Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-25-2019, 01:24 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891

How heavy would it have to rain to flood the Earth in 40 days?


Cast your beliefs and disbeliefs to the side for the purpose of this thread, please. How much rain would have to fall in a forty day(and night) period to actually flood the Earth and cover the highest mountain 40 cubits(approximately 60 feet)?
  #2  
Old 05-25-2019, 01:52 AM
pmwgreen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 342
You want to fill the volume of a hollow spherical shell going from sea-level to the highest mountain, (less the volume already occupied by land). Is there an average height of the land above sea-level we could use to estimate the volume of land surface? And if the sun exploded at the same time, would the seas then boil at a lower temperature, being at a higher altitude?
  #3  
Old 05-25-2019, 01:55 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmwgreen View Post
You want to fill the volume of a hollow spherical shell going from sea-level to the highest mountain, (less the volume already occupied by land). Is there an average height of the land above sea-level we could use to estimate the volume of land surface? And if the sun exploded at the same time, would the seas then boil at a lower temperature, being at a higher altitude?
Let's leave the "sun exploding" bit for another thread, please?
  #4  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:10 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
A quick calculation gives the volume that has to be filled as
3.73217E+17 cubic feet.
But that doesn't help all that much as far as rainfall.
It is easier to see that each spot on the Earth would get 60 / 40 or a foot and a half of rain per day.
That's after the sewers back up, of course.
The real problem seems to be that calculating the energy of the rain after falling from the supposed water above the Earth would more or less melt everything.
Problem number 3 is where did the water go after the flood?
  #5  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:13 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
A quick calculation gives the volume that has to be filled as
3.73217E+17 cubic feet.
But that doesn't help all that much as far as rainfall.
It is easier to see that each spot on the Earth would get 60 / 40 or a foot and a half of rain per day.
That's after the sewers back up, of course.
The real problem seems to be that calculating the energy of the rain after falling from the supposed water above the Earth would more or less melt everything.
Problem number 3 is where did the water go after the flood?
Problems #2 and #3 are for another thread, please-I just want an answer to problem #1.
  #6  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:36 AM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Cast your beliefs and disbeliefs to the side for the purpose of this thread, please. How much rain would have to fall in a forty day(and night) period to actually flood the Earth and cover the highest mountain 40 cubits(approximately 60 feet)?
This is such an elementary math problem that I wonder if there is another purpose for the question.

Mt. Everest is 29,029 ft. Divide that by 40 days, 24 hours per day and 60 minute per hour. I get 6” of rain per minute.

A quick google search shows the record rainfall in one minute is 1.22”.
  #7  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:42 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
This is such an elementary math problem that I wonder if there is another purpose for the question.

Mt. Everest is 29,029 ft. Divide that by 40 days, 24 hours per day and 60 minute per hour. I get 6” of rain per minute.

A quick google search shows the record rainfall in one minute is 1.22”.
No ulterior motive-I just wanted an answer to the question I asked. Thank you.
  #8  
Old 05-25-2019, 05:27 AM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Problem number 3 is where did the water go after the flood?
It doesn't go anywhere, you have Waterworld. Some evaporates and eventually Everest becomes Dryland. And for awhile, you can climb the highest mountain on earth in like 10 minutes.
  #9  
Old 05-25-2019, 06:08 AM
kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 19,456
From this, it could have been a light sprinkle, as there was a second source of water, even a case for a 3rd source could be made:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gen 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
In Gen 1 God divided the water above and below, it appears that both were being used here, if not 3 sources (underworld, our world, and from the heavens). Gen 2:5 could be said to make rain that 3rd category of water as it was seperate from the division of waters below and above.

