Major unanswered issues regarding the “literal flood"

[Zzyzx]

.
In the Head to Head debate between Osteng and Zzyzx, many issues have been raised to cast doubt upon the flood being literally true. The issues have been addressed briefly, shallowly or not at all – while Osteng insists upon expounding upon a “Flood Model” that purports to be “better” than geology and other natural sciences at explaining Earth features, materials, processes, and present and past life forms.

Since the issues have not been successfully addressed, I choose to open them to general discussion. Perhaps there are theists who can help by providing information to support the “literal flood theory” – or theist members who regard the flood tale as less than literally true and who might have helpful comments -- or non-theists who might care to comment on the issues.

Note: Some of the issues raised below are from applicable genesis passages (quoted by Osteng in post #3 of the Head to Head debate). Others are in response to claims made in favor of the “Flood Model”.

There is ONE condition for discussion in this thread – substantiate, substantiate, substantiate – with real world, credible, verifiable information. Conjecture is NOT welcome in this thread. Saying, ”It could have been possible” is NOT acceptable as substantiation (that is known as a “wuss-out”). “Goddidit” and “because the bible says so” do NOT constitute valid arguments in this thread.

Although twenty issues are presented below, I suggest dealing with ONE topic at a time or one per individual post.

Major unanswered issues that cast doubt upon the “literal flood”.

1. How were the animals gathered from around the world to go aboard the ark? No rational explanation has been offered for the gathering of animals worldwide (other than a suggestion that a pair of each “kind” of animal swam, flew, walked, crawled, etc from wherever they lived worldwide to get aboard) and no credible explanation was offered for their return to their native habitats after the flood and cruise -- all without transportation

2. How were thousands or millions of animals fed and cared for on the ark? There has been no satisfactory explanation how thousands or millions of animals aboard a boat could be fed and cared for by eight people during a one-year voyage – with 100% survival to insure that species did not become extinct.)

3. How did Noah build the ark? It has not been shown to be feasible for primitive people without known experience to build a boat larger than any wooden boat known to exist (as long as one and a half football fields and as tall as a five story building -- and 1.5 times as long as the longest wooden ships known to have been built) – during an era when tools were probably stone and when the wheel was unknown (yet millions of pounds of wood were supposed cut, transported, hewn and placed).

4. How did fresh water and salt water fish survive the flood? Survival of freshwater and salt water fish through drastic habitat changes has been addressed only superficially – with the claim that “no provision is necessary because they live in water” and “fish could have been different before the flood”. No evidence has been presented that fish were significantly different a few thousand years ago, that the evolved rapidly into present form and that they then stopped evolving rapidly.

5. How did plants survive a year of being flooded? Survival of plants after a year of flooding has been addressed very superficially by citing means of reproduction NOT survival of plants per se – with conjecture to indicate that restoration of the world’s vegetation happened. No reasoning or evidence has supported the contention. Any plant that could not survive and/or reproduce after a year of flooding would be extinct.

6. How could a dove “return with an olive leaf”? Instantaneous sprouting of an olive leaf just in time to be found by a dove has been weakly discussed – and the very un-dovelike behavior (not shown to be characteristic of doves) of plucking a leaf and returning to the ark has not been shown to be anything other than a children’s bible story.

7. How could fossils have been sorted as thoroughly as we know them to exist in present rock strata if all sedimentary rock was deposited during the flood? No rational answer has been offered to the question of how fossils were sorted into distinct layers (as known to geologists) if all life forms were wiped out at the same time.

8. Unsupported Claim: “The mountains were lower before the flood” has been claimed with NO indication that the mountains were substantially different a few thousand years ago – and no explanation of how the mountains grew suddenly then slowed or stopped growing. This is diametrically opposed to what is understood by those who study the Earth and nature.

9. Unsupported Claim: “The atmosphere was a blanket of water before the flood and it never rained” – (even though people obviously lived on Earth before the flood) is pure conjecture with NO substantiation whatsoever.

