Is there an explanation for the seeming impossibility of the flood story?

Question

Ignoring all the ark and animal logistics...
How could there have literally been a world wide flood that covered everything? I recently saw a Discovery Channel presentation in which a climatologist stated that there is simply not enough water in the atmosphere, the glaciers, the oceans, or the underground systems to flood the earth as claimed in the bible. Plus, if the world were covered in water and it was raining globally for 40 days; then the atmosphere wouldn't be breathable.

Even if you don't believe the above assertions there is one glaring fact: Plants provide our oxygen. If they were all under water, then how did Noah's family and the animals breathe?

Is there an explanation for all this that I've missed somewhere, or is it explained by just saying god performed a miracle. Because if the miracle thing is the only answer, then isn't that basically putting words in the bible's mouth? That doesn't sound like a very sound tactic for defense of biblical literalism.

Please forgive the lack of concrete sources... I couldn't find the name of the presentation or the persons interviewed. But I swear I saw it :)

I appreciate (and agree with) all the answers so far. I especially like the essay link from acid zebra, I've actually been looking for something like that.

I just wish there were more biblical literalists around to try to answer. I've always been curious as to how they explain the glaring impossiblities in the story.

Answer 1

where the water went from and ended up is a bit of a glaring oversight (people don't really have a good conception of the sheer volume of water needed to flood the entire planet to a level higher than the highest mountaintops).

Also, the dimensions of the ark as mentioned (in cubits) somewhere in the bible could not possibly house all these animals plus all the food for the long voyage. Plus boatbuilding skills were FAR below the level needed for such a massive project.

This is a very decent essay completely demolishing the Noah thing:
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/8619_issue_11_volume_4_number_1__3_12_2003.asp

Answer 2

Well, i really like this question because it made me think.

First off, I'm not sure about the whole "not having enough water thing" . .i know nothing about that but i think the guy was wrong about that. How would he know anyway?

What do you mean about the atmosphere not being breathable? I don't really get it? Is it because of your claim to plants not being there? Who said plants were not there? They could have been sticking out of the water. And no where in the Bible does it say that Noah did or didn't take plants on the boat. Plus, there is oxygen in our atmosphere and probably enough to sustain 2 of every animal for about a month (especially if all the plants weren't covered up until a few weeks into the flood).

As for putting "words in the Bible's mouth" isn't it pretty much a miracle happening? I mean come on think about it - the Earth flooded for 40 days and forty nights. .sounds like a miracle to me. . so we don't know what God did to sustain the life on Earth. It was a miracle - the whole thing. .the raining and sustaining life and everything else in between that we might not know about. That part is not putting words in the Bible's mouth and actually it is a strong defense of biblical lit.

Answer 3

It is possible that the earth looked quite different before the flood. Given the unequaled magnitude of this event it would not be unsurprising if the flood had a major impact on the earth (shifting of tectonic plates, mountain ranges, etc). Thus, if the oceans were not so deep, and the land not so elevated, it would be possible to cover all land.

Regarding the atmosphere... I do not see the reason this is a problem. If you assume normal atmospheric concentrations of oxygen at the beginning of such an event, you would then need to explain how that oxygen would be consumed.

The oxygen demand of sea animals would be much larger than that of those on the ark; however, you must also consider the sea "plants" which would continue to generate oxygen.

From Wikipedia,

"All algae have photosynthetic machinery ultimately derived from the cyanobacteria, and so produce oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis, unlike non-cyanobacterial photosynthetic bacteria. It is estimated that algae produce about 73 to 87 percent of the net global production of oxygen[1] - which is available to humans and other terrestrial animals for respiration."

So , it is possible that these algae could have sustained the atmospheric (and aquatic) concentrations for one year.

----

I'm undecided on the flood, but it's an interesting question to consider.

Answer 4

Deep in south america, across a rope bridge, lies a hidden society. They believe 'they' are the 'center of the world' and that their purpose in life is to do the ritual to make the sun come up each day. By the way, after the camera team and producers interviewed them and filmed them; they were escorted back across the rope bridge and it was cut from the natives side. They spoke to the foreigners to complain that 'we' are polluting the earth and to warn us to stop wasting the earth's resources.

Why did I talk about this you ask? Because 'every' isolated society (and a bunch that aren't) believes where they are: is the center of the earth ! IF you study any western history or geography you will see that the Meditterranean sea is a big sea. LOL...If you lived in Greece, Rome, Asia Minor or Israel: THAT is the entire world ! Who says the entire planet was covered in water !!!

