The flood (again)

[Zzyzx]

.
In a current thread someone said:

Would you like to have a debate on the deluge or Jesus' resurrection?

As people join the Forum they maybe unaware that some topics have been debated many, many times. Perhaps they think they have 'killer arguments' that are compelling.

Question for debate: Was the Earth flooded 'to the tops of mountains' as described in Genesis?

[Zzyzx]

Exactly where does the Bible state there was only one continent? Kindly quote passages that make that statement.

God said, "Let the waters under the sky be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear," and it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:9-10

Did 'God' actually say that? To whom? Who recorded the conversation?

Yes, I didn’t claim modern continents float. Bible tells that in the beginning dry land was stretched above waters. So, if earth (=dry land) was stretched, above waters, we can assume that the edges were connected to land below the waters and so there was like bubble below the dry land. And if the water can’t escape, it can support heavy weight, as in hydraulic systems.

It would not be a contradiction, because in this case there would be good explanation, what causes the force. If there really was a continent that was broken and collapsed and sunk, the edges probably would have collided and in the edges, there would have been compression and mixed materials that were flushed would have formed different layers. But, I don’t think they would have risen above the point where they originally were. Basically the circumference of earth shrank, and that causes formation of mountains, because the surface area adjusts to that smaller circumference (like example fruit that is dried).

It would not be surprising that people thousands of years ago had little knowledge of Earth materials and processes, or that they wrote strange and fanciful notions telling their opinions about how things came to be.

It is less understandable that current people prefer those ancient fantasies over modern scientific studies. Very fanciful opinions are offered with no supporting evidence cited that: "Dry land stretched above waters", "Bubble below the dry land", "Edges connected", 'Water can't escape", "Circumference of the Earth shrank", "Mixed materials flushed and formed different layers"

Evidently such 'explanations' (imaginative speculations) are acceptable in church or on creationist websites.

It all sounds even less credible than Santa Claus coming down the chimney -- even where there are no chimneys.

[brunumb]

If there really was a continent that was broken and collapsed and sunk, the edges probably would have collided and in the edges, there would have been compression and mixed materials that were flushed would have formed different layers. But, I don’t think they would have risen above the point where they originally were. Basically the circumference of earth shrank, and that causes formation of mountains, because the surface area adjusts to that smaller circumference (like example fruit that is dried).

Your entire response is highly fanciful and doesn't even qualify as pseudoscience. The genuine science that we do have explains the history of Earth with supporting evidence from numerous fields of research. Creationist explanations are no better than science fiction where people use their imagination to invent scenarios that might appeal to the gullible as being real.

Dried fruit shrinks because it loses the water that is contained within the fruit and within the peel to the surroundings. The circumference of the Earth would only shrink if there was a void below the crust because there is nowhere for any alleged subterranean water to go.

It wouldn't matter where the Ark was during all the alleged catastrophic break up of the continent, its sinking and mountains forming (still contrary to your original criticism). It could not have survived. Even a relatively minor earthquake can generate massive, destructive tsunamis. What you have proposed is millions of times more significant than a mere earthquake.

There are countless problems associated with the biblical flood that it is hard to believe that anyone today can still accept it as a real event. To me that acceptance is just further testament to the power of religious indoctrination.

[Zzyzx]

According to the the Genesis tale, the Earth was flooded 'to the tops of mountains'. To meet that condition, water would have to cover Mt. Everest – 29,029 feet (five and a half miles). The amount of water required to do that is calculated to be one BILLION cubic miles – three times the Earth's total water supply. If the depth of water was achieved in 960 hours (forty days and nights) the rise in water level would have to be THIRTY feet per HOUR (height of a three-story building -- a veritable waterfall on every square foot of the Earth's surface including oceans)

If that wasn't problem enough, the water would have to disappear after the flood. Where would it go? Can't go into oceans because they also are covered with 5.5 mile-deep water.

It must be magic.

Attempting to make sense of the tale by saying 'The mountains might have been lower back then' only works if one can demonstrate that the mountains WERE lower a few thousand years ago. Mountain elevation changes over millions of years, not thousands. Some mountains are known to be increasing in elevation – by inches per year or per decade. Some are known to decrease (erosion).

Claiming that the flood was local or regional does NOT fit the Genesis description – not even close. Floods are common in lowlands, coastal areas, river valleys – NOT covering mountains.

