The TRVE history of the Flood...

Forty days and nights of rain all over the earth would turn most of the land mass to mud, creating mudslides everywhere. A mudslide created by a local flood can do a lot of damage all by itself. I posted pictures of that a long time ago. Multiply that by millions. Much of the land would be scoured nearly flat.The oceans would rise up onto the land, heavy with sediment from their own sources as well as the mudslides. People and animals would be dying in each phase; others would try to get to higher ground.the oceans would deposit sand, mud, silt, and calcareous ooze in layers as it rose. At its height more sediments would precipitate out of the standing water. There would be nothing anywhere but water. Everything would die that couldn't live in the water, and even marine life would die because of all the sediment in the water.There's a start.

Of course that's impossible. The water cycle requires evaporation in one area to produce rain in another. If it rained for forty days an forty nights over the whole earth, all of that water had to be up there beforehand, which is also impossible. So there must have been whales on the Ark.The problem with your ad hoc approach is that every "answer" produces so many more questions.

No the problem is that you don't know anything about this debate.Forget saying anything is impossible that the Bible says happened. You don't get to say what is impossible and argue with God. Sorry. The Bible is where we start, we don't argue it. the Flood began with forty days and nights of rain.I didn't say ALL marine life died. Obviously it didn't for crying out loud. Talking to someone who knows absolutely nothing is a lost cause.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm not arguing with God. I'm arguing with what YOU claim God said. Nope. This is a science forum. Reality is where we start.

Such hubris; you don't speak for God, Faith.

Nooooo, we assume the Flood and try to prove it from the observed facts. We are not here to argue for the Bible's veracity.

I certainly can speak for God, any Bible believer can.

By the way, trying to prove the Flood is only part of the project. The bigger part is showing the utter nonsensicalness of the Geological Time Scale. Seems to me that knowing it's based on a stack of horizontally laid wet sediments in which are encased billions of dead things, should be reason enough to regard it as delusional, without any other information, and that the stack of lithified sediments is good evidence for a worldwide Flood. In a way I don't see the need for any more argument, it's open and shut.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Wow That's, like, the craziest thing I've read today. That's a really big problem, in multiple ways, and I don't think I can talk to you anymore*.I can't believe you actually think that. Well, I mean, I can believe that you believe it, but I'm surprised at how conceited you are.Pride is an abomination - check yourself.*I'll still point out the errors and mistakes you are making, but I don't think I can relate to someone so deluded that they think they can speak for God.

The atmosphere cannot hold that much moisture, Faith. You need some ad hoc explanation for where that meteoric water came from. So, you are saying that there were no rock formations before the fludde, yes? Where did the mudslides flow if there were no hills? Why didn't rivers form? If they did, where are they in the geological record? Again, no hills, no mountains, no rock formations. Is that true?Do you have evidence of such mudslide events in the geological record? What do you mean 'their own sources'? Why would rising seawater carry huge sediment loads? What force is moving the water such that it can carry mud up onto the continent? And yet there are no human fossils in the early fossil record. Odd, yes? What about human artifacts, where are they in this mudslide. Please show us any known flood that deposited limestone. What kind of sediments are you precipitating here? Then what is the source of sediments? Why do we have shorelines throughout the record? And why do we not see deep sea sediments or fossils in the Cretaceous seaway, for instance? It would seem that they would be carried along with this load of sediment from the ocean. And limestone deposits would be impossible.Did Noah bring an aquarium on the Ark? Sounds like a multiple reversing global mudslide hypothesis.Which is not in the geological record...Not a good start, actually.

The record of people who say they speak for God is not very impressive.

You have a project? How else would water-lain sediments look? Why would they not be evenly bedded strata with sharp contacts? And why would a fludde create the strata as they are. AFAIC, your scenario is based on mudflows which are never known to create extensive, bedded strata.So, yes, something around here is delusional... Well, there you go. Start paying attention to the data. You keep saying that but never explain why.OH! That's right, it's obvious. A typical YEC discussion: Just shut it down.

Well, we know that they are literally unable to be speaking for God - I mean, they're contradicting the known scientific fact that the planet has never been covered in water since humans have been here.There's no way God is that stupid

Exactly.You don't want facts to get in the way of your preconceived story. So, ignore as many as necessary.

I have never understood why an omnipotent god would go to the trouble of a flood, with all of the collateral damage and pointless geological problems, to punish a single reprobate species. I mean, it only took 6 days to create the entire universe, so why spend a year with one simple task, leaving behind and entire planet of questionable evidence?