The Far East (Religion)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Thursday, September 16, 2010, 12:40 (5180 days ago) @ David Turell

Mt Everest is 8,848m above sea level. For every 67m of sea level rise, we need 24M (M = million) water. 8848/67= 132. So to cover Mt. Everest, we need 24*132= 3169 million or 3.169 BILLION km^3 more water. If you see the above statement, we estimate the volume of the ocean at 1.37Bn. So, we need about 2.2 times more water than currently exists. -
Apparently both of you missed the last two paragraphs of the article ..-
"It is possible that the underground floodgates may have broken down in prehistoric times. Consequently, millions of tons of hot salt water and vapor began to burst forth. The sea level around the globe went up dramatically. The water vapor condensed and fell down hard. The rain lasted for 40 days. All the above resulted in an event that was later described as the Flood. Eventually, the water was sucked back into the depths of the planet.-The findings released by the American researchers indicate that a catastrophic event may happen again, at least from a theoretical point of view. Prof. Wysession stresses the point that the areas located beneath the underground oceans have water too. He specifically refers to the parts of the mantle that have not been researched yet. Prof. Wysession believes there is plenty of water out there. According to his estimates, the amount of water may be five times as greater as that of all the oceans on the earth's surface."-
1.37Bn Km^3 x 5 = 6.85Bn Km^3 (estimated) which is more than double the estimated 3.169Bn Km^3 that would be needed. Even if his estimates are over by 200% that would still leave 3.425Bn Km^3, which is still more than the 3.169Bn needed according to your calculations. Additionally, the method described is consistent with your statement about the delivery method. I.E. Water temperatures reached the point where they are ejected as water vapor. That under the ocean would condense almost immediately and become part of the ocean, that released into atmosphere would cool as it gained altitude until it condensed and came down as precipitation. As a third note, all of our estimates for prehistoric catastrophes are based off our current MSL(mean sea level) and our current landmass. In truth, we have no clue as to what the actual MSL and landmass was even 5000 years ago, much less 10 or 15 thousand years ago. It is all a guess. -If you are wondering about my qualifications in discussing this matter, I work in applied Geophysics and Marine Geology.-
As for the animals, again, you are basing your statement off of current species count. We KNOW from the fossil records that there was a massive die off and reduction of the number of species around the same time frame as the purported flood. What we don't know is how many species survived the mass extinction, nor what common ancestors exist for each family. In order to know that, we would need to sequence the DNA for ever species of mammal on the planet and trace them back to a common ancestor. This project would take a few decades at least. -I will say it again(I think it was on here that I said it before), I am not so much interested in whether there was a Noah, or if he stacked 2-7 of each kind (Family) of animal on a big wooden boat. What I am interested in is, how did the authors of the book, some few thousand years ago, know that there was water deep in the planet, and know how to accurately describe what it would take in order for a flood of that proportion. They have the general idea right, even if they didn't add in a bunch of scientific calculations to appease modern skeptics.