|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 49 (9214 total) |
| |
Cifa.ac | |
Total: 920,165 Year: 487/6,935 Month: 487/275 Week: 4/200 Day: 4/18 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Where Did The (Great Flood) Water Come From And Where Did It Go? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18691 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
Good question. I enjoy reading what other members think, even if most of them are no longer active here. Since these threads are no longer limited to 300 posts, I brought this one out of summation.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3976 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
Dr. A writes: 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. An "ex nihilo" water creation and "de-ex nihilo" disposal seems to be the only remotely rational answer to me. And the Biblical narrative seems to indicate the flood didn't have much effect on anything other than land based animal life. What about the poor submerged plants? Apparently they were still in place and doing fine when the flood receded. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
An "ex nihilo" water creation and "de-ex nihilo" disposal seems to be the only remotely rational answer to me. Creation scientists don't seem to what want these kinds of explanations. It is okay if the Red Sea to parts and then swallows up Pharoah's army, but the Flood has to be something else entirely. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World. Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 709 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Moose writes:
Ad nihilo? "de-ex nihilo"An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18691 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
Trixie,Topic Originator writes: 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. . Dr.Walt Browns Hydroplate Theory pandion,inactive member writes: 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. Rrhain writes: 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. Modulous writes: 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?Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Arkangel Daniel Member (Idle past 2251 days) Posts: 20 Joined: |
The water from the flood came from a dimension that was bigger than this universe that was full of clean water. Delivery was done by tiny worm holes just above the ground and in the upper atmosphere to create a dense low pressure system without wind. After the flood a reverse process was carried out where the water particles were teleported particle by particle by the Holy Spirit back into the water dimension in a clean state. Later we used that water again during the Exodus to quench the thirst of the Hebrews in the desert and those springs still exist to this day, the Bedouin use them. You will know when you find one it has extremely clean water and a good taste and comes from nowhere!(another dimension-not this universe) After the flood Spaceships from Heaven arrived and dropped off people and animals/plants and creatures and the Ark was loaded onto one and taken to Heaven to God's museum. We then constructed the Great Wall of China, Pyramids etc. Stonehenge was built prior to the flood as we knew it would be ok although we did cover it. The team involved in constructing the monuments on Earth all built a statue on Easter Island and other locations. The Holy Spirit is the statue with the hat, mine is to his left. I am the Arkangel Daniel and I am from Heaven.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
The calculation of water is likely based on the water needed to cover present mountains. We do not know that the high mountains of today existed. That means possibly a lot less water was needed. Your question is where the water came from (that is known) and where did it go. In my creationist perspective I think that most of the water that covered the earth came from the other side of the firmament. (the firmament is where the stars were made)
In creation week waters were separated below and above this firmament, and in the flood portals of heaven were opened allowing those waters beyond where stars are, to be transported to earth. Science envisions wormholes. That might give some small idea of what kind of higher science was involved here. The waters seem to have come across space and time through windows of heaven! There is no limit as to how much water could come this way. The fountains of the deep closed. A great wind came. In a hundred and fifty days the waters had receded. I suspect that those windows of heaven stopped bring rain, and maybe started 'sucking' it back up!That explains where the water went and came from. Science is not able to understand these things. That is why there is no scientific explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8685 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
That explains where the water went and came from. Science is not able to understand these things. That is why there is no scientific explanation. But science has explained it. It is religious delusional fantasy. There are thousands of science texts and studies detailing the effects that such a flud would leave in this world that are not there. There are thousands of science texts and studies detailing the weakness of mind, the confirmation bias and the acculturation of evil religious thought. Of course science can explain your non-existent flud. It's religious bullshit. And you, an anti-science, illogical, religious zealot, can not show otherwise.Factio Republicana delenda est.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
Science has limits. What lies beyond the known and limits of natural science may seem strange to those pegged to those limits. But by the tone of your posts it seems you don't care and have a religion to defend.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
The bible indicates plant growth such as trees was very fast in the old world. No need for plants to live underwater.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
The huge door of the ark was closed by God. The animals called to the ark by God. The waters were sent and taken away by God. There is no natural (where natural is defined by ignoring and omitting all parts of nature that are not physical) explanation possible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 709 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
dad writes:
No it doesn't. But that discussion belongs in a Bible thread, not a science thread. Take it over thete so we can show where you're mistaken. The bible indicates plant growth such as trees was very fast in the old world."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
Is that because science is too small to be able to know one way or the other and deal in the issues?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 709 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
dad writes:
Science does know but that's irrelevant to what the Bible says. In a Bible thread we can see if you're as wrong about the Bible as you are about science. Is that because science is too small to be able to know one way or the other and deal in the issues?"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dad Member (Idle past 1634 days) Posts: 337 Joined: |
If science does know where the water came from or went as you claim, then post it. Obviously it does not.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025