Where Did The (Great Flood) Water Come From And Where Did It Go?

Right, but in that case why make reference to real things at all? The water appeared out of nowhere because God wanted it to, and then poofed away into nothing because God told it to. What's wrong with saying that? But if instead creationists want to produce a naturalistic explanation for their flood, then they are obliged to give us a bit more detail.

"de-ex nihilo"

Arguments have been made that the flood was not catastrophic or violent, that water flows uphill, that the opening of the fountains of the deep doesn't mean water reaching high in the atmosphere, that water wasn't in the mantle pre-flood, but got there afterwards when the "single land mass" divided in the days of Peleg.

So many different arguments have been made, some inconsistent with others, that it's difficult to visualize the floodist's model and the various statements are scattered over numerous posts and threads.

In the distant past we've discussed this topic, touching on Walt Brown's hydroplate theory and vapour canopies etc, but it would be worthwhile to discuss this subject (...)many claims are made regarding the source of the flood water. A rough calculation puts the amount of water required to flood the entire earth at 2046 million cubic km. To help get an idea of what that means, the Earth's crust is estimated to be 1332 million cubic km (I googled that). The temperature of the mantle ranges from 1400C to 3000C with densities ranging from 3.4 - 4.3 g/cm2.

What effect would 2000 million cubic km of superheated pressurised water have on the atmosphere, crust and life if it was released to the surface over a period of 40 days? What sort of atmospheric temperatures are we talking about here?

When water becomes steam it increases in volume by 1600 times, giving us a total of 3.2 trillion cubic km. In contrast, the earth's atmosphere is estimated to be 51,000 million cubic km so the volume of steam is 62.7 times the volume of the earth's atmosphere. .

Isn't it interesting that the entire video is nothing more than assertion from faith in a book of mythology without a single bit of actual evidence?
Creationist arguments in the creation/evolution debates all seem to fall into two categories:

1) The mythology of bronze age, nomadic herdsmen is scientific in nature. That is the argument offered in the video. But it is presented without any evidence. The arguments show a gross lack of understanding of what science is and how it works. In science, an assertion must be supported by evidence as the basis of an hypothesis which supports a prediction that can be tested. Creationism is assertion based on mythology that is untestable and therefore, not scientific.

2) Evolution is a religion. But, of course, not even christian evolutionary biologists attend evolutionary worship services. In fact, in science, the point is to challenge everything and to accept nothing on faith. But any challenge must be based on evidence supported by hypothesis, prediction, and testing. Empty assertion just doesn't do the job.

The problem, of course, is that it doesn't matter how flat the earth is. You cannot flood the earth using the water that already exists. If there is dry land anywhere, then that means you have to have additional water come from somewhere else. The entire reason that there is dry land is precisely that there isn't enough water to cover it up.

The amazing thing about sea level is that it is the lowest you can go and still be on the "surface". Water necessarily rushes downhill to the lowest level it can get: Sea level. Thus, dry land is necessarily above and beyond what the water can cover.

The reason we can have a local flood with the water we have is that we take it away from somewhere else: To flood point A with water, you have to take it away from point B. Therefore, it is physically impossible to flood the earth with the water we already have.(...)Trying to get the flood to happen with the water we currently have on the planet in the way it is described in the book is mathematically and physically impossible.

Where did that water go? There are two possible answers. The first is the simple reading: The water dried up. The people that wrote this story probably did not realize that when water dries up, it goes somewhere.

A second answer, which does not assume its a plot hole resulting from scientific ignorance, would be that the water presumably returned to the deep. It evaporated back up through the firmament. Presumably, the stoppers Yahweh used were semi-permeable membranes or something. Or maybe it drained into the large cavernous underworld?

The bible indicates plant growth such as trees was very fast in the old world.

Is that because science is too small to be able to know one way or the other and deal in the issues?