research Journal 17 (January 31): 43–61. https://answersresearchjournal.org/neanderthal/ancient-dna/.

Jorgensen, Greg S. 1994. “The Canopy, the Moon, the Earth’s Tilt, and Pre-Flood Ice Age.” In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism. Edited by R. E. Walsh, 287–303. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship.

Josephus, Flavius. 2018 (94). Antiquities of the Jews. Norwich, Norfolk: Outlook Verlag.

Jouzel, J., R. D. Koster, R. J. Suozzo, and G. L. Russell. 1994. “Stable Water Isotope Behavior During the Last Glacial Maximum: A General Circulation Model Analysis.” Journal of Geophysical Research 99, no. D12: 25791–25802.

Kelly, Meredith A., Jean-François Buoncristiani, and Christian Schlüchter. 2004. “A Reconstruction of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) Ice-Surface Geometry in the Western Swiss Alps and Contiguous Alpine Regions in Italy and France.” Eclogae Geographica Helvetiae 97 (May): 57–75.

Kenyon, Kathleen M., and Thomas A. Holland. 1981. Excavations at Jericho. Vol. 3: The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell. 1st ed. London, UK: Council for British Research in the Levant.

Kirschner, Philipp, Manolo F. Perez, Eliška Záveská, Isabel Sanmartín, Lauren Marquer, Birgit C. Schlick-Steiner, Nadir Alvarez, the STEPPE Constortium, Florian M. Steiner, and Peter Schönswetter. 2022. “Congruent Evolutionary Responses of European Steppe Biota to Late Quaternary Climate Change.” Nature Communications 13, Article number 1921. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29267-8.

Kuhle, Matthias. 2004. “The High Glacial (Last Ice Age and LGM) Ice Cover in High and Central Asia.” Developments in Quaternary Sciences 2, part C: 175–199.

Lang, Valter. 2020. Homo Fennicus – Itämerensuomalaisten etnohistoria. Finnish Literature Society.

Lanier, Gregory R., and William A. Ross. 2021. The Septuagint: What It Is and Why It Matters. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway.

Law, Timothy Michael. 2013. When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible. New York, New York: Oxford University Press.

Legge, James. 1865. “The Annals of the Bamboo Books.” In “Prolegomena.” The Chinese Classics. Vol. 3, part 1. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

Lubenow, Marvin L. 2004. Bones of Contention: A Creationist Assessment of Human Fossils. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.

Lucian of Samosata (c. 125–180+). n.d. A True Story. Translated by Francis Hickes. Independently published.

Mangerud, Jan, Martin Jakobsson, Helena Alexanderson, Valery Astakhov, Garry K. C. Clarke, Mona Henriksen, Christian Hjort, et al. 2004. “Ice-Dammed Lakes and Rerouting of the Drainage of Northern Eurasia During the Last Glaciation.” Quaternary Science Reviews 23, nos. 11–13 (June): 1313–1332.

Marcus, David, and James A. Sanders. 2013. “What’s Critical About a Critical Edition of the Bible?” Biblical Archeology Review. https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/article/whats-critical-about-a-critical-edition-of-the-bible/.

Marshall, Michael. 2010. “The History of Ice on Earth.” New Scientist (May 24). https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/.

Macalister, Robert Alexander Stewart. trans. and ed. 1941. Lebor Gabála Érenn: Book of the Taking of Ireland. Part 1. Dublin, Ireland: Irish Texts Society.

McManus, J. F., R. Francois, J.-M. Gherardi, L. D. Keigwin, and S. Brown-Leger. 2004. “Collapse and Rapid Resumption of Atlantic Meridional Circulation Linked to Deglacial Climate Changes.” Nature 428, no. 6985 (22 April): 6985: 834–837.

Melville, Sarah C. 2014. “Women in Neo-Assyrian Texts.” In Women in the Ancient Near East: A Sourcebook. Edited by Mark W. Chavalas. London, UK: Routledge.

Metzger, Bruce M., and Michael D. Coogan. 1993. “Assyria.” In The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Mills, S. C. , T. T. Barrows, M. W. Telfer, and L. K. Fifield. 2017. “The Cold Climate Geomorphology of the Eastern Cape Drakensberg: A Reevaluation of Past Climatic Conditions During the Last Glacial Cycle in Southern Africa.” Geomorphology 278 (1 February): 184–194.

Muller, Richard A., and Gordon J. MacDonald. 1997. “Glacial Cycles and Astronomical Forcing.” Science 277, no. 5323 (11 July): 215–218.

Muller, Richard A., and Gordon J. MacDonald. 2000. “Ice Ages and Astronomical Causes: Data, Spectral Analysis and Mechanisms.” Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Murphy, Denis. J. ed. 1896. The Annals of Clonmacnoise: Being Annals of Ireland From the Earliest Period to A.D. 1408. Translated by Conell Mageoghagan. Dublin, Ireland: Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2005. “A Record from the Deep: Fossil Chemistry.” September 27, 2005. https://www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Paleoclimatology_SedimentCores/paleoclimatology_sediment_cores_2.php.