Last edited by kanicbird; 05-25-2019 at 06:11 AM.
  #10  
Old 05-25-2019, 06:16 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanicbird View Post
From this, it could have been a light sprinkle, as there was a second source of water, even a case for a 3rd source could be made:



In Gen 1 God divided the water above and below, it appears that both were being used here, if not 3 sources (underworld, our world, and from the heavens). Gen 2:5 could be said to make rain that 3rd category of water as it was seperate from the division of waters below and above.
Just interested in how hard it would have to rain in forty days to cover the highest mountains.
  #11  
Old 05-25-2019, 06:33 AM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,362
Slightly less than 362.5 inches per hour, everywhere on earth, non-stop, for the entire 40 days.

Last edited by TriPolar; 05-25-2019 at 06:34 AM.
  #12  
Old 05-25-2019, 06:36 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Slightly less than 362.5 inches per hour, everywhere on earth, non-stop, for the entire 40 days.
Is there space between the raindrops at that rate?
  #13  
Old 05-25-2019, 07:15 AM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Is there space between the raindrops at that rate?
Yes. It's only accumulating at 1/10 of an inch per second. That means a drop with a volume of 1/10 of a square inch has to hit the ground or water surface per second. If my math is correct (which is highly unlikely), assuming spherical drops, that's somewhere around a .31 inch diameter drop per second. Plenty of space in between them.
  #14  
Old 05-25-2019, 07:42 AM
panache45's Avatar
panache45 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NE Ohio (the 'burbs)
Posts: 42,900
And what the hell kind of clouds could supply the planet with that much rain?
  #15  
Old 05-25-2019, 07:57 AM
Si Amigo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 8 Mile
Posts: 4,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by panache45 View Post
And what the hell kind of clouds could supply the planet with that much rain?
Heavenly?
  #16  
Old 05-25-2019, 08:00 AM
am77494 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,583
That much water will definitely trigger earthquakes and effect the tectonic plates. Be ready for giant tsunamis.
  #17  
Old 05-25-2019, 08:37 AM
kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 19,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by am77494 View Post
That much water will definitely trigger earthquakes and effect the tectonic plates. Be ready for giant tsunamis.
Not to mention make the ark top-heavy.
  #18  
Old 05-25-2019, 08:55 AM
Francis Vaughan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 5,014
Given the entire planet is being rained upon (thus nowhere for air driven down by the falling dropplets to go), and the rain is falling from some height, I wonder what the air pressure increase we would see on the ground would be. There is a quite significant density of water droplets in the air, so I would imagine the pressure created could be reasonably significant.
  #19  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:08 AM
Arrogance Ex Machina's Avatar
Arrogance Ex Machina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lappeenranta, Finland
Posts: 1,562
Quote:
Originally Posted by am77494 View Post
That much water will definitely trigger earthquakes and effect the tectonic plates. Be ready for giant tsunamis.
Once there's no more beaches because of the flood the tsunamis won't do much. Probably the least of our worries at that point of course.
  #20  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:14 AM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Vaughan View Post
Given the entire planet is being rained upon (thus nowhere for air driven down by the falling dropplets to go), and the rain is falling from some height, I wonder what the air pressure increase we would see on the ground would be. There is a quite significant density of water droplets in the air, so I would imagine the pressure created could be reasonably significant.

13,000 PSI.
  #21  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:51 AM
Flyer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,273
There are several mistaken assumptions in the OP's question. One, as kanicbird pointed out, is ignoring other sources of water.

Another is ignoring changes in world-wide climate.

Yet another is assuming that the height of the highest mountain today is similar to what it was at the time in question.

It's easy to calculate what the answer would be in today's world. Whether that answer bears even a passing resemblance to the correct answer at the time that the earth was actually flooded is another matter entirely.
  #22  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:51 AM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,263
Ark Encounter LLC Files Lawsuit After Heavy Rains Damage Property

Quote:
(LEX 18) – The Ark may have been constructed to withstand 40 days and 40 nights of flooding, but Northern Kentucky’s Ark Encounter property did not fare as well as Noah’s original construction when rains hit the area.

