Flooding Brings Up An Interesting Question

It’s been an incredible year for floods, in the United States alone there has been flooding going on across bottomland farms in the river’s upper valley in Illinois and Missouri. Also, record rains and major storms across the Midwest and South have added to the flow along with major snowmelt where predictions were being made of record stages at the Mississippi River which could end up to be as bad or worse than the historic 1937 floods.

All this flooding this year has brought up an interesting question, how big can these floods get? National Geographic takes on that question even bringing up Noah’s flood but only to cast doubt on it…

“The numbers are still provisional, but [the current flood’s peak water discharge] looks to be about the same” as the 1927 flood, said James O’Connor, a hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Still, the 1927 and 2011 Mississippi River floods remain just drops in the bucket compared to other known freshwater “megafloods” around the world, according to O’Connor.

“The scientist co-authored a 2004 USGS report that ranked all freshwater floods known to have occurred during the past two million years. The list, which remains largely unchanged since its release, includes only floods that had peak discharges of 3.5 million cubic feet (100,000 cubic meters) a second or more.”

Here is an intelligent scientist who works for taxpayers in America as a a hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey  where Ker Than writing for National Geographic eats up like it’s gospel, trying to suggest that Noah’s flood was a fictional story…

“Even though a real flood may have inspired the story, O’Connor thinks there’s a simple reason it couldn’t have been a days-long meteorological event like the one suggested by the Bible. “There’s just not that much water in the atmosphere,” he said.”

What’s wrong with this conclusion with this so-called expert opinion? Do you know? Do you really think this intelligent scientist knows what he is talking about? So-called man-made climate change has been suggested as an explanation of current major flooding, others say it’s too early to tell as snow in parts of Canada melted later than normal in addition to the stormy trend of spring. Again I ask, what is wrong with O’Connor’s explanation of Noah’s flood? Here is the answer…

Genesis 7:11 says…

“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.”

Do you see it yet? The major source of the water was not the atmosphere rather it was “all the fountains of the great deep.” Now there is speculation on what all entailed concerning the fountains of the great deep…The catastrophic plate tectonics model (linked here) for the flood is available for public reading, perhaps then he would have known what creationists believe as the major source of the water rather than coming up with his own idea…Here is another flood model explanation by Austin…

“In their catastrophic plate tectonics model for the flood, Austin et al. have proposed that at the onset of the flood, the ocean floor rapidly lifted up to 6,500 feet (2,000 meters) due to an increase in temperature as horizontal movement of the tectonic plates accelerated.[3] This would spill the seawater onto the land and cause massive flooding—perhaps what is aptly described as the breaking up of the “fountains of the great deep.”

There is evidence of rapid movements of huge volumns of water everywhere in the world (like here and here and more in the geology section) which confirms the global flood.

1) Increditable plutons around Lake Tana in Ethiopia, that appear to have been formed in the earth and exposed by erosion. 

2) The dramatic geology of the US Southwest and similar features in Ethiopia that are best explained by lots of fast moving water over a short period of time. 

3) Washington’s channeled scabland and Columbia River benches.

4) Similar braided waterways in Kergezstan (sp?) for miles southwest of Biskek.

5) Enormous rocks which had been moved 3,000 miles across whole continents.

6) Worldwide layers of sediment being housed in the fossil record and why we find animal fossils in strange places where they normally didn’t dwell.

Perhaps O’Connor was trying to build up a strawman which is easy to knock down than the actual viewpoint itself instead of addressing actual viewpoints. Perhaps Ker Than writer for Natural Geographic should have done his homework as well instead of allowing his bias to alter the actual event!

About these ads

9 thoughts on “Flooding Brings Up An Interesting Question

  1. . . . . . Flooding Brings Up an Often Regurgitated Question

    Michael again cherry-picks data, then misinterprets it to arrive at his position. Unfortunately for him, science requires considering all the data, not merely that which is favorable to one’s own pet theory. The purpose of peer-review and publication—which creations avoid—is to prevent scientists from omitting or minimizing contrary data.

    Michael invokes earlier posts as “evidence” for a world-wide flood. However, their only content consists of claims that certain effects “may be consistent with” such a flood. And even most of those have been debunked many times from many different sources for a number of reasons.[1]

    When you come right down to it, the fact remains that a Noachian flood would require 80 times as much water as the total amount present in the oceans and in the atmosphere. Both this post and a previous one fantasized that mysterious “fountains of the deep” opened to supply the necessary water. This again collides with a rat5her obvious fact: The interior of the Earth, the only source for this water, is so hot that liquid water cannot exist there.[2] Then another question arises: After this flood, where did all the water go? Back to the fountains? If so, it has never been detected.

    Every excuse for a Noachian flood quickly falls apart on the evidence. Or rather, on the absolute lack of any evidence whatsoever. Apparently creationists believe that if God can create the universe with a word, then they are entitled to create mere humungatons of water from nothing.

    Sorry, it still doesn’t work. All you’re accomplishing is providing hours of innocent merriment for those not as blinded as you.