National Center for Science Education (NCSE). 1982. “Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating.” Creation/Evolution Journal 3, no. 2 (Spring). https://ncse.ngo/answers-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating.

National Park Service (NPS). 2024. “Kenai Fjords National Park: Exit Glacier Terminus Mapping.” https://www.nps.gov/kefj/learn/nature/glaciermonitoring.htm.

Oard, Michael J. 1979. “A Rapid Post-Flood Ice Age.” Creation Research Society Quarterly 16 (June): 29–37, 58.

Oard, Michael J. 1984a. “Ice Ages: The Mystery Solved—Part I: The Inadequacy of a Uniformitarian Ice Age.” Creation Research Society Quarterly 21, no. 2: 66–76.

Oard, Michael J. 1984b. “Ice Ages: The Mystery Solved? Part II: The Manipulation of Deep-Sea Cores.” Creation Research Society Quarterly 21, no. 3: 125–137.

Oard, Michael J. 1985. “Ice Ages: The Mystery Solved? Part III: Paleomagnetic Stratigraphy and Data Manipulation. Creation Research Society Quarterly21, no. 4: 170–181.

Oard, Michael J. 1990. An Ice Age Caused by the Genesis Flood. El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research.

Oard, Michael. 2003. “Neanderthal Man—The Changing Picture: An Overview of How This Alleged ‘Subhuman’ is Being Progressively Rehabilitated, Despite the Evolutionary Bias Resisting the Trend.” Creation 25, no. 4 (September) 10–14.

Oard, Michael. 2004. Frozen in Time: Woolly Mammoths, the Ice Age, and the Biblical Key to Their Secrets. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Oard, Michael J. 2005. The Frozen Record: Examining the Ice Core History of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets. Santee, California: Institute for Creation Research.

Oard, Michael J. 2007. “Astronomical Troubles for the Astronomical Hypothesis of Ice Ages.” Journal of Creation 21, no. 3 (December): 19–23.

Oard, Michael J. 2016. “Evidence Strongly Suggests the Laurentide Ice Sheet was Thin.” Journal of Creation 30, no. 1 (April): 97–104.

Oard, Michael J. 2017. “Non-Glacial Landforms Indicate Thin Scandinavian and British-Irish Ice Sheets.” Journal of Creation 31, no. 2 (August): 119–127.

Oard, Michael J. 2021a. “Neanderthals Becoming More Modern with Time.” Journal of Creation 35, no. 1 (April): 12–14.

Oard, Michael J. 2021b. “A Dam Breach Unlikely for the Origin of Grand Canyon.” Creation Research Society Quarterly 57, no. 3: 206–222.

Oard, Michael. 2024. “Flood/Ice Age Research: Ice Age Model.” http://michael.oards.net/IceAgeModels.htm.

Oppenheimer, Stephen. 1998. Eden in the East: The Drowned Continent of Southeast Asia. London, UK: Orion Publishing.

Osgood, A. John M. 2023. “The Ark Landing, the Migration, and the Early Settling of Noah’s Sons. Part 1: The Beginning and the Sons of Shem.” Answers Research Journal 16 (October 4): 501–528. https://answersresearchjournal.org/archaeology/ark-landing-migration-early-settling-noahs-sons-part-1/.

Patterson, Roger. 2008. “Dating Methods.” Evolution Exposed: Earth Sciences. Chapter 4. Petersburg, Kentucky: Answers in Genesis.

Patton, Henry, Alun Hubbard, Karin Andreassen, Amandine Auriac, Pippa L. Whitehouse, Arjen P. Stroeven, Calvin Shackleton, Monica Winsborrow, Jakob Heyman, and Adrian M. Hall. 2017. “Deglaciation of the Eurasian Ice Sheet Complex.” Quaternary Science Reviews 169 (1 August): 148–172.

Riebeek, Holli. 2005. “Paleoclimatology: The Oxygen Balance.” May 6. https://www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Paleoclimatology_OxygenBalance/oxygen_balance.php.

Riebeek, Holli. 2006. “Paleoclimatology: Explaining the Evidence.” May 9. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Paleoclimatology_Evidence.

Robertson, Mark, and Jonathan Sarfati. 2003. “More Evidence Neandertals Were Fully Human.” TJ 17, no. 3 (December): 13.

Rohl, David. 2002. The Lost Testament. From Eden to Exile: The Five-Thousand-Year History of the People of the Bible. London, UK: Century.

Rudd, Steve. 2017. “Birth of the Masoretic Text (MT) By Rabbi Yose ben Halafta in 160 AD at Zippori: Jews Deliberately Corrupted Their Hebrew Tanakh to Counter Christian Theology and the Masoretic Text Was Born.” https://bible.ca/manuscripts/Masoretic-Text-MT-Leningrad-Codex-Bible-manuscripts-Old-Testament-Torah-Tanakh-Hebrew-Rabbi-Yose-ben-Halafta-Zippori-160AD.htm.

Rudd, Steven A. 2019. Nimrod and the Archaeology of the Tower of Babel: Christian Archaeological Dating (CAD). Independently published.