Court documents filed in District Court show that the owners of the Ark Encounter in Northern Kentucky have filed a suit against their insurance company after flood and storm damage.
  #23  
Old 05-25-2019, 10:10 AM
RitterSport's Avatar
RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
There are several mistaken assumptions in the OP's question. One, as kanicbird pointed out, is ignoring other sources of water.

Another is ignoring changes in world-wide climate.

Yet another is assuming that the height of the highest mountain today is similar to what it was at the time in question.

It's easy to calculate what the answer would be in today's world. Whether that answer bears even a passing resemblance to the correct answer at the time that the earth was actually flooded is another matter entirely.
Anatomically modern homo sapiens have been around either 200,000 years or 6,000 years, depending on your sources, but either way, I don't think the earth has changed that much over that time frame. I don't it's very long geologically speaking.
  #24  
Old 05-25-2019, 10:24 AM
markn+ is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: unknown; Speed: exactly 0
Posts: 2,368
Yes, if you ignore everything we know about geology, it's possible to believe that all the earth's high mountains sprang up in the last few thousand years.

And if you ignore everything we know about physics, it's possible to believe that vast reservoirs of water under the earth suddenly emerged from the ground, leaving vast empty chasms that somehow disappeared, along with the water.

And if you ignore the first sentence of the OP, it's possible to believe that Flyer's response was relevant to this thread.
  #25  
Old 05-25-2019, 11:05 AM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 42,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by panache45 View Post
And what the hell kind of clouds could supply the planet with that much rain?
Magic clouds. No natural process could provide that. First of all, consider the solar energy needed to evaporate that much water. Once clouds form and blanket the Earth, the sun can no longer reach the ocean's surface to evaporate more. And of course, once the atmosphere reaches 100% humidity no more can evaporate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
Yet another is assuming that the height of the highest mountain today is similar to what it was at the time in question.

It's easy to calculate what the answer would be in today's world. Whether that answer bears even a passing resemblance to the correct answer at the time that the earth was actually flooded is another matter entirely.
According to all geological evidence, the last time the surface of Earth was almost entirely under water was about 2.5 billion years ago. But that wouldn't be particularly catastrophic, since all life at the time was aquatic and consisted mostly of bacteria.
  #26  
Old 05-25-2019, 11:42 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Yes. It's only accumulating at 1/10 of an inch per second. That means a drop with a volume of 1/10 of a square inch has to hit the ground or water surface per second. If my math is correct (which is highly unlikely), assuming spherical drops, that's somewhere around a .31 inch diameter drop per second. Plenty of space in between them.
Nitpick: 0.1 in2 is an area, not a volume.

Actually, I don't even need to be numerically specific. Any measurement expressed in square inches is an area and not a volume.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
There are several mistaken assumptions in the OP's question. One, as kanicbird pointed out, is ignoring other sources of water.

Another is ignoring changes in world-wide climate.

Yet another is assuming that the height of the highest mountain today is similar to what it was at the time in question.

It's easy to calculate what the answer would be in today's world. Whether that answer bears even a passing resemblance to the correct answer at the time that the earth was actually flooded is another matter entirely.
Ummm.

Do you believe that the planet was ACTUALLY flooded, or are you just being extra diligent about not fighting the hypothetical, here?
  #27  
Old 05-25-2019, 01:26 PM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Nitpick: 0.1 in2 is an area, not a volume.

Actually, I don't even need to be numerically specific. Any measurement expressed in square inches is an area and not a volume.
Yes, whatever the volume is, I meant cubic inches.
  #28  
Old 05-25-2019, 01:49 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Yes, whatever the volume is, I meant cubic inches.
Of course, volumes may have been measured in square inches at the time the earth actually flooded. There's just no way to know.
  #29  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:00 PM
ftg's Avatar
ftg is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Not the PNW :-(
Posts: 19,239
In terms of sticking with just one miracle, the rain, we can ignore the percentage added by water spewing forth from underground.

