Answers I DIDN'T get - Noah's Flood covering the mountains

[Magnetic]

In a thread on a Christian Forum, a person came on asking who of us believed in certain topics such as a literal 6 day creation, and Noah's flood. On the flood part, I stated that I didn't think the flood account actually happened because if it WAS an actual occurance, there would have had to have been a miriad of miracles before, during, and after the event and then those miracles covered up.

Someone asked what these miracles would have to be, and then brought up the sea shells at the top of mountains.

I answered:

"Barring miraculous events from God, all of which are possible [though their evidences would have been concealed]:

The amount of water necessary to cover the mountains is 5 times more water that what is currently in the oceans or in the water tables.

All the fossil records should be completely diverse, regardless of animal species, regardless of how advanced they are, due to the mixing of them as the flood was happening, and as they receded. Species with superior mobility whould be at the shallowest levels of sediment, flying animals at the top. Ex. flying dinosaur species are buried at the same depth as other dinosaur species, well below much more recent species with inferior mobility.

Migration of the animals from Mr. Ararat would have caused mass extinction, since they would not have been in their specific ecosystems. Ex. South American trapdoor tarantulas, polar bears [thousands of mies of temperate zones], panda bears [with no bamboo (specific dietary requirements) and poor mobility], etc.

Metallic man-made Bronze Age aritifacts would have been at the very bottom do to their unability to run for higher ground, struggle, or tread water. Rather they are at the top of the sediment layers.

I could give more.


Oh, the seashells on the mountains. Old earth states that the tectonic plates are in constant motion, or pushing towards other plates. Over millions of years, this 'collision' pushes up the land forming mountains. So, millions of years ago, that part of the world would have been under the oceans."

Now, I may be a little off or elementary on the sea shells thing, but I think that's the general idea.

Then he said that it is possible (and I've heard many others on the board say the same thing) that the Earth, before the flood, was a lot different than it is now, such as the possibility that the topography was flatter, so in other words, the waters could have covered the whole earth if it was flatter.

Then I replied (to which there hasn't been a response for a week:

Yes, I've heard the idea that the topography was flatter before the flood, but if that were the case, they would not have known anything about mountains, nor would there have been a mountain for the ark to rest upon, and for a mountain range to spring up as high as Ararat, the Hymalayas, Everest, would have caused a devestating production of friction heat buildup that would have boiled the waters. And it would make no sense to say [in Genesis 7:20] "Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail, and the mountains were covered" if there were no mountains.

[Civil War Man]

On the flood part, I stated that I didn't think the flood account actually happened because if it WAS an actual occurance, there would have had to have been a miriad of miracles before, during, and after the event and then those miracles covered up.

Some historians believe that the Noah flood story (and myths like it) are partially derived from something that happened in Mesopotamia during the Sumerian days. Basically there was a lot of rain, causing level of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to rise up and overflow the levies. Guy named Ziasutra (probably spelled that wrong) saw what was happening, commandeered a boat that was full of various merchandise, and rode out the flood, after which he gave thanks at a mountaintop temple because he survived.

Your answer to the YEC regarding the flood was good, but I doubt it will penetrate his Wall O' Ignorance. It often proves to be inpenetrable armor when assailed by logic.

[Alyeska]

Might also want to mention the fact that in order to cover the planet in water in 40 days you are going to cook it. Water as it falls through the atmosphere has friction and as it impacts it releases it kinetic energy. Small amounts mean nothing. But the level of water required to cover the planet is a massive amount of energy. More then the combined nuclear missile arsenals in the world and is sufficent in energy to raise the temperature by more then a hundred degrees.

[El Moose Monstero]

On the flood part, I stated that I didn't think the flood account actually happened because if it WAS an actual occurance, there would have had to have been a miriad of miracles before, during, and after the event and then those miracles covered up.

Some historians believe that the Noah flood story (and myths like it) are partially derived from something that happened in Mesopotamia during the Sumerian days. Basically there was a lot of rain, causing level of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to rise up and overflow the levies. Guy named Ziasutra (probably spelled that wrong) saw what was happening, commandeered a boat that was full of various merchandise, and rode out the flood, after which he gave thanks at a mountaintop temple because he survived.

Your answer to the YEC regarding the flood was good, but I doubt it will penetrate his Wall O' Ignorance. It often proves to be inpenetrable armor when assailed by logic.

I thought the biblical flood was pegged at having it's roots from an earthquake which collapsed lake banks releasing large amounts of water from an isolated sea/big ass lake?