That many cultures have folklore about floods is not surprising (and does not support the Genesis tale) since floods are common events. Those flood tales / folklore do not indicate that all life on Earth was killed. The Gilgamesh flood myth and the Epic of Atrahasis from Babylonian and Sumerian cultures predate the Genesis tale. Bible writers were rather late in telling the tale. Why did other cultures know / write flood tales before 'God's chosen people'?

[JehovahsWitness]

According to the the Genesis tale, the Earth was flooded 'to the tops of mountains'. To meet that condition, water would have to cover Mt. Everest – 29,029 feet (five and a half miles).

This presumes the mountains we presently have have always been as high as they are now. There is evidence that this was not the case.



TOPOLOGY

How could the waters have covered the mountains?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 30#p983830

What can be learnt from the presence of marine life fossils in the tops of mountains?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 28#p984828

Do mountains not "grow" at a SLOW steady rate?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 37#p983837

How can the earth's present topology be explained [high mountains]?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 76#p983976

How could the Ark come to rest on Mt. Ararat before the tops of the mountains were seen?
viewtopic.php?p=755310#p755310

Would the passengers of the ARK not have suffocated at such elevated levels? [Zzyzx]
viewtopic.php?p=792737#p792737

Personal BLOG
Tetoniics
http://jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2019/0 ... onics.html

For more information go to other posts related to

THE GLOBAL DELUGE, NOAH'S ARK and ... FLOOD MYTHS AROUND THE WORLD,

[JehovahsWitness]

The Gilgamesh flood myth and the Epic of Atrahasis from Babylonian and Sumerian cultures predate the Genesis tale.

Why could this not be considered as extra-biblical evidence that a global deluge was indeed a historic event ?

[brunumb]

The purpose of the great flood was to wipe almost all of the life on the planet. After the event there were only eight humans and a contingent of animals to repopulate the world. There should only be one flood story as told by Noah and passed down. You would think that there should also only be one known god as a consequence. Somehow, in an incredibly short amount of time, all corners of the earth were repopulated from a starting base of eight humans, civilisations grew and a plethora of new gods made their appearance. None of it gels with reality. There was no biblical flood.

[RJG]

The purpose of the great flood was to wipe almost all of the life on the planet. After the event there were only eight humans and a contingent of animals to repopulate the world. There should only be one flood story as told by Noah and passed down. You would think that there should also only be one known god as a consequence. Somehow, in an incredibly short amount of time, all corners of the earth were repopulated from a starting base of eight humans, civilisations grew and a plethora of new gods made their appearance. None of it gels with reality. There was no biblical flood.

I agree with you.

[Zzyzx]

According to the the Genesis tale, the Earth was flooded 'to the tops of mountains'. To meet that condition, water would have to cover Mt. Everest – 29,029 feet (five and a half miles).

This presumes the mountains we presently have have always been as high as they are now. There is evidence that this was not the case.
Posting a list of links is NOT debate.

[JehovahsWitness]

That is true my response is your post presumes the mountains we presently have have always been as high as they are now; there is evidence that this was not the case.

Do you have anything to say in response to my comment above in blue?







JW








TOPOLOGY

How could the waters have covered the mountains?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 30#p983830

What can be learnt from the presence of marine life fossils in the tops of mountains?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 28#p984828

Do mountains not "grow" at a SLOW steady rate?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 37#p983837

How can the earth's present topology be explained [high mountains]?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 76#p983976

How could the Ark come to rest on Mt. Ararat before the tops of the mountains were seen?
viewtopic.php?p=755310#p755310

Would the passengers of the ARK not have suffocated at such elevated levels? [Zzyzx]
viewtopic.php?p=792737#p792737

Personal BLOG
Tetoniics
http://jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2019/0 ... onics.html

For more information go to other posts related to

THE GLOBAL DELUGE, NOAH'S ARK and ... FLOOD MYTHS AROUND THE WORLD,

[Tcg]

That is true my response is your post presumes the mountains we presently have have always been as high as they are now; there is evidence that this was not the case.

That is true. A current estimate is that the Himalayas are growing 2 cm per year. If a global flood would have happened 5,000 years ago, they would have been approximately 10,000 cm shorter. 10,000 cm equals 328 feet.

The accepted height of Everest today is 29,029 feet. 29,029 - 328 = 28,701. This difference in height is insignificant when considering claims of a global flood.

More interesting math related to the flood: After age 30, men lose about 1 inch in height every 50 years. Noah would have been almost 2 feet shorter at his death than when he was 30. So, if he was 5 feet tall at age 30, he would have been just over 3 feet tall when he died.


Tcg