Hi David,
You wrote: A large meteor impact can produce earthquakes, but not ones that
will produce the motion necessary for the model Mike seems to be envisioning.
So, you can say with absolute certainty that a large meteor impact or several
such impacts could not possibly trigger earthquakes which would cause a few
hundred square miles of land to lose 20 some feet of elevation over a forty
day period of time?
You wrote: the magnitude of such an impact must be compared with the
magnitude that would have destroyed the ark.
Are you saying that any earthquake which caused such a loss of elevation,
possibly a loss of only about 6" a day for 40 days, would definitely have
destroyed Noah's ark? How can you possibly be sure of such a thing?
However, there is no evidence that such a situation existed near the Persian
Gulf a
few thousand years ago. Earthquakes in tectonically active settings can
produce abrupt rising or lowering of a region (e.g., Chile, with the series
of terraces observed by Darwin), but I know of no example of lowering and
raising of the same region following each other so quickly.
I admit, if Noah's flood occurred in such a way, It would certainly be a
highly unusual situation. But the Bible indicates that God Himself caused
Noah's flood to take place in the way that it did. Do you believe God could
not have directed meteors to strike the earth in just such a way as to cause
Noah's land to first fall 20 feet, and then several months later to strike
the earth in just such a way as to cause Noah's land to regain its previous
elevation?
You wrote: Theoretically, I suppose that it is possible to have a region drop
over 20 feet and come back up about a year later
Thank you. You make my point.
You wrote: But I know of no reason to support the idea that it happened in
the
Persian Gulf region at the time needed by this model.
Perhaps you should have said "But I now know of no reason ...."
You wrote: A second impact will not reverse the effects of the first one.
I doubt you can say with absolute certainty that an impact or impacts at just
the right location or locations could not possibly cause such a reversal.
You wrote: Compressional tectonics is the only cause I know of for rapid
elevation of a region.
Well then, maybe compressional tectonics were involved at the time.
You wrote: Dropping a large region of land into the ocean will produce large
waves, unlikely to have a desirable effect on the ark (e.g., turning upside
down; washing it either miles inland or out to sea).
I suspect you are referring to a rapid drop. The Bible indicates that the
land took 40 days to become flooded which indicates a gradual drop.
Thanks for your response.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 28 2002 - 11:05:07 EDT