[SPOOFE]

I've always loved how YEC point to the fact that many disseparate cultures have a "flood" story as proof of Noah's flood.... ignoring the fact that floods happen all the time, everywhere.

[DPDarkPrimus]

I've always loved how YEC point to the fact that many disseparate cultures have a "flood" story as proof of Noah's flood.... ignoring the fact that floods happen all the time, everywhere.

Considering all primitive cultures HAVE to be based by a water source, it's no wonder they all have flood stories.

The "answer" given by the Christian doesn't even address the points raised, but it does raise new questions. For example: Why isn't there any evidence that the tectonic plates shifted so suddenly as claimed, and why aren't they continuing to drift at such a fast rate?

[Darth Wong]

Fundies always point to rapid-deforming tectonic plates as an explanation, never thinking to consider what kind of gigantic tidal waves this would produce, or how Noah's boat would survive them. What the hell kind of explanation is "oh, well, the tectonic plates underwent the equivalent of billions of years of present-day movement compressed into a few months" without any consideration of the enormous energies which would be released by such rapid movement?

[Zero]

Fundies always point to rapid-deforming tectonic plates as an explanation, never thinking to consider what kind of gigantic tidal waves this would produce, or how Noah's boat would survive them. What the hell kind of explanation is "oh, well, the tectonic plates underwent the equivalent of billions of years of present-day movement compressed into a few months" without any consideration of the enormous energies which would be released by such rapid movement?

I thought tidal waves could actually pass under ships far enough out to sea without much effect, and were primarily felt when the wave came closer to land? I may be wrong, but that's what I've heard...

[Utsanomiko]

Fundies always point to rapid-deforming tectonic plates as an explanation, never thinking to consider what kind of gigantic tidal waves this would produce, or how Noah's boat would survive them. What the hell kind of explanation is "oh, well, the tectonic plates underwent the equivalent of billions of years of present-day movement compressed into a few months" without any consideration of the enormous energies which would be released by such rapid movement?

One aspect about YEC ideas that cracks me up are the ones that esentially claim the same events science has discovered also happened- just over a much quicker & chaotic period of time. Billions of years of stars did actually form and die and reform, but just over a few millenia; millions of years of plate tectonics, landscape forming and erosion ocurring in the centuries after the flood; the Ark only holding a few hundred baseline animals, which then speciated over mere generations; thousands of years of dependant and independant language development all done while building a God-intimidating tower; etc, etc.

Why even bother? If you have to pick up all your opponent's premises and hold them together with the most convulted and absurd parts of your beliefs just to stick with your dumb conclusion, you might as well give up and conceed.

It's like saying "Ok, maybe those 5,000 miles *were* added to your car while I was in posession of it, and not added by a gremlin right after I gave it back... But what if a gremlin added them *while* I had it, like while I was *sleeping*?"

[Mange]

It's strange that the various cultures in Mesoamerica, Europe etc. survived this flood that supposedly was designed to kill off all the living things on Earth. Never mind how poor Noah was able to cope with all those animals, he must have had a hard time cleaning the floor of the Ark, feeding the animals (how was fodder for the animals provided? The Ark was only 150 meters long, 25 meters wide and 15 meters high, not much room left for storage. And how was the predators fed? How was Noah's family fed?) and he must've had some really big aquariums in the ark, as the fish and the mammals in the sea couldn't have survived due to the change in salinity (good luck bringing two blue whales on board). And of course, there must have been an awful lot of insects buzzing about...

Seriously, I can't understand that adults to this day still believes in this fairy tale. Last year, there was some excitement and the news sites wrote about it when another expedition was to take samples of a formation. I don't remember hearing much when it turned out, to no surprise, that the samples was volcanic in origin.

Flood stories aren't surprising, as the early civilizations was dependent on rivers and seas, but not all the early civilizations had such myths. The Egyptians sang praises to the Nile which, in contrast to Euphrat and Tigris, was tame.

[Darth Wong]

I always enjoy pointing out the curiosity of Egyptian culture and pyramid construction techniques being the same both before and after the Flood supposedly occurred; rather curious if their entire civilization was destroyed and then rebuilt by Noah's descendants. But then they always give me that "that's an interesting argument; I will ask my pastor and then get back to you" delay tactic. After which I never hear about it again, of course.

[Sea Skimmer]

I thought tidal waves could actually pass under ships far enough out to sea without much effect, and were primarily felt when the wave came closer to land? I may be wrong, but that's what I've heard...

They can, its when the wave enters shallow water that it becomes visually huge. A 10-foot high tidal wave in the deep ocean could be 100 feet high when it reaches the shore. However, the amount of water that would be required to cover the earth would require wave so huge that even in deep water they'd tear apart modern steel hulled ships.