The water coming from below would have resulted in the ground above them sinking to replace the water (and magically leaving no sign of such collapses or where the underground water came from in the first place). This would have had very little to no affect on overall water level over the vast majority of the planet. Keep in mind that 71% of the planet is covered by water. Water coming from below that water does nothing at all as the seabed sinks to fill in. Ditto areas near coasts, etc. for the most part.

You'd have to theorize that most of the land was much, much higher than it was today. There would have to have been amazing waterfalls on the Mississippi which would have left noticeable affects.

And speaking of Everest, if it was significantly higher with magic water reservoirs under it and it sank to its present height during the flood, then you'll have to explain how such a massive mountain stayed so intact as so much material under it flowed away in such a tiny period of time. (Never mind how it got there, stayed there, didn't boil away, etc.)

And if some parts of Asia had a lot of water under it and not other ones, the differential settling would also be easily seen.

And on and on. No, vast caverns of water coming up don't affect the overall calculation.

Note in doing a precise calculation: "The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits." So add a few more feet, at least. (How the writer knew it was at least fifteen cubits is Yet Another Mystery.)

And then there's the question of where the water went. But I guess not this thread.
  #30  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:01 PM
markn+ is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: unknown; Speed: exactly 0
Posts: 2,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Of course, volumes may have been measured in square inches at the time the earth actually flooded. There's just no way to know.
True, a lot of things were different. After all, pi was equal to 3.0 back then.

Last edited by markn+; 05-25-2019 at 02:01 PM.
  #31  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:04 PM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Of course, volumes may have been measured in square inches at the time the earth actually flooded. There's just no way to know.
. Actually I was visualizing the simple rain gauge I have which is a square plastic tube with an opening of 1 square inch at the top.

I hadn't noticed TokyoBayer's calculation either. Glad it agrees. The calculation is all about covering Mt. Everest because the vast majority of the earth's surface is already filled with water up to sea level, and most of the rest only a little above that.

The real answer is that no matter how hard it rains the water will never exceed sea level by much because there isn't enough water, and the excess mainly comes from ice melt.

Last edited by TriPolar; 05-25-2019 at 02:05 PM.
  #32  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:07 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftg View Post
And then there's the question of where the water went.
I think I know this one. Turned into wine.
  #33  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:08 PM
Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 21,072
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP. It's a simple question, and should have a simple answer based on geology, physics, and mathematics.

Although it is obvious what the motivation for the question is, the OP did not ask for consideration of extenuating circumstances, an allowance for evaporation, an allowance for the "fountains of the deep" to contribute, an allowance for other supernatural factors or an exploding sun, or a climate change correction to be included.

IOW, just answer the fucking question and we can move on!
  #34  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:15 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
This is such an elementary math problem that I wonder if there is another purpose for the question.

Mt. Everest is 29,029 ft. Divide that by 40 days, 24 hours per day and 60 minute per hour. I get 6” of rain per minute.

A quick google search shows the record rainfall in one minute is 1.22”.
I've seen some claims that the mountains did not exist before the flood, so the 60 feet mentioned in the OP would be the number to use. Mountains thrust up after (like the one Noah supposedly landed on) but that's irrelevant to the calculation.
So I stand by 60 feet / 40 days or 18 inches a day or 3/4 inch per hour.
Adjusted for seepage and evaporation, of course.
  #35  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:16 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
I think I know this one. Turned into wine.
*hic*
  #36  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:18 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP. It's a simple question, and should have a simple answer based on geology, physics, and mathematics.

Although it is obvious what the motivation for the question is, the OP did not ask for consideration of extenuating circumstances, an allowance for evaporation, an allowance for the "fountains of the deep" to contribute, an allowance for other supernatural factors or an exploding sun, or a climate change correction to be included.

IOW, just answer the fucking question and we can move on!
We don't know pre-flood geography, which makes it kind of tough.
The existence of oceans is irrelevant, for to have the water level on land raise by 60 feet seal level must also raise by 60 feet.
  #37  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:22 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Do you believe that the planet was ACTUALLY flooded, or are you just being extra diligent about not fighting the hypothetical, here?

