Where did all the Flood water go?

Perhaps the Earth was at one time smaller than it is now and the current amount of water would have easily flooded the entire globe. Once the Earth expanded there was a larger surface area for the water to receded into. This is just a theory of course but not a complete crack-pot theory.



Of course where did the extra mass come from in order for the Earth to expand? While most scientist today think this theory is unfounded it can't be entirely dismissed.

en.wikipedia.org...

The expanding Earth theory has been debunked countless times.

hey, if god can create the whole universe, whats a few trillion gallons of water really ?

the part of the story that makes me lol is the animals part. noah really had 2 of every south american insect ? asian bird ? north american reptile, ? galapagos amphibian ? hawaiian freshwater fish ? australian snake ?

and hey, if the earth was re-populated from noahs family......we are all off spring of incest !!!!

ewwwww !!!!!!

Reply to post by SG-17

So was the round earth theory, back in the day.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by dbates


Real science relies on observation and peer review confirmation. Pseudo science cherry-picks information to support a pre-defined conclusion.
Neal Adams videos on you tube had an agenda and when presented to his peers, he was uniformly panned.How dare these robot science geeks who demand to see data like "math" and "evidence" and other science.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

So was the round earth theory, back in the day.

Straw man we are no longer back in the day.

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

So was the round earth theory, back in the day.

Straw man we are no longer back in the day.

Not a strawman. It is fact.

The point is that just because consensus, peer review, and the evidence that is current do not agree with the theory, does not mean the theory is debunked an inadmissible.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

So was the round earth theory, back in the day.

Straw man we are no longer back in the day.

Not a strawman. It is fact.

The point is that just because consensus, peer review, and the evidence that is current do not agree with the theory, does not mean the theory is debunked an inadmissible.

Yes it does actually. This isn't 14th century theology, this is 21st century science.

Originally posted by SG-17

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

So was the round earth theory, back in the day.

Straw man we are no longer back in the day.

Not a strawman. It is fact.

The point is that just because consensus, peer review, and the evidence that is current do not agree with the theory, does not mean the theory is debunked an inadmissible.

Yes it does actually. This isn't 14th century theology, this is 21st century science.

Oh, so that makes science immune, because we are now in the 21st century.


Perhaps you should research what science has gotten wrong in modern times. Science, even today, is not infallible, as much as you all want it to be.

Originally posted by SG-17
This isn't 14th century theology, this is 21st century science.

And the expanding Earth isn't a 14th century discussion.

Authors: Scalera, G.*
Title: The expanding Earth: a sound idea for the new millennium
Publisher: Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia - TU Berlin
Issue Date: 1-Mar-2003

www.earth-prints.org...

And this

Why expanding Earth?
Publisher INGV Publisher, 2003
Original from the University of California
Digitized Jun 15, 2009
Length 465 pages

books.google.com...

There are several more books cited as related discussions on the last link. So just saying this isn't a flat-earth discussion by cave men writing on walls.

Originally posted by Freelancer
For the record, my personal opinion regarding the evolution v creationism philosophy is quite blurred right now. While evolution 'sounds' logical, it doesnt quite sit right with me. Creationism does but I find it difficult to understand it having no religious faith other than that of science. A catch 22 I guess.

However, the point of this topic is quite simple this.. Where did all the flood water go?

I came across a page from the USGS site, called: How much water is there, on, in and above the Earth and must admit, was taken back by just how little water there actually is.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/04a49d4ca276.jpg[/atsimg]

As you know, the Earth is a watery place. But just how much water exists on, in, and above our planet? The picture to the left shows the size of a sphere that would contain all of Earth's water in comparison to the size of the Earth. You're probably thinking I missed a decimal point when running my calculator since surely all the water on, in, and above the Earth would fill a ball a lot larger than that "tiny" blue sphere sitting on the United States, reaching from about Salt Lake City, Utah to Topeka, Kansas. But, no, this diagram is indeed correct.

About 70 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered, and the oceans hold about 96.5 percent of all Earth's water. But water also exists in the air as water vapor, in rivers and lakes, in icecaps and glaciers, in the ground as soil moisture and aquifers, and even in you and your dog. Still, all that water would fit into that tiny ball. The ball is actually much larger than it looks like on your computer monitor or printed page because we're talking about volume, a 3-dimensional shape, but trying to show it on a flat, 2-dimensional screen or piece of paper. That tiny water bubble has a diameter of about 860 miles, meaning the height (towards your vision) would be 860 miles high, too! That is a lot of water.

Source

Now assuming this data is more-or-less correct, where has all the flood water gone to?