Ryan, Emma. ed. 2002. Annals of the Four Masters. Translated by John O’Donovan. Cork, Ireland: CELT. https://celt.ucc.ie/published/T100005A/index.html.

Rydelnyk, Michael A. 2019. “Textual Criticism and Messianic Prophecy.” The Moody Handbook of Messianic Prophecy: Studies and Expositions of the Messiah in the Old Testament, 61–72. Chicago, Illinois: Moody Publishers.

Sailhamer, John H. 1995. Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.

Seltzer, Alan M., Jessica Ng, Werner Aeschbach, Rolf Kipfer, Justin T. Kulongoski, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, and Martin Stute. 2021. “Widespread Six Degrees Celsius Cooling on Land During the Last Glacial Maximum.” Nature 593, no. 7858 (12 May): 228–232.

Smith, Henry B., Jr. 2018. “The Case for the Septuagint’s Chronology in Genesis 5 and 11.” In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, 117–132. Edited by J. H. Whitmore. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship: 117–132

Snelling, Andrew A., and Bodie Hodge. 2010. “Did the Continents Split Apart in the Days of Peleg?” In The New Answers Book 3. Edited by Ken Ham, Chapter 23. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Snelling, Andrew A., and Mike Matthews. 2012. “When Did Cavemen Live?” Answers 7, no. 2 (April–June): 50–55.

Snelling, Andrew A., and Mike Matthews. 2013. “When Was the Ice Age in Biblical History.” Answers 8, no. 2 (April–June): 46–52.

Ssu-ma Ch’ien [Sima Qian]. 86 BC/1994. The Grand Scribe’s Records. Vol. 1. The Basic Annals of Pre-Han China. Edited by William H. Nienhauser, Jr. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Stephens, Walter. 2011. “Complex Pseudonymity: Annius of Viterbo’s Multiple Persona Disorder.” Modern Language Notes 126, no. 4 (September): 689–708.

Stroeven, Arjen P., Clas Hättestrand, Johan Kleman, Jakob Heyman, Derek Fabel, Ola Fredin, Bradley W. Goodfellow et al. 2016. “Deglaciation of Fennoscandia.” Quaternary Science Reviews 147 (1 September): 91–121.

Sugar, Peter F. ed. 1990. A History of Hungary. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Thomas, Mike, and Neil Chelton. 2020. Glacier Travel and Crevasse Rescue: The Climber’s Guide to Accessing Alpine Terrain. Independently published: VDiff Climbing.

Tierney, Jessica E., Jiang Zhu, Jonathan King, Steven B. Malevich, Gregory J. Hakim, and Christopher J. Poulsen. 2020. “Glacial Cooling and Climate Sensitivity Revisited.” Nature 584, no. 7822 (26 August): 569–573.

Ussher, James. 2003 (1650). The Annals of the World (1650–1654). Revised and updated by Larry and Marion Pierce. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Waltham, Clae. 1971. Shu Ching. Book of History: A Modernized Edition of the Translations of James Legge. Chicago, Illinois: H. Regnery Co.

Waitt, Richard B. Jr., 1985. “Case for Periodic, Colossal jökulhlaups from Pleistocene Glacial Lake Missoula.” Geological Society of America Bulletin 96, no. 10 (October): 1271–1286.

Weaver, Andrew J., Oleg A. Saenko, Peter U. Clark, and Jerry X. Mitrovica. 2003. “Meltwater Pulse 1A from Antarctica as Trigger of the Bølling-Allerød Warm Interval.” Science 299, no. 5613 (March 14): 1709–1713.

Waelbroeck, Claire, Bryan C. Lougheed, Natalia Vazquez Riveiros, Lise Missiaen, Joel Pedro, Trond Dokken, Irka Hajdas, et al. 2019. “Consistently Dated Atlantic Sediment Cores Over the Last 40 Thousand Years.” Scientific Data 6, 165, no. 2019 (2 September). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0173-8.

Weiss, Ehud, and Daniel Zohary. 2011. “The Neolithic Southwest Asian Founder Crops: Their Biology and Archaeobotany.” Current Anthropology 52, no. S4 (October): S237–S254.

Whitcomb, John C., and Henry M. Morris. 1961. The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications, 292–302. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing.

Worraker, William. 2020. “Heat Problems Associated with Genesis Flood Models—Part 3: Vapour Canopy Models.” Answers Research Journal 13 (August 5): 69–94. https://answersresearchjournal.org/heat-problems-flood-models-3/.

Yasinski, Emma. 2022. “New Evidence Complicates the Story of the Peopling of the Americas.” The Scientist (May 2). https://www.the-scientist.com/features/new-evidence-complicates-the-story-of-the-peopling-of-the-americas-69928.

Young, J. A. 2003. “Septuagintal Versus Masoretic Chronology in Genesis 5 and 11.” In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism. Edited by Robert L. Ivey, 417–430. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship.

Zenz, Emil. ed. 1955–1962. Die Taten der Trierer. Gesta Treverorum. 8 vols. Trier. Edited and translated by Emil Zenz. Trier, Germany: Paulinus-Verlag.