Among many other things, flyer is a Young-Earth Creationist.
  #38  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:23 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 42,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP. It's a simple question, and should have a simple answer based on geology, physics, and mathematics.

Although it is obvious what the motivation for the question is, the OP did not ask for consideration of extenuating circumstances, an allowance for evaporation, an allowance for the "fountains of the deep" to contribute, an allowance for other supernatural factors or an exploding sun, or a climate change correction to be included.

IOW, just answer the fucking question and we can move on!
Moderating

I find it interesting that you've been around a long time without being aware of the rule against junior modding.

The basic answer was given in the first few posts. By your standards I should just go ahead and close the thread after that.

Once the question has been answered, discussion of related issues is allowed. If this bothers you, you are free to stop reading the thread.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

Last edited by Colibri; 05-25-2019 at 02:24 PM.
  #39  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:29 PM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP. It's a simple question, and should have a simple answer based on geology, physics, and mathematics.

Although it is obvious what the motivation for the question is, the OP did not ask for consideration of extenuating circumstances, an allowance for evaporation, an allowance for the "fountains of the deep" to contribute, an allowance for other supernatural factors or an exploding sun, or a climate change correction to be included.

IOW, just answer the fucking question and we can move on!
The OP asked us to cast aside our beliefs. For most people this makes the calculations impossible because they believe in math. It worked for me because I have never believed in math ever since I found out that I could perform the same calculation three times and get four different answers (and often none of them correct according to so called 'math').

Last edited by TriPolar; 05-25-2019 at 02:30 PM.
  #40  
Old 05-25-2019, 03:22 PM
Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 21,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
We don't know pre-flood geography, which makes it kind of tough.
The existence of oceans is irrelevant, for to have the water level on land raise by 60 feet seal level must also raise by 60 feet.
Regarding pre-flood geography, all we need to know to answer the OP is how much land there was roughly 4000 years ago, in order to subtract that from the volume of water needed. We also need to know the oceanic water level at that time. 4000 years in geological terms is insignificant; and the movement of tectonic plates won't alter the water volume much (move North America to the left or right and it still occupies the same volume of matter).

I don't have the figures or technical knowledge to do the calculation, but it seems to me that the answer can be derived from: (1) calculate the volume of matter needed to make a sphere larger than Everest (2) subtract the volume of matter needed to make a sphere the size of the Earth at sea level (3) subtract the volume of matter represented by the (non-aquatic) continents above sea level. This would give you the volume of water needed for a 40 days/nights deluge. The remaining calculations are academic, to compute the rate of precipitation.

Possible confounding factors would be ice volume at the poles and glaciers.
  #41  
Old 05-25-2019, 03:32 PM
Yllaria is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Stockton
Posts: 10,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanicbird View Post
From this, it could have been a light sprinkle, as there was a second source of water, even a case for a 3rd source could be made: . . . In Gen 1 God divided the water above and below, it appears that both were being used here, if not 3 sources (underworld, our world, and from the heavens). Gen 2:5 could be said to make rain that 3rd category of water as it was seperate from the division of waters below and above.
I'm perfectly happy to let the OP frame the question any way they like, for any reason they like. If he's talking about the flood with regular folks, regular rain is probably the idea they've picked up.

Several people have mentioned underground water and modern geology. Kanicbird referred to the bible verses about the divided waters. According to the one comparative religion class I took (yeah, I know - and it's been awhile, too), the cosmology in the OT (matching Babylonian cosmology) starts with the universe being water. God divides the waters from the waters, making an area for a flat earth. Above the earth is the vault of the heavens, which is keeping back the water. The sun, moon, and stars are either on the vault of the heavens, or just under it. Then there's air/the winds, then there's flat land, then there's the underworld, then there's the rest of the water that makes up the rest of the universe.