    ===============

    []1 For example the claim in this post that “3) Weather rates increased dramatically” has not a single shred of evidence to support it.

    [2] Even at the depths of Alaska’s North Slope wells, oil comes out of the ground almost at the boiling point of water.

  2. Michael cites “catastrophic plate tectonics” to back himself up here. What he does not realize is that that theory actually contradicts the Bible in important implications. The heat that this would cause would be up to 10^28 joules…which is more than enough to boil away the oceans,…which begs the question how the water remained on the earth for about a year.

    God did it!!

    No, The Bible does not say that the Flood changed the earth. In fact, in Genesis 2, the Bible gives geography which included modern rivers… This is BEFORE the flood.. If the flood altered the earth’s surface, why is modern geography given in from a time BEFORE the flood?

    Answer me that, Michael.

  3. Excellent points, Kris. We have certainly seen in Japan the catastrophic effects of plate motions that are mere billionths the size of the ones that Michael proposes.

    For comparison, the Japan quake involved a movement of 100 feet over a fault segment 30-60 miles long, plus a much smaller motion over another 90 miles. The kind of tectonic restlessness contemplated by flood delusionists involves more than 1500 of miles of movement over faults that would total more than 13,000 miles.

    More than just the water would boil away into space. A large portion of the Earth’s crust would be vaporized—10^28 Joules, you say?

    Oh—I see. This is another effect of religious thermodynamics, where vaporization is subservient to revelation.

  4. Hey eyeonicr,

    You say, “all the fountains of the great deep.” -still not enough water…” Such nonsense! Even today, if you look at Earth from space, it looks like it’s in a global flood, there is plenty of water on earth to flood the entire planet. On a PBS show they talked about how mars has strata, much like the grand canyon on earth. Secular Scientists are quick to conclude, that was results of a global flood on that planet. Mars does contain numerous canals, wash gullies and canyons that appear to have been created by massive water flows. But this begs the question, so does Earth? So why on Mars and not on Earth? Well it’s mainly to sell the Mars mission and no biblical account of Mars having a global flood which is why scientists allow evidence on Mars to lead them to a global flood.

    The Grand Canyon on earth is an enormous area that looks strikingly like a large wash basin. It is 277 miles long, a mile deep, and varies in width between 10 to 18 miles wide. The amount of sediment removed from this area defies common logic, yet sparingly little of it is found at the exit point of the canyon. This is a clear indicator that the sediments were removed rapidly by a vast amount of water. The thick layers of sediment in the canyon bear the hallmarks of rapid deposition. With missing sediment, missing layers (in the evolutionary time from there is a gap of a billion years are missing in the layer), and missing fossil formation all pointing toward a rapid wash scenario, how are they able to maintain that this is a uniformitarian feature created over millions of years, while claiming there is not enough water where 2/3 of the planet is covered with water and then claim something similar on a freeze dried world like Mars is the result of a flood? The only way they can maintain any of that is through their storytelling which holds to a particular faith.

  5. There’s plenty enough water for the world to be waist deep as it is, but there isn’t very much more water around that could raise this the colossal amount necessary to cover “all the high mountains under the entire heavens” (Genesis 7:19)
    I wouldn’t say that the Mars strata and canyons is the result of a “global flood” – more that Mars once had surface water like earth (though not as much), and now it does not.
    When I was younger I used to play with water in a sandpit. Sometimes I used to flood it, and after I left the water drained away. I never came back to a grand canyon. But other times I would put just a small flow of water coming from a place far from the places where it drained. With just a small amount of water and a lot of patience, I got a canyon.
    It should be added that if you first laid down the sediment in the flood, and then immediately drained the water away, if you did get a canyon it’s sides would just slump in. Scenes like this would not be possible.

  6. You say, “all the fountains of the great deep.” -still not enough water…” Such nonsense! Even today, if you look at Earth from space, it looks like it’s in a global flood, there is plenty of water on earth to flood the entire planet.

    WOW! Talk about evidence—what more could we ask? “It looks like … there’s plenty of water to flood the entire planet.”!
    BWAHAHAHAHAAAAA

    Do the math, Michael. That’s all you have to do. Tiring, but the numbers are available: Radius of the Earth’s surface. Average depth of the oceans. Percentage of water vapor in the atmosphere.

    Oh, yes. Then there is this mysterious “fountains of the deep.” Where water cannot physically exist in liquid form. And has never been detected as steam.

    As they say in junior-high school, “Show your work, Buster.”

    “Looks like plenty” just doesn’t cut it, except in religious mathematics. But don’t try to use religious math when you balance your bank account. You won’t have a … prayer… when the bank imposes overdraft fees.

  7. I welcome you too eyeonicr. Here we have amazing adventures in the backwards tradgedy and comedy of Creationism. Sometimes it is a sad journey we tread here…sad when we are forced to repeat ourselves when Michael doesn’t bother much with even responding to much…

    So, with all that said, I hear-by welcome you to “The Dud.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s