[Zero]

They can, its when the wave enters shallow water that it becomes visually huge. A 10-foot high tidal wave in the deep ocean could be 100 feet high when it reaches the shore. However, the amount of water that would be required to cover the earth would require wave so huge that even in deep water they'd tear apart modern steel hulled ships.

Thank you for explaining. Of course, this won't explain anything to fundie fucktars, because whenever there's a scientific inconsistancy, they cry 'miracle.'

[The Dark]

This is all excerpted from a paper I wrote for a course on the discourse between science and religion:

Creationism has attempted to argue in favor of the Flood story of Genesis literally occurring. The most thorough examination of what would be necessary was done by J. C. Whitcomb and H. M. Morris. Their basic tenets include a vapor shell surrounding the Earth (in order to maintain the separation of “the waters above” from “the waters below”) and large amounts of water stored beneath the soil. These waters would have been released simultaneously or nearly so, creating a flood that was higher than all land, including mountains. In order to account for Earth’s fossil fuels, they include high levels of water erosion, with corresponding deep burial of organic materials. This also accounts for the fossil records in their theory. The Ark is used to rescue certain people and animals, which become the ancestors of all modern lineages.

The first scientific dilemma arises when one considers the necessary volume of water to create such a flood. The current total of water on Earth is estimated at 326 million cubic miles. In order to cover the entire Earth to a depth deep enough to cover Mount Everest would require an extra 1085 million cubic miles of water over and above currently existing levels. Even if it is accepted that those extra billion cubic miles of water existed at a point roughly 5000 years ago, how is it that Earth’s hydrosphere has shrunk to 20% of that size in five millenia?

Another problem arises from the rapid speciation required of this theory. Creationism attempts to work its way around evolution by speaking of animals being created in “kinds.” Unfortunately, “kind” is one of those poorly defined words that seems to shift whenever a Creationist eeds it to mean something in particular. In different arguments, it has referred to species, to genus, to any organisms that are interfertile, or even to non-interfertile creatures with similar morphology. Duane Gish in particular makes things confusing when he speaks of “fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals” as “different basic kinds,” then speaks of “dogs, cats, lemurs, monkeys, apes, and man” also as “different basic kinds,” and finally “[a]mong the apes, the gibbons, orangutans, chimpanzees, and gorillas” are each “a different basic kind.” Until the Creationists establish exactly what a “kind” is, the term is meaningless in serious scientific discussion. However, it can be said that the idea of “kinds” does not mesh with our genetic knowledge, as even creatures of the same genus can often not interbreed with success. The mule, while a hybrid, is itself infertile and thus a “failure” as a hybrid. Likewise, certain fruit flies produce sterile hybrids, and some cannot produce hyrbids at all.

This is problematic because the sotry of the Ark establishes that all creatures were placed on a boat roughly 450 feet long. This is a very small boat to carry multiples of every creature (whether a single pair or seven pair, depending on the variation within the story) and the necessary food for the creatures. Some Creationists argue that only pairs of each “kind” were necessary, as they would be able to recreate the differences and developed within their “kind” to create the various types seen today. For example, two cats would reproduce to form every type of feline known today. This would be remarkable speciation for a mere 5000 years, and would lead one to question why such development doesn’t seem to occur today. Such rapid mutation does not seem to occur…housecats very rarely give birth to tigers.

Theologically, Creationism relies on a very narrow interpretation of the Bible. This is contrary to theological tradition dating back to Irenaeus. While this early church leader did believe in non-allegorical interpretation of eschatological writings, the law and prophets “contain many parables and allegories that can frequently be drawn into various senses, according to the kind of exegesis to which they are subjected.” This sort of interpretation is a vital and necessary part of Biblical scholarship, and is an area in which Creationism falls flat and fails to be consistent with traditional Christian doctrine. One must wonder if the Creationists really do believe the Kingdom of God is as a mustard seed.

I can provide references for all quotes, but they're a pain in the ass to get from a document to a post. I recommend finding Lee Tiffin's book Creationism's Upside-Down Pyramid, as it's a wonderful analysis of their arguments, and the inspiration for a good portion of what I wrote in the essay.

[Darth Servo]

I thought tidal waves could actually pass under ships far enough out to sea without much effect, and were primarily felt when the wave came closer to land? I may be wrong, but that's what I've heard...