Quote:
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
That's a universe of water, albeit a smaller universe than we're accustomed to. Actual rain would be negligible compared to it. Although depending on the actual language used at the time, any water coming down from above might have to be described as "raining" - that is, using a word that would have been translated as raining.

Ooo. This bit is interesting.

Quote:
Genesis 7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
Cubits vary, but are usually about a foot and a half. I have to believe they mean to say that the top of the mountains were covered by at most twenty three feet of water.

As to how it went away:

Quote:
Genesis 8:1 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;

2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;

3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
Sounds like the bubble in the vault was deliberately drained. Although they may not have wanted to look at that too closely. I'm not sure what the wind was doing. To me it sounds like it was calming the churning of the flood water.

Last edited by Yllaria; 05-25-2019 at 03:32 PM.
  #42  
Old 05-25-2019, 03:43 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Regarding pre-flood geography, all we need to know to answer the OP is how much land there was roughly 4000 years ago, in order to subtract that from the volume of water needed. We also need to know the oceanic water level at that time. 4000 years in geological terms is insignificant; and the movement of tectonic plates won't alter the water volume much (move North America to the left or right and it still occupies the same volume of matter).

I don't have the figures or technical knowledge to do the calculation, but it seems to me that the answer can be derived from: (1) calculate the volume of matter needed to make a sphere larger than Everest (2) subtract the volume of matter needed to make a sphere the size of the Earth at sea level (3) subtract the volume of matter represented by the (non-aquatic) continents above sea level. This would give you the volume of water needed for a 40 days/nights deluge. The remaining calculations are academic, to compute the rate of precipitation.

Possible confounding factors would be ice volume at the poles and glaciers.
Given your prior concerns about thread etiquette, it seems surprising that you don't appear to have read the thread. TokyoBayer already answered the question with a much simpler approach that doesn't require volume calculations at post #6.

It's straightforward to check if land elevation makes a significant difference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth
~29% of of the surface is land, at a mean elevation of ~2,600 ft amsl, giving a mean evelation for the entire surface of ~750 ft amsl. That's less than 3% of the height of Everest, so TokyoBayer's calculation of a rainfall rate of ~6" per minute is still correct to the nearest inch.
  #43  
Old 05-25-2019, 03:46 PM
dtilque is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: My own private Nogero
Posts: 6,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yllaria View Post
Several people have mentioned underground water and modern geology. Kanicbird referred to the bible verses about the divided waters. According to the one comparative religion class I took (yeah, I know - and it's been awhile, too), the cosmology in the OT (matching Babylonian cosmology) starts with the universe being water. God divides the waters from the waters, making an area for a flat earth. Above the earth is the vault of the heavens, which is keeping back the water. The sun, moon, and stars are either on the vault of the heavens, or just under it. Then there's air/the winds, then there's flat land, then there's the underworld, then there's the rest of the water that makes up the rest of the universe.
You need all that water for the astrochelonian to swim in. And don't forget the elephants. Everyone always forgets about the elephants.
  #44  
Old 05-25-2019, 03:49 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 7,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Regarding pre-flood geography, all we need to know to answer the OP is how much land there was roughly 4000 years ago..
It's interesting to compare your two posts here. Can you point out where the OP specifies that he's asking about something happening 4000 years ago?

Last edited by Riemann; 05-25-2019 at 03:52 PM.
  #45  
Old 05-26-2019, 01:17 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Regarding pre-flood geography, all we need to know to answer the OP is how much land there was roughly 4000 years ago, in order to subtract that from the volume of water needed. We also need to know the oceanic water level at that time. 4000 years in geological terms is insignificant; and the movement of tectonic plates won't alter the water volume much (move North America to the left or right and it still occupies the same volume of matter).

I don't have the figures or technical knowledge to do the calculation, but it seems to me that the answer can be derived from: (1) calculate the volume of matter needed to make a sphere larger than Everest (2) subtract the volume of matter needed to make a sphere the size of the Earth at sea level (3) subtract the volume of matter represented by the (non-aquatic) continents above sea level. This would give you the volume of water needed for a 40 days/nights deluge. The remaining calculations are academic, to compute the rate of precipitation.

