We don't talk about rain, but we do talk about water, as follows.
Genesis 1:6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. vs.7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
So, now the bottom-waters part is concentrated together--the seas and oceans form--to allow the ground to appear. Apparently, the ground rises; the water goes down.
Now look at all this water from the mist--like a green house effect with self-watering.
Genesis 2:6. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
If there was rain at the time, I would think that it would have been mentioned.
Now about the lights--the water above the firmament apparently became thinner as it could have expanded out in circumference around the earth--as follows:
Ge. 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
So, one was able to have light, day and night; stars, and water.
What should be evident is that the exact geotechnical atmospheric dynamics arrangement at that time between water and light is not discernable.
Further, in a self-watering bowl of plants, there can be light and water; and to an extent things will grow without external watering.
Also, although God "set" the rainbow as a symbol. This does not mean there was never a rainbow before then. Whether before then, then, or now; the point is that rainbows seen thereafter are a reminder to both God and man.
....I will look at it to remind me of the lasting compact between with you and every living creature whatsoever upon earth.
Actually, your approach to the subject is a non-sense way to prove anything at all about the rainbow before the flood. Scientific analyses is fun, along with conjecture and speculation about the matter; but for you to speak with absoluteness based upon undiscernable knowledge of earth, heaven, & water conditions at that time is hardly a rational means to disprove the Bible. All I have said here is that you cannot go beyond your own fantasy and fanciful nonsense-thinking about the matter.
It is most difficult to disproved Christian faith, when the knowledge that develops the faith is not always provable, and it is not necessary that it be provable to the believer or the unbeliver.
In your anti-God arguments, why contend with the Holy Spirit that (1)gives faith to Christians, and (2)considers you of no consequence in contending with God.
