Does the evidence support the Flood? (attn: DwarfishSquints)

And, if you'd read carefully:

quote:

---

That much seawater in the mantle means that as much as 10 percent of Earth’s oceans have been subducted into the planet’s interior throughout its history ” more than returns to the atmosphere and oceans through volcanic eruptions, Holland says. “On balance,” he adds, “the cycle is moving water from the surface and into the mantle.”

---

So, what is the claim of these researchers, Wumpini?They think that the oceans have lost 10% of their water to the mantle, doubling the water in the mantle, and meaning that they think the mantle water now equals 20% of the original quantity in the oceans, and two ninths of the present quantity in the oceans.This means that the researchers you are quoting do not think that there's enough water in the mantle to cover the earth. What they are saying is that the surface water is being slowly lost to the interior; that a very small percentage is managing to pass the heat barrier somehow.At the rate described, in another 30 billion years or so, the oceans will have disappeared!!!!!

You're welcome. That was just a technical point about that particular paper. I'm not actually debating the flood, as I know it didn't happen, and I sometimes get in trouble with the Admins for treating flood threads like a joke.I once got suspended for answering someone's question as to where the flood water came from and went to by suggesting a theory that the water for the flood came out of someone's imagination, then went into the imaginations of millions of others (actually a viable theory that's probably close to the truth), so I should stay clear of flood discussions, which really belong in the nineteenth century, IMO But the stuff on the changing view of the mantle is interesting for other (non-creation v evolution) reasons, so I'm glad you brought it up.

Cool! Nothing you've quoted actually seems to disagree with Nuggin. 60-65 metres doesn't cover any mountains.You're wrong about the whole world being pushed up out of the water. Scotland is rising, yes, but England is sinking. In other words, our Island is more tilting than rising.I've a vague memory of reading years ago that northern Australia is sinking, as well, but I could be wrong. Maybe Melbourne's rising as Darwin (great name for a town) sinks.Edited by bluegenes, : trivia!

---

The avatar: "This highly concentrated DNA solution has undergone a series to liquid crystalline phase transitions to form a densely packed hexagonal phase."

With hips like that? How big is your brain? What was the old name? Christ's College? (where Darwin went in Cambridge) I'll politely resist further questions about your brain, Lucy. Funny though. If this was the 4,300 year old flood, it seems to have missed Stonehenge. It missed this entire island, in fact.