The problem with that is why would Noah's boat be out in the middle of the ocean? It was supposedly build on land and landed on top of Mount Ararat

[wolveraptor]

Another as-of-yet unmentioned problem is that of the botanical kingdom. Noah couldn't store several entire greenhouses of tropical, temperate, and even semi-polar climates, and fit them all on a freaking wooden boat.

And of course, he'd somehow magically seed the planet, with magic bean seeds, so that they grew within a timeframe of days, so that herbivores wouldn't starve. One wonders how he grew the rainforests of Brazil?

[Ford Prefect]

Well, Noah was what, like nine hundred years old when he died?

[Striderteen]

It is worth noting that the idea of a global, planet-covering flood is inconsistent with the Bible itself.

The Bible states that God sent wind to make the floodwaters subside, which is fundamentally incompatible with a planetwide flood -- wind would speed up evaporation of a local-scale flood back into the clouds, but to clear up a planetary flood with wind you'd have to be talking gales so strong that they blew all the excess water off into space. Which is clearly absurd.

[Striderteen]

I thought tidal waves could actually pass under ships far enough out to sea without much effect, and were primarily felt when the wave came closer to land? I may be wrong, but that's what I've heard...

The problem with that is why would Noah's boat be out in the middle of the ocean? It was supposedly build on land and landed on top of Mount Ararat

Actually, the Bible says it landed in the mountains of Ararat -- which could mean anywhere in a sizable mountain chain in southern Armenia between the Black and Caspian Seas.

[DPDarkPrimus]

It is worth noting that the idea of a global, planet-covering flood is inconsistent with the Bible itself.

The Bible states that God sent wind to make the floodwaters subside, which is fundamentally incompatible with a planetwide flood -- wind would speed up evaporation of a local-scale flood back into the clouds, but to clear up a planetary flood with wind you'd have to be talking gales so strong that they blew all the excess water off into space. Which is clearly absurd.

You haven't looked at a Bible lately, have you? There's an Ark-load of absurdism in there.

[wolveraptor]

Well, Noah was what, like nine hundred years old when he died?

That reminds me of another piece of shit: YECs say that due to flood-cloud related radiation, people no longer lived as long as they did before the flood. How clouds emit radiation is beyond me, and how it can have such a specific effect is too.

[mr friendly guy]

Well, Noah was what, like nine hundred years old when he died?

That reminds me of another piece of shit: YECs say that due to flood-cloud related radiation, people no longer lived as long as they did before the flood. How clouds emit radiation is beyond me, and how it can have such a specific effect is too.

Must be one of those technobabble radiation seen in Star Trek : Insurrection.

[Rye]

Well, Noah was what, like nine hundred years old when he died?

That reminds me of another piece of shit: YECs say that due to flood-cloud related radiation, people no longer lived as long as they did before the flood. How clouds emit radiation is beyond me, and how it can have such a specific effect is too.

Uh, aren't they saying that the "vapour canopy" is just absorbing radiation? The vapour canopy thing is so silly though, any significant amount of water above the atmosphere will fall down, since it's heavier than air.

My favourite flood contradiction is how Noah covered his Ark in pitch, though pitch was supposed to be formed when the fossil record/geological strata were laid down by the flood.

[zippy]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/canopy.html gives a great rebuttal to the flood. I always like the idea too that if Moses wrote Genesis as they claim, then Gilgamesh is going to slap the Mother of all plagarism charges on him

[Magnetic]

I attended a creation seminar years ago and (at that time) was amazed at the evidences they gave for a few facts surrounding length of life times, dinosaurs, how mountain ranges formed, and the like. I thought it was brilliant, . . . at the time. It went something like this:

The flood consisted of two sources.

Source #1
There were waters under the survace of the earth that were opened up, at the Oceanic Ridge, which accounts for why mountain ranges line up with that ridge.

With a piece of foam, the speaker showed how a mountain range could be pushed up as the waters came up out of the fissure. He took the flat piece of foam, put his hands at both ends, and drew his hands (and the foam) together and BINGO, the center part pushed up.

Source #2
There was a water canopy that encircled the earth, made of ice. Because of this ice, radiation from the sun wasn't able to penetrate it, and oxygen levels were higher, thus people and animals lived a lot longer than before. This also accounted for the dinosaurs. Being reptiles, as they aged, they would keep getting bigger and bigger, since reptiles continue growing in body size until they die, which accounts for the large bones that are called dinosaurs today. They died out because their nostril size, after the flood and the changed environment, was too small (since the oxygen level was lower now) for them to get enough oxygen. Hence is why today reptiles are only as big as they are, they don't life as long now.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yeah, at the time, I bought right in to it.