But, if Im in a semi desert and a flood comes, by gawd....I tell you the truth...the whole world was covered in water !!

While Im on my soapbox: we are told that God did the flood because there was great evil and violence and 'giants' born of women who had (somehow) copulated with demons. And God wanted them destroyed. Now, because they were parasitic spirits, when their host drowned, they were let loose to 'hover/fly' elsewhere. I beilieve they then re inhabited the grungier people of the 'northern' part of the world and that is why those people....The people from the 'north' -- be they huns, goths, vandals, etc....were soooo blood thirsty and invaded the southern lands at will.

Food for thought??? I hope so.

Answer 5

Look. I'm going to say this AGAIN; Take away the factories. Take away the skyscrapers. Take away Oil Drills. Take away every major polluting body off the planet earth. NOW. understand that in the OLD WORLD, pollution was not as bad as today. Not even close. So, case in point, the environment would be different. More cleaner. More natural. (THIS IS A GLARING FACT)So it is plausible to say this event DID happen. Why? Because not only is this recorded in the Bible, but other religions as well. And Flood deposits have been found in those areas. Why is it archaeological discovery of the past does not stick out in the damn future? Now consider the WIND that moved the ark, which was floating, mind you, to the mountain top.

Answer 6

Yes, it did not happen. The earth has a finite amount of water. Even is all the glaciers, ice caps, etc were to melt, there is not enough water on this planet to reach the summit of Everest. Could there have been a localized flood. Of course, they happen all the time. Could it have rained for forty days straight? Yes, but again, only locally. I lived in Okinawa for 2 years. There were times when it rained almost straight for weeks at a time.

The only thing I can explain of your questions is the oxygen one. The majority of the world's oxygen is produced by the blue-green algae in the ocean. So, that could explain one little part of the otherwise impossible myth.

Answer 7

I comprehend that as quickly because it involves the flood, a lot of human beings supply an in-intensity attention of what are often stated as impossibilities. yet what's somewhat being stated right here? The objection looks that "it is impossible using fact it could have taken a miracle." In different words, God is being disregarded of the equation. If we examine that God brought about a international deluge, then, of necessity, dazzling activities could be in touch. needless to say if God introduced animals aboard the Ark so as to maintain their variety for duplicate, he could proceed to maintain them alive on the Ark. Is it sensible to indicate that the God who introduced the deluge, the God who introduced the animals aboard for upkeep ought to no longer thereafter shield their lives whilst they have been on the Ark? it somewhat is nonsensical. besides, even scientists are very careful approximately employing the term impossible. What grow to be as quickly as theory impossible fifty years in the past is now very plenty a fact. using fact we don't comprehend each and every part of a definite experience does no longer recommend it fairly is impossible. Scientists nevertheless do no longer yet totally comprehend how our brains perform or how memory operates. yet they do no longer deny that the human techniques does some dazzling issues. and that they do no longer deny that memory is a fact. using fact we can possibly no longer comprehend each and each part of the shape standard using fact the deluge does no longer recommend it did no longer take place. a great deal of it fairly is defined, specific. yet some info are no longer. Hannah J Paul

Answer 8

To add to this:

How did fit 30 million + species on board,
+ feed & water 30,000,000 or so every day,
+ clean up their stinky poo & piss water,
+ keep ardvarks (who only eat ants) alive with just 2 ants,
+ keep woodpeckers, beavers, termites, & woodworms from eating through the ark,
+ all the freshwater species should of died when the salty oceans combined & mixed with them?,
+ find food to eat afterward (Shouldn't all have drowned?),
+ how to live when temp can plummet over 40 degrees at night, not to mention 40 of them where they sun doesn't shine,
+ oh well, you get the picture!

Answer 9

Noah sounds like a relatively smart elder of a tribe noticed that the rainy season was getting longer and the glaciers were melting faster and said, "Hey, I think we should move to higher ground or build boats for our stuff." The story apears in a cople of mythological structures of that area, my assumption is that it is a legend from the stone age that carried over.

Answer 10

Some bronze age sheep herders got a hold of the Epic of Gilgamesh. They liked the flood story so much that they used it as the basis for their flood story. Think of the Epic of Gilgamesh as a H1 and Noah's ark as a pimped out H2.