Describing what the Biblical Flood would be like.

ICANT suffers from the same disease all creationists suffer from. If they don't know any of the research done over hundreds of years to come to conclusions; they call it an assumption.

In particular, which assumptions are those?

More appropriate in Assumptions involved in scientific dating, if ICANT shows up.

Hi NoNukes But you want to use the Bay of Fundy.The dry land mass that appeared in Genesis 1:9, when the water gathered into one place was not shaped like the Bay of Fundy.When the water began to rise it would have come on the land mass from all direction at the same time. With the water rising at the rate of 1" per minute there would be little to no damage to the land mass.
When the water receded if it was at the same rate or less there would still be little to no damage to the land mass, regardless of the elevation of the dry land.So when someone says there is no sign in the earth of a world wide flood such as the YEC"S put forth they are correct. Because that kind of flood did not take place.God Bless,

Hi Jon I am not YEC.I probably believe the earth and universe is much older than you do.God Bless,

Hi NoNukes The assumption that the Tectonic Plates have always moved at the same speed of one too two inches per year.God Bless

The erosion effects would be generated by the water velocity rather than the rate of rise. Your argument that a global flood is just like the tide coming in, even with analogy to Fundy is ridiculous. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Really? You think that it's an assumption? You really need a basic education.

The Bay of Fundy is in no way analogous to a large land mass surrounded by water.The tides in the Bay of Fundy are unique and due to unique conditions. The time it takes for a wave to travel from the mouth of the bay to the end and back is almost exactly the same as the time between high tides. This sets up a resonance that causes the extremely high tides.That resonance would not exist in your fludde scenario because the geometry is totally different.That resonance is periodic, meaning that what goes into the bay must shortly come out of the bay before any more goes into the bay. There cannot be a steady rise in the Bay of Fundy or any analogous situation. Tidal Resonance in the Bay of Fundy and Gulf of MaineEdited by JonF, : No reason given.

I don't agree with much of ICANT's ideas about the Flood as far as I can tell so far, but this idea that he thought the tides in the Bay of Fundy could just go on rising is a complete misreading of what he said that really needs to be corrected. He was NOT suggesting that this could happen IN THE BAY OF FUNDY. He was simply using the Bay of Fundy as a model for the Flood in relation to the height of the tidal rise in a brief period of time (or something like that, he can correct me if I got this wrong), then adding the necessary difference that the Flood would not have receded after the tidal rise but kept on rising. NOT THE BAY OF FUNDY, THE FLOOD.

Yep, I know that's what he meant.That's why I pointed out that the tides in the Bay of Fundy are in no way anything remotely like a flood on a land mass surrounded by water. Which, of course, is impossible in the Bay of Fundy so that "necessary difference" destroys any correlation between the two scenarios. "Kept on rising" is an unjustified and ad-hoc explanation that is not supported by anything to do with the Bay of Fundy. The Bay of Fundy is a...

If you want to argue "no correlation," fine, but you didn't, you implied he was stu*pid enough to think the water could go on rising after high tide in the Bay of Fundy, and so did some others here.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You may have inferred that, but I did not imply it. {ABE} note "or any analogous situation" in my original message, which obviously means ICANT's fludde{/ABE} I pointed out that the water could not keep rising in the Bay of Fundy and therefore a global fludde would have to be wildly different.Do you acknowledge that the tides in the Bay of Fundy have no connection whatsoever to an alleged fludde?.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

OK, I'll assume I misread you then. Sorry.I don't see any connection between the Flood and the Bay of Fundy, no, but then I'm not quite sure what connection he intended to make

Hi NoNukes What would cause the velocity you are alluding too?The Bay of Fundy has velocity because as the tide comes in the area gets smaller and smaller until the water is racing up river causing a rapids that people go rapid riding in..But if you start with a relativity flat elevation and the water is rising from all directions as the sea is rising at 1 " per minute the water would rise like the tide coming in on the beach. There would be no Tsunami waves to tear everything up as the water would be rising at a steady rate.I say relativity flat as there was no place the plates would have been diving under each other to make the mountain ranges yet.God Bless,