An attempt to let Flood supporters explain how things were created

Hi jar What if you believe there was a flood but you don't believe the flood did it.God Bless,

Hi Tangle What would you expect it to leave behind?
There was only one body of dry land with no known elevation above sea level.The water rises and falls up to 53 feet every 12 hours in parts of the Bay of Fundy.It hadn't washed it away yet.If the land mass was all in one place and was relativity flat and you had that kind of rise of water the land mass would be covered in just a few hours. The tide would not go out the water would just rise until it reached 15 cubits above the highest point on the land mass. The water had 40 days to rise on the land. That would mean it did not have to rise too fast. When it returned it could take its time as it had over 300 days.Then just over a hundred years later the earth was divided into the positions we observe today. So just what do you think you would find that looked like a world wide flood?God Bless,

Hi NoNukes My mentioning of the rise and fall of the water at the Bay of Fundy is for visual content only.The tide rises and falls and has been doing so for a very,very,very long time. It has not destroyed the landscape.I have personally viewed the rise and fall of the tide back in the 50's and it is a beautiful sight to behold.For the water to rise 53 feet in 6 hours it has to rise 8 feet and 10 inches per hour. Which is a little over 1 3/4 inches per minute. That means it rises 1 foot every 6.85 minutes.The exact opposite is required for the water to decrease 53 feet in 6 hours.My observation that I could not tell the difference in the landscape between before and after the rise and fall of the water, I concluded it did not do much damage due to the change in the depth of the water.The Bible says the water was all in one place which leads me to believe all the land was in one place. In fact science confirms for me that the land mass was a supercontinent in the past.My hypothesis then is:Providing that all the dry land mass was in one place and was relatively flat as was believed in the past. Water could have rose to cover that land mass and receded without leaving much of a trace. According to what happens twice daily at the Bay of Fundy. Then if the land mass was divided into the configuration we have today that division would have erased all evidence for such an event.
Yet we do have evidence that mountains as well as in valleys have been covered with water in the past. We know this because we find sea shells in and on the mountains and in the valleys.My conclusions are that in the past there was one land mass surrounded by water. That land mass was covered with water for a short period of time. That land mass was divided into the configuration we have today.I think science concurs with my notion.It is believed by some scientist that at one time 95% of the surface of the earth was covered with water leaving a small dry land mass. This dry land mass of 5% was increased to the present 30% dry land mass that we have today .https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/02/020208075438.htmGod Bless,