Possible confounding factors would be ice volume at the poles and glaciers.
Genesis says that the water extended 15 cubits above the highest mountain. Therefore all you need to do, as before, is decide the height of the tallest mountain, add 15 cubits, divide by 40, and you get the rainfall per day. Clearly this is bit high since you don't account for the volume of the mountains.
I understand that if we are using science Everest is the highest, but I don't think that is an assumption you can make. I've also seen people who claim that the post-flood world was all connected, to explain how the kangaroos got to Australia.
If you're responding to a question in a creationist scenario, you kind of have to play by creationist rules. You certainly don't have to accept them.
  #46  
Old 05-26-2019, 01:20 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Of course, volumes may have been measured in square inches at the time the earth actually flooded. There's just no way to know.
They were obviously measured in cubic cubits.
  #47  
Old 05-26-2019, 02:22 AM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
Another is ignoring changes in world-wide climate.
How does wold-wide climate change affect things? This is a math question. How would that change? Does climate change mean that 1 inch of water is less or more than 1 inch of water then.
Quote:
Yet another is assuming that the height of the highest mountain today is similar to what it was at the time in question.
It really doesn’t matter. Mr. Ararat is at 16,854 ft. which would made the hourly rainfall 3’ per hour. Scientifically, that’s impossible as well.
Quote:
It's easy to calculate what the answer would be in today's world. Whether that answer bears even a passing resemblance to the correct answer at the time that the earth was actually flooded is another matter entirely.
Young Earth Creationism simply requires abandoning science and relies on miracles. Employing miracles which hide all evidence of themselves means that it can't be debated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
I've seen some claims that the mountains did not exist before the flood, so the 60 feet mentioned in the OP would be the number to use. Mountains thrust up after (like the one Noah supposedly landed on) but that's irrelevant to the calculation.
So I stand by 60 feet / 40 days or 18 inches a day or 3/4 inch per hour.
Adjusted for seepage and evaporation, of course.
If there are real people who are making claims that the mountains did not exist, they are not reading the Bible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 6
For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits.
I know the YEC like to torture readings into supporting whatever they want (I grew up LDS, after all), but no, the text says mountains.
  #48  
Old 05-26-2019, 02:22 AM
Lucas Jackson's Avatar
Lucas Jackson is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
Especially considering this is GQ, I find it interesting that most posters appear to not have read the OP, or the followup posts by the OP reinforcing the OP. It's a simple question, and should have a simple answer based on geology, physics, and mathematics.

Although it is obvious what the motivation for the question is, the OP did not ask for consideration of extenuating circumstances, an allowance for evaporation, an allowance for the "fountains of the deep" to contribute, an allowance for other supernatural factors or an exploding sun, or a climate change correction to be included.

IOW, just answer the fucking question and we can move on!
Forget it, Jake, this is the Dope.
  #49  
Old 05-26-2019, 02:25 AM
Lucas Jackson's Avatar
Lucas Jackson is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
I think I know this one. Turned into wine.
Thats a lot of wine drinkin’. OK smart guy, where did all the pee go?

  #50  
Old 05-26-2019, 05:24 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Genesis says that the water extended 15 cubits above the highest mountain. Therefore all you need to do, as before, is decide the height of the tallest mountain, add 15 cubits, divide by 40, and you get the rainfall per day. Clearly this is bit high since you don't account for the volume of the mountains.
I understand that if we are using science Everest is the highest, but I don't think that is an assumption you can make. I've also seen people who claim that the post-flood world was all connected, to explain how the kangaroos got to Australia.
If you're responding to a question in a creationist scenario, you kind of have to play by creationist rules. You certainly don't have to accept them.
At no time did I say that this flood took place any time in the past.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017