10. Unsupported Claim: “The climate was more moderate before the flood” has been claimed. When challenged, the claim was “supported” by citing data relating to climate 50 Million years ago rather than 5 Thousand years ago. AND, the use of such inappropriate and inapplicable data was irrationally “defended” as being representative.

11. Unsupported Claim: “The oceans were much smaller before the flood” is another claim that is made with no substantiation at all. No credible hydrologist, geologist, oceanographer has ever (to my knowledge) proposed that oceans were significantly smaller a few thousand years ago.

12. Unsupported Claim: “The continents were all together before the flood” (unsubstantiated). This represents a distortion of geological studies (based upon actual and accurate measurements) that conclude that continents are moving (on the order of centimeters per year) in relation to one another and have occupied different configurations in the past (millions of years ago – not thousands of years ago).

13. Unsupported Claim: “Water for the flood came from vast caverns ten miles below the Earth’s surface”. NO evidence has been presented that such caverns existed or that they were filled with water. The claim is pure conjecture without even an attempt to provide support or verification.

14. Unsupported Claim: “Water ‘gushing’ out of the [supposed] caverns shoved continents apart”. No evidence is provided to even suggest this is true or that it is possible. The rate of movement apart of North America and Europe would have had to be a minimum of approximately ten miles per day (when actual movement is measured at a few centimeters per year).

15. Unsupported Claim: “Gushing water” formed the mid-oceanic ridges, carved the edges of continents, eroded materials and produced all of the Earth’s sedimentary rocks, ejected material to form comets, (and did not disturb the ark in its journey).

16. Unsupported Claim: “The Earth’s sedimentary rocks were deposited during the flood” – thousands and tens of thousands of feet of sedimentary rocks supposedly deposited in less than a year.

17. Unsupported Claim: “Dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time” (up until the flood). No answer is offered to explain why dinosaur and human fossils are never found in the same rock strata. All studies in anthropology, geology, paleontology, paleobiology, and other natural sciences (based on actual examination of conditions and materials) conclude that dinosaurs were extinct for approximately 65 Million years before Humans appeared. (Emotionally disputed by creationists based on scripture only).

18. Unsupported Claim: “Coal was formed rapidly” [during the flood]. This contrasts with the process of coal formation well known to geologists as well as mining engineers (people actually involved with the subject) – a sequence from peat, to lignite, to bituminous, to anthracite – a slow process.

19. No explanation has been provided for the accumulation of thick layers of salt and gypsum among layers of other sedimentary rocks. Both salt and gypsum are “evaporites” – materials deposited when transporting waters evaporate (as in the case of Great Salt Lake and Bonneville Salt Flats). Evaporites are formed very slowly and NOT by flooding.

20. No explanation has been provided for the presence of limestone – which consists of small, often microscopic, calcium-rich body parts of marine organisms. Deposits of limestone are known to geologists to require warm water and to be a very slow process. Deposits of limestone layers hundreds or thousands of feet thick did NOT occur in a year or in a flood condition.

21. At least twenty separate “miracles” would be required to “explain” the above – since no rational reasons, reasoning, or evidence has been provided to substantiate any of the claims beyond “it could have been possible” (if enough unsupported assumptions are accepted).

22. If “miracles” are invoked to “explain” how the flood was literally true, this is no longer a debate and is no longer scientific – it is pure theology and guesswork opposing the real world and science. “Goddidit” and “miracles” void any claim that reasoning, knowledge, experience, observation, measurement, validation have formed the basis of ideas, theories, or arguments presented.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 100 by rikuoamero]

I am not interssted in discussing why people choose to believe something or not. I am dealing with the question of whether all miracles by definition can be analysed by physical evidence.

[Revelations won]

Perhaps one of the best answers that could be given would be from those who did not survive the flood???

I would suggest that the clear physical evidence could only be correctly understood when based upon a clear and correct understanding of the topography prior to the flood and the "sources of water used to accomplish the flood.

