Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 57 (9054 total)
66 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 65 visitors)
Newest Member: EWolf
Post Volume: Total: 888,321 Year: 5,967/14,102 Month: 115/438 Week: 47/112 Day: 2/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where Did The (Great Flood) Water Come From And Where Did It Go?
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 941 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(2)
Message 10 of 432 (642595)
11-30-2011 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Taz
11-29-2011 7:51 PM


Taz writes:

quote:
Kent Hovind already proposed the perfect creationist model for this. It was the same amount of water as we have today. The difference is the Earth back then was more flat and soils more evenly spread out.

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 because 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 because 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.

You can try this for yourself. Get yourself a baking dish and a big sheet of foil. Put some weight in the foil so that it's heavy and crumple it up into a ball and place it in the baking dish. Now, fill the dish with water so that it comes up but does not completely cover the lump of foil.

Now, try to flood the lump with the water that's currently in the dish such that when you leave it alone for a minute, it remains completely flooded. You'll find that it can't be done. It doesn't matter how you manipulate the water or how little the lump of foil peeks up over the surface of the water. You might achieve a temporary state of floodedness while agitating the water, but once you let it sit for a minute, the water rushes to the lowest level, leaving dry land.

The only way to flood the entire lump is to introduce new water into the system.

Unless you're going to re-arrange the topology of the lump, but the stories don't say that the mountains were pushed down into the waters. It says the waters rose up.

But let's assume it wasn't the waters rising but rather the earth moving. The flood was actually the ground re-arranging itself to be flatter so that the water could rise above the highest peak. This, of course, doesn't even get into the amount of energy required to raise Mt. Everest in the short amount of time described by the story. At the end of the flood, the ground would have to rise up again and Mt. Everest needs to rise 5 miles into the air above sea level, all in less than a year, not to mention all the other prominences across all the other continents. Such an uprising would require so much energy that it would have sterilized the surface of the planet and boiled off said water.

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.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Taz, posted 11-29-2011 7:51 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Taz, posted 11-30-2011 12:01 PM Rrhain has responded
 Message 15 by frako, posted 11-30-2011 4:18 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 941 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 151 of 432 (645573)
12-28-2011 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Taz
11-30-2011 12:01 PM


Taz writes:

quote:
If you think about it, the bible never stated that the entire earth was flooded all at the same time. Therefore, it must have flooded one region at a time until the entire earth was covered. I propose (in creationist terms) that massive tsunamis were responsible and that every part of the earth was covered at some point.

Yes, it does.

Genesis 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Waves don't last for that long. And if that's not enough, it says so directly:

Genesis 8:9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

I should think that "the waters were on the face of the whole earth" is pretty explicit.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Taz, posted 11-30-2011 12:01 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021