by VM44 3 Replies latest jw friends
I was reading some material concerning the Noachian Global Flood,
and the simple point was made concerning fresh water fish, they
would have quickly died in single water mass covering the entire
earth.
I think this in itself would indicate the Flood could not be global.
Did the Watchtower ever address this problem in their literature
(or for that mater, has anyone addressed this problem?)
--VM44
Yeah, in fact I addressed it. The global flood never happened. Remember Occam?
Francois
Where it is a duty to worship the Sun you can be sure that a study of the laws of heat is a crime.
i dont believe the WT has tried to address details like this. their stance seems to be that you're just being silly if you ask questions like this, nit-picking in details trying to find excuses not to believe. i think that's probably a pretty good stance since these arguments do tend to get pretty silly.
Creationists (not WT) have addressed this issue, saying that there could've been pockets of fresh-water and salt-water, moderate, warm and cold to suit all the different inhabitants of the sea. they do not need to provide a mechanism since god could do anything he liked. its at that point that the arguments do seem to get kind of silly.
i applaud the WT for avoiding these thorny issues - i think that's the best approach. they seem to be avoiding more and more. whereas they used to discuss frozen mammoths, water canopy, land bridges and so forth in previous publications, the most recent science-slanted publication, Creator, devotes 2 whole sentences to the flood, mentioning only the anthropological arguments, the strongest they have.
mox
Hi VM: Like some others, I developed an exhaustive post on the Flood, most of which was posted on H20. In that series, I discussed fresh water fish, and some additinal complications.
1. The minimum level to cover the tops of the highests mountains would have been about 30,000 feet deep if one uses Mt. Everest at 29,000+ feet. The intense water pressure near the ground's surface would have forced most sea-life species up closer to the water's surface, thus causing serious problems with the food supply, especially since the flood lasted for months.
2. Presuming that much of the rainfall and artesian wells would have been fresh water, this would have greatly diluted the oceans salt content, creating yet another problem for salt water species as well.
There are many other logistical problems associated with the notion of a global flood, but just the above alone shows the serious problems with the concept.
Fundamentalists and Apocalyptics will argue every problem away by either using plausibilities, or when out of ideas, will resort to God's magic hand to protect every problematic situation. But, in doing this they are also forced to admit that the geological evidence resulting from such a global flood 3,500 years ago would also have to be altered by God's magic hand to create new evidence that fools scientist today into believing that a global flood is not possible; thus making God a liar by use of deception.
These young-earth global-flood people could easily solve the problem by admiting that the flood was a local event, and move on. But they are stuck in the rut of trying to prove a claim that is not only unprovable, but that facts in evidence prove otherwise. - Amazing