[1213]

This is old topic, but I would like to add few things to here.

2. How were thousands or millions of animals fed and cared for on the ark? There has been no satisfactory explanation how thousands or millions of animals aboard a boat could be fed and cared for by eight people during a one-year voyage � with 100% survival to insure that species did not become extinct.)

It is possible that the animals were not fully grown. It is also not necessary to believe there were millions of species. It could be that there were about 5000 animals that were not all fully grown. Many animals know how to eat, they are not needed to be fed. Possible food sources could have been animals that breed fast, plants, things that floated or swam around the ark after the flood. Drinks could have been rain water and milk.

3. How did Noah build the ark? It has not been shown to be feasible for primitive people without known experience to build a boat larger than any wooden boat known to exist (as long as one and a half football fields and as tall as a five story building -- and 1.5 times as long as the longest wooden ships known to have been built) � during an era when tools were probably stone and when the wheel was unknown (yet millions of pounds of wood were supposed cut, transported, hewn and placed).

I think it is good to notice, Bible doesn’t say it was a boat or a ship. It was an ark. And by the description it was like wood raft, like in these plans:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/Noahs_Ark.html

That could be relatively easy to build.

4. How did fresh water and salt water fish survive the flood? Survival of freshwater and salt water fish through drastic habitat changes has been addressed only superficially � with the claim that �no provision is necessary because they live in water� and �fish could have been different before the flood�. No evidence has been presented that fish were significantly different a few thousand years ago, that the evolved rapidly into present form and that they then stopped evolving rapidly.

I think it is possible that the ancient sea creatures were more adaptable to different water salinity. However, salt and fresh water tend to form layers, if water is not mixed. That is why it is possible that there were different environments that were suitable to different species.

5. How did plants survive a year of being flooded? Survival of plants after a year of flooding has been addressed very superficially by citing means of reproduction NOT survival of plants per se � with conjecture to indicate that restoration of the world�s vegetation happened. No reasoning or evidence has supported the contention. Any plant that could not survive and/or reproduce after a year of flooding would be extinct.

Seeds could survive underground.

6. How could a dove �return with an olive leaf�? Instantaneous sprouting of an olive leaf just in time to be found by a dove has been weakly discussed � and the very un-dovelike behavior (not shown to be characteristic of doves) of plucking a leaf and returning to the ark has not been shown to be anything other than a children�s bible story.

Doves can be used to carry mail. So, I think it wouldn’t be great miracle, if it could carry a leaf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeon_post

Before the ark found dry land, it may have been above water some time so that the olive tree could have grown enough to have leaves for dove to carry.

7. How could fossils have been sorted as thoroughly as we know them to exist in present rock strata if all sedimentary rock was deposited during the flood? No rational answer has been offered to the question of how fossils were sorted into distinct layers (as known to geologists) if all life forms were wiped out at the same time.

Animals have different attributes and environments. Slow animals are more easily to captured. Also, density influences on how animal will drown. For example, mammals can float long time after death, which is why they don’t get as easily to lower strata.

8. Unsupported Claim: �The mountains were lower before the flood� has been claimed with NO indication that the mountains were substantially different a few thousand years ago � and no explanation of how the mountains grew suddenly then slowed or stopped growing. This is diametrically opposed to what is understood by those who study the Earth and nature.

I would say, mountains don’t generally grow, because of gravity that pulls things down. Exception is volcanoes. But by what I know, most mountains are not volcanoes. Biblical explanation for current state of earth is this:
1. In the beginning there was just one continent. Below it, there were vast water storage. This is why it would have been easier to animals to walk into ark.
2. When the flood came, it was because the original continent was broken and collapsed and sunk.
3. Lot of organic material was drowned and captured in earth. The water level was higher right after the flood, because drowned material had not yet been compressed as much as it is nowadays. Compression has caused the water level to decrease and it is also the reason why it seems continents are moving like in modern theory of continents.
4. After the flood there came ice age. That is why water level continued to decrease, opening dry land routes to different continents. This made it possible to animals to spread to different areas.

