Originally Posted by music is my soul
accually there is evidence that a large flood accured in the east.
The Flood would have no purpose unless it flooded the entire earth to the mountain tops, but there is not enough water on earth to flood every continent to the top of the highest mountains. Forty days of the heaviest rain imaginable would scarecely make a difference and, in any case, rain comes from the sea and would quicky drain back into the sea.
The Bible vaguely mentions water from the deep - under the earth - but there never was any such water. In any case it would have to defy the laws of gravity to reach the surface, and to stay there for a whole year.
The Bible says that Noah lived for a further 350 years after the Flood. Having personally talked to God, been rescued from the greatest disaster in human history, and being the direct ancestor of every living person, it is inconceivable that no written record exists of the subsequent life of this great man. No one sought Noah's advice, and even the worship of the God who had saved Noah had totally disappeared by the time of Abraham, who knew nothing of his supposedly still-living ancestor.
The total volume of water on Earth is about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers
Volume of a sphere = 4/3 r3 where r=radius
Radius of Earth = 6,378.15 Kilometers
Height of Mt. Everest = 8.85 Kilometers
The volume of water needed to cover Earth to the height of Mt. Everest is approximately the difference in volume of a sphere needed to encompass Mt. Everest and the volume of a sphere the size of the Earth.
Volume of a sphere encompassing the Earth at sea level
= 4/3 (6,378.15 KM)3 = 1,086,825,918,019 KM3
Volume of a sphere encompassing Mt. Everest
= 4/3 (6,378.15 + 8.85 KM)3 = 1,091,388,460,971 KM3
The Difference = 4,530,488,766 KM3
Notice that this is more than 3 TIMES the amount of water presently on Earth.
How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?
Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?
How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10 ky) climatic conditions.
Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?
Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time.