GENESIS 7
11-In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12-And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
Notice, It says the water came from 2 sources; from above and below.

GENESIS 8
3-And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.So the water returned to where it came from.

reply to post by addygrace


You can't use the Bible as evidence.

- Water vapour in the air
- Icecaps
- Expanding earth theory (Perhaps the earth has grown in size so there is more mass to cover)
- Hollow earth theory
- God removed the water

I am not Christian, but believe there are too many possibilities available to rule out the bible being accurate. That does not mean it is accurate - it just means we have a long way to go before we rule it out.

Originally posted by byteshertz
- Water vapour in the air
- Icecaps
- Expanding earth theory (Perhaps the earth has grown in size so there is more mass to cover)
- Hollow earth theory
- God removed the water

I am not Christian, but believe there are too many possibilities available to rule out the bible being accurate. That does not mean it is accurate - it just means we have a long way to go before we rule it out.

We can rule it out because:
- There isn't enough water vapor to flood the Earth.
- There isn't enough ice to flood the Earth.
- Expanding Earth is physically impossible, matter cannot be created.
- The Earth would have to be completely hollow to have enough water to flood the Earth, which it isn't.
- Can't be proven scientifically, therefor is inadmissible.

Originally posted by SG-17

Originally posted by byteshertz
- Can't be proven scientifically, therefor is inadmissible.

It can not be proven scientifically that God is not real either, Science describes what we can measure but that is very little, we are limited by our senses, our perspective our brains - technology can only do so much to compensate.
Yes we know a lot of things that are within our 'reach'- but we have to be realistic that there are things way beyond us in everything we measure. In every direction there is always a mystery to be solved that multiplies the complexities... in the grand sheme of everything - we know nothing,

If we know nothing of the grand scheme who are we to say someone else is wrong, we state our reasons for belief, and see what the others person thinks of your view.
You ask for things to be proven "scientifically" - But science itself can only measure a sub-micro small portion of this universe, and is only just learning about multiverses that it can only theorise exist through advanced mathmatics and some new particle experiments.

Expand your mind and realise, that there can be a design or a system way beyond the one we currently see/measure - imagine you get dropped of in the ocean on earth, and you have never seen land before, your vision is your science, you see everything is ocean in every direction, so you say the planet must be all ocean. To someone that believes there is something else out there (whatever their reason) this dont mean a thing, because you yourself have your limitations. Science knows this very well, but people tend to forget it.

Originally posted by SG-17


. . .
We can rule it out because:
- There isn't enough water vapor to flood the Earth.
- There isn't enough ice to flood the Earth.

If the Earth was smaller, there would be.

- Expanding Earth is physically impossible, matter cannot be created.

No new matter would have to be created.

- The Earth would have to be completely hollow to have enough water to flood the Earth, which it isn't.

Not necessarily. Could be a vapor canopy, or even an incoming ball of ice from space.

- Can't be proven scientifically, therefor is inadmissible.

The Catholic Church of the 14th century is hiring.

Science is not infallible. Try again.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

The Earth cannot just grow without new matter being created. Less than 4% of the Earth's mass is from post-Theia extraterrestrial material. The planet would need to be under constant large scale bombardment to grow in mass to the terms that EErs claim.

Comets contain frozen water, yes, but it took millions upon millions of comets to give us our current oceans and any sufficiently large comet to bring enough water in at once to flood the Earth would also cause the entire surface of the Earth to be destroyed upon impact.

Any vapor canopy that is sufficiently voluminous enough to flood the Earth would block out a large percentage of sunlight and freeze the Earth.

You cannot argue scientifically with God because god is not scientifically verifiable or even plausible. To say that "God took the water away" is the same as saying that "Santa brings you presents on Christmas".

Science is a method, it is a changing, adapting tool.

Originally posted by byteshertz
- Water vapour in the air
- Icecaps
- Expanding earth theory (Perhaps the earth has grown in size so there is more mass to cover)
- Hollow earth theory
- God removed the water

I am not Christian, but believe there are too many possibilities available to rule out the bible being accurate. That does not mean it is accurate - it just means we have a long way to go before we rule it out.

We'd still find sedimental evidence of a global flood...and guess what, there is NONE!! Local floods, sure...global flood, complete and utter nonsense.

Instead of asking "how did the global flood happen?", people should ask "why is there ZERO evidence supporting the claim that there even was a global flood?".

reply to post by MrXYZ


Cultures around the world talk of a great flood, how is that no evidence?

reply to post by byteshertz

The end of the last Ice Age raised the global sea level by several feet (this is a lot). Many then-coastal settlements would have been flooded. Not to mention the Black Sea Deluge.