Describing what the Biblical Flood would be like.

Nonsense. You have no witness accounts for a super genome. You made that up. You have no witness accounts for the idea that there is missing landscape evidence. You made that up. You do have a Biblical testimony that an olive leaf is available, but as for how that happened you don't have any witness as to how that occurred. You made your explanation up.In one post you tell us that there is no explanation for the sorting of fossils. In another you tell us you have a working model for the flood. One of those statements is obviously false. I think Jar has properly guessed that neither of those things is true. In one post you tell us that there is no way to obtain information regarding the unwitnessed past. Yet you devote an entire thread to telling us how you can use that same evidence to rule out a scientific explanation. Quite obviously one at least one, and almost certainly both of those statements are wrong. But not when you tell it.Perhaps you've simply blundered into the wrong forum?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Do you understand how tides work? Is this really a plausible thought?

I'm not a seventh day adventist and I have no idea what E G White wrote about the Flood, absolutely none, so if I'm saying anything like what she said it didn't come from her and in fact most of it came out of my own head and not from anybody that I know of.As for salty water, rain is not salty. In fact I just happened to see a film based on a true story about four guys stranded in an overturned trimaran on the ocean. After they ran out of water they came up with a system of diverting rainwater along the hull of the boat into a reservoir. Rainwater is obviously drinkable.

You are extremely talented at turning a reasonable statement into garbage. First I said "it's all a big fat piece of guess work" before I said that I have a witness account on my side. You go on to accuse me of having no witness account for the very things that are the GUESS WORK I was first talking about. You have a terrible time, just terrible, understanding a statement according to its own emphases. I don't know how you do it but you are amazingly consistent at it.No point in trying to answer your whole garbage heap. But I do NOT postulate a "super genome" -- increased heterozygosity is cdompletely within the normal range of things. PAY ATTENTION. THINK FOR A CHANGE. Stop garbling everything I say. As for your incomprehensible statement "the idea that there is missing landscape evidence" is just that, incomprehensible, probably the usual garbling of something I said that I can't even recognize from your phrase. Go ahead and deny it all. You never stop to think that maybe I'm right about this mangling of communication you do even though I've said it many times by now.

Hi NoNukes I think they are caused by the moon's gravitational effects on the water and the earth. At least that is what I was told.But what would that have to do with the water from the fountains of the deep that could open up and supply water where the tide would not recede.So why would it not be plausible?My point was that the water at the Bay of Fundy does not do a lot of damage even though it has a high tide every 12 hours and 25 minutes.There would be no force to tear up the earth as required by young earth creationistAccording to AIG there was enough mass on earth at the time of the flood to create the coal that is found. They forget about the trillions of tons of mass required to produce the 1 trillion barrels of oil we have used and the 3 trillion barrels still left, plus all that can not be retrieved. It takes 98 tons of mass to make 1 gallon of gas. A barrel of oil will produce 19 gallons of gas and 12 gallons of diesel. Then you have to get that mass under 5 miles of rock and earth under 22,000 psi pressure.I can't even get an answer out of the scientific community for the mechanism of the oil being where it is at.The Biblical flood just did not produce a mechanism to produce all the oil, natural gas, and coal in the earth and the formations seen in the rocks.God Bless,

No, it is not.

Hi Faith You don't have to be a seventh day Adventist to have the same crazy ideas Ellen G White had.There are many evangelicals and others that believe in a young earth.But do you want me to believe you sat around and come up with the garbage you have posted on this site about the flood all by yourself?I know one thing you did not get it out of the Bible because your flood and E G Whites's flood is not the one recorded in Genesis. Go back and read my post again. I said the water that comes down in the form of rain is water that was evaporated from the oceans as well as lakes and rivers. But the salt would be separated from the vapor.Now to what a Biblical flood would look like.There is enough water in the atmosphere to cover the earth as we know it today with 1 inch of water. When that water comes down in the form of rain more evaporated water has to be drawn up into the atmosphere to return to the earth in the form of rain. So you are only going to get 1 inch of water out of the atmosphere. The rest had to come from the springs (fountains) of the deep.There is no way the catastrophic flood required by YEC could have taken place and be the flood described in the Bible.Do I believe in a flood that covered all the land mass as recorded in Genesis? Yes I do.Since the Bible has the land mass in one place at the time (Genesis 1:9) of the flood there is no elevations of the earth given so we don't know how flat it was nor do we know the height above sea level. The land mass was not divided until the days of Peleg (Genesis 10:25) which was over a hundred years after the flood.Everybody here keeps saying the land mass was not covered in water in the past. But scientist say it was covered in water and some even say it was covered in ice at one time. Scientist also tell us that the earth has lost 25% of its water. The Earth has lost a quarter of its waterGod Bless,

What's required for salvation, Faith? Haven't we discussed this point a dozen times? You don't have to be endorse YEC to be a Christian. Beyond that, this is a discussion where evidence based discussion is the order of the day.

The sun and the moon's gravitational effect on the oceans as a whole accompanied by the rotation of the earth. ICANT, what you said was this: It's not feasible for the tide to come in and not go back out. Further the extreme rise of the tides at the Bay of Fundy is caused by the region's topology. The fountains of the deep are like the tides in what way? How would the effect get expanded to the rest of the world, where the tides are of a substantially smaller scale. What is the point of your comparison with the Bay of Fundy.

There is no witness account of the flood.

So you are saying humans were living some 175 million years ago?

I didn't say you had to endorse YEC, I wondered how a Christian can simply do away with actual Biblical text.

Didn't mean to impute salty rain to you, should have been clear I was adding my own information about that.To my mind the strata with their fossil contents are THE unimpeachable evidence of the Flood, for which no other explanation makes sense, certainly not millions of years of different time periods with completely different life forms.All the details are attempts to imagine the hows of the matter.Scripture DOES mention MOUNTAINS, though their height is a matter of speculation, and the splitting of the earth in the time of Peleg as a physical event is one interpretation held by some commentators but not others; some interpret it as a cultural splitting or some such. It's still a possibility in my mind but I think earlier timing right after the Flood makes more sense.You don't know and I don't know so you can drop your tone of certainty.I could not care less what Ellen G. White said about it.Yes the scientists come up with six sea transgressions to explain how obviously WET the strata had to have been. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

There is nothing that would challenge the structure of the genome in greater heterozygosity. Postulating a super genome with something like polyploidy would be an example of an abnormal solution to the problem, something that would change the structure of the genome.

And even capable washing away whole coral reefs and plunking them down, intact, so it appears that they were just buried where they grew.