The answer is about 3.95e9 km^3 of water.
And to get to this number I shaved about 850 feet off of Mt. Everest. To flood it today would take a lot more. This is about 100 times the amount of water in the polar icecaps and greenland, by the way. So even if you subtract out the volume of water trapped in the ice caps and greenland, we are still missing cube of water 900 miles high, wide and across.
Wonder where it went.
2007-01-26 17:40:22 · 16 answers · asked by mullah robertson 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Jarrett, are you saying there was no ater in the atmosphere before the flood? That would mean rainforests couldn't survive and THAT would mean post-flood evolution.
Oh no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-01-26 17:51:32 · update #1
treeman, I hope you are joking.
2007-01-26 17:55:07 · update #2
Mullah, you are very attractive when you are shaving feet off of Mt. Everest. ;-)
Answer: I don't know *where* that water went!
2007-01-26 17:51:41 · answer #1 · answered by MyPreshus 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible only says a wind began blowing and the water began disappearing. Perhaps there is some sort of phenomenon that could happen which would make for this to be possible. I don't believe the whole Earth flooded.
Read up on the electric universe theory. There are a lot of interesting possibilities which will arise when you begin to understand the true nature of gravity, the planets and the stars,
http://www.thunderbolts.info
2007-01-27 02:02:48 · answer #2 · answered by Atlas 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Today it would take more water because during the deluge of Noah's time the topography of the earth was different. The billions of tons of water created basins which are oceans to us and would of eventually pushed land up so the earth has a higher areas for land and deeper areas of water.
2007-01-27 01:48:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's if you put the entire world under water. But if the polar icecaps were to completely melt, you'd have lands with low altitude being completely flooded, displacing and/or killing millions.
2007-01-27 01:44:41 · answer #4 · answered by LaissezFaire 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I've got it! You see Noah brought two of each species onto the arch. Are you with me so far? Ok, that means he brought sea sponges on board too right. So if he brought sponges he must have squeezed out the water before he brought them on the boat.
There, that's were the water came from.
2007-01-27 01:51:36 · answer #5 · answered by Author Unknown 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ok...lets say you're right...900 square miles of land is still showing. Broken up in small islands. I would still say the world was pretty much flooded., wouldn't you? 900 total miles of land showing on the earth is nothing.
2007-01-27 01:48:57 · answer #6 · answered by Cloud 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are under water caves that have not been discovered yet, because the fountains of the deep burst forth with water and filled back up again.
2007-01-27 01:47:32 · answer #7 · answered by rapturefuture 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You also have to consider that the Arctic icecap, which is floating, would not change the ocean level if it melted
2007-01-27 01:45:17 · answer #8 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the flood might have been local, but the entire earth to Noah and his family. Remember that the bible isn't a science book, but a book about god.
2007-01-27 01:43:37 · answer #9 · answered by IKB 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
You're assumming the mountains were the same height back then as they are today. The earth was much more flat. See article
http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/theological-dictionary/TD4W1003.pdf
2007-01-27 02:06:15 · answer #10 · answered by upsman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