• afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      No it isn’t. Geology does not back up a global flood.

      When it rains a lot and the ground gets saturated it can seem like the water is coming up from the ground. Also you know they had wells so they knew water is in ground.

        • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well aside from trapped water existing or not, this certainly didn’t happen. The geological layering of soil would tell us, the extinction events would tell us, and the fossils would tell us.

          Not to mention there’s also a massive problem with heat and moving that much water so quickly.

    • Dullahaut@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Triple the amount of surface water is far from enough to suggest a global flood is remotely possible, let alone plausible.

    • GojuRyu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      It isn’t though. A worldwide flood would leave behind plenty of evidence in the geologic record. That it doesn’t exist makes it quite implausible. Making matters worse is the supposed time of the flood had many civilizations with extensive records for hundreds of years before and after forget to mention they were wiped out and instead just continued living through the flood without noticing it.