Here are few images that show the principle.

http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/geology.html

9. Unsupported Claim: �The atmosphere was a blanket of water …

What do you mean with that? And from where do you get that idea?

10. Unsupported Claim: �The climate was more moderate before the flood� has been claimed. When challenged, the claim was �supported� by citing data relating to climate 50 Million years ago rather than 5 Thousand years ago. AND, the use of such inappropriate and inapplicable data was irrationally �defended� as being representative.

By Biblical description there was just one continent. It is very likely that the climate was different than now with many continents. But I have no means to tell the exact dates. I don’t think we have any way to prove any old ages.

20. … Deposits of limestone layers hundreds or thousands of feet thick did NOT occur in a year or in a flood condition.

Is there any scientific evidence to support that claim?

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to post 100 by rikuoamero]

I am not interssted in discussing why people choose to believe something or not. I am dealing with the question of whether all miracles by definition can be analysed by physical evidence.

Since all miracles appear to happen in this universe (that is the claim anyways), and because all miracles involve the interaction of energy and matter in some way that changes the outcome of something, and since there are proven conservation laws in the universe, it is obvious that there must be physical evidence created from every miracle that happens on Earth involving mass and/or energy. You can't escape that fact.

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

[Kenisaw]

Perhaps one of the best answers that could be given would be from those who did not survive the flood???

I would suggest that the clear physical evidence could only be correctly understood when based upon a clear and correct understanding of the topography prior to the flood and the "sources of water used to accomplish the flood.

Floods happen in a wide range of topographic features, from steep terrains to flat ones, in rocky topographies to fine silty clay areas. The topography, to be blunt, is unimportant. It's the results of floods that matter, because the results of floods are always the same in most ways. It's a simple matter of understanding hydraulics and flood dynamics.

Floods create one sediment layer from a flood event, regardless of topography. They also deposit larger particles first, because the heavier particles can settle out in faster currents while smaller particles remain suspended in the water.

Creationist's claims of dozen or even hundreds of sedimentary layers coming from one flood event, with layers of fine particle deposits existing underneath larger particle layers, is not possible given easily provable hydraulics. That doesn't even take into account the preposterous notion that different layers of sediment from the same flood could have unique and different species of plants and animals in them, as if flood waters could mysteriously separate things.

Your suggestion isn't useful to the understanding of geology or flood deposition, because topography doesn't matter.

[JehovahsWitness]

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

What about miracles that miraculously remove all, physical evidence of their happening?

[Zzyzx]

.

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

What about miracles that miraculously remove all, physical evidence of their happening?

Do such 'evidence removed miracles' occur?

If so, kindly cite examples of such 'miracles' and tell how you (or anyone) can know they occur(ed) if evidence is 'miraculously removed'.

[JehovahsWitness]

.

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

What about miracles that miraculously remove all, physical evidence of their happening?

Do such 'evidence removed miracles' occur?

If miracles were indeed possible, is there any reason such 'physical evidence removed miracles' could not be possible?

[Tcg]

.

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

What about miracles that miraculously remove all, physical evidence of their happening?

Do such 'evidence removed miracles' occur?

If miracles were indeed possible, is there any reason such 'physical evidence removed miracles' could not be possible?

No, if miracles were indeed possible. The question asked, however, was do such 'evidence removed miracles' occur?



Tcg

[Zzyzx]

.

Physical evidence can be analyzed, therefore miracles can be.

What about miracles that miraculously remove all, physical evidence of their happening?

Do such 'evidence removed miracles' occur?

If miracles were indeed possible, is there any reason such 'physical evidence removed miracles' could not be possible?

Of course, IF we can imagine 'miracles', we can imagine that evidence of them is 'removed' miraculously.

In fantasy and fiction anything is possible. Some of us prefer the real world.