The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Is the evidence for the biblical flood sufficient

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
leedle has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/20/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 413 times Debate No: 97189
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




I will try my best to show evidence for the flood as opposed to con's argument


Hello, I would like to accept this debate

Now, as far as evidence is concerned, those who have any, typically use hypotheticals to explain a global flood, like how back then, there could have been a lot of moisture in the atmosphere causing water to spontaneously pour from the sky. and as believer would say, in those upcoming events, that is when Noah built the ark, saving all of the animals 2 by 2. Now, if you delve deeper, you can see that this argument is flawed if you take into account other biblical happenings. For instance, diseases can survive in specific hosts or in laboratories, that is to say that the animals on Noah's ark weren't enough to host all the diseases in the world. Also, the bible says that God created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. If he indeed took six days to create the earth, all of the diseases wouldn't have been on the earth, instead they would have needed a host, so God would've had to place all of the diseases in the world in Adam and Eve, who then passed it down to their posterity.

Now, in accordance with my last argument, in order for water to pour atop the earth, creating one giant ocean, the sun would have to produce a lot of energy to evaporate the water. To put this in perspective, the amount of rain required (that creates such a flood), to cover mount everest would be 30 feet per hour for 40 days. Lets say that the flood has been instated already, creationists believe that there was a water vapor canopy that caused a greenhouse effect, causing luscious vegetation to sprout all over the world before the flood. This much biomass couldn't have been spontaneously created, because the laws of thermodynamics clearly state that energy cannot be created. Therefore, the animals under the sea would have had to be fueled by the sun. The second law of thermodynamics basically states that if a natural increase of energy has been instated, it cannot be reversed, so the sun's solar energy back then having to be an amazing amount, wouldn't have gone back to the way it was before. But if the sun did spontaneously have that sort of power, it would have fried all of the undersea animals before the flood had been complete. After all of the rain, the flood had to have been lifted in some way. The sun had to have evaporated all of it. The earth's average temperature is 60.5 degrees Fahrenheit, therefore, the average temperature then would have had to be 128 degrees fahrenheit to evaporate that much water over a 100 year period.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you accepting this debate.

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.

And by the fountains of the deep it means the water underneath the earth then it rained for 150 days

I would assume Noah would use his initiative and take healthy animals also what diseases are you talking about many of the diseases we have today are what some people speculate mutations and in my opinion most of the diseases came about in a laboratory such as the common Cold.

Before the flood I don't think mount everest was there the bible saysThey go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them. Psalm 104:8

I would say that it created a greenhouse effect I would probably double atmospheric pressure which would somewhat replicate the conditions in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber were plants grow twice as fast, yes "we" can't create or destroy energy doesn't mean God can't think about it look at of the energy here on this planet how did it get here evolution doesn't provide a good enough explanation so it must have been the product of Gods creation.

And last but not least this is not criticism this is advise if you're going to debate about a specific topic do a little bit of research, I'm only saying this based on your argument.

Kind regards to everyone reading this debate


I am certain that Noah didn't take the time to check the animals for diseases for he had no tools or time to do so. Animals can have diseases that are not superficial.

I used Mt. Everest as a reference point to display how fast the rain had to fall.
The current atmospheric pressure in approximately 370 ppm CO2 and 21% O2, so if this were doubled, it still wouldn't reach the requirement for a significant increase of photosynthetic rates.

In order for the plants to grow significantly faster as a result of raised atmospheric pressure, then the pressure must have been globally equivalent to (or higher than) that of the cretaceous period when the atmospheric pressure was at 2000 ppm CO2 30% O2. Although the photosynthetic rates increased, the only time the O2 rates fluctuated significantly, was millions of years ago. The Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences in North Carolina have tested this in a hyperbaric chamber. But according to Christianity, the earth is only 4000 years old thus barring all of the scientific evidence that proves this, which then contradicts their own reasons the flood actually happened. This ironically spontaneous influx of O2 has not been shown in scientific records, so it is almost safe to say that this couldn't have been a possibility.

In the bible, God created this flood which killed several people, innocent and wicked even the babies which would certainly go against the pro-life ideology of Christianity. Unless God told everyone to take one for the team. I know that in Sumer, people were told to go onto the highest point of the building to survive, but the buildings were made of mud brick, which wouldn't stand to force of such a flood.
Debate Round No. 2


How certain are you? Because it doesn't say how long Noah had to build the Ark or check all of the animals or any tools to check the animals so what you've just said so far is quite ludicrous to be honest.

Again most of the water probably came from underneath the earth also speaking of Mount Everest how do you explain petrified clams found on top of Mount Everest as well as dead carcasses found
found and crinoids found on top of Mount Everest

I'm not saying that it was doubled I'm said maybe it was double doubled I don't know for sure.

If atmospheric pressure use to be higher millions of years ago according to you where is the evidence that shows this and what caused it to fluctuate?

Actually Christianity indicates that the earth is around 6,000 to 10,000 year's old and what evidence is there to even indicate that the earth is millions of years old?

Just the fact that you said that you said the flood killed "SEVERAL" people as well as innocent just shows me how unprepared you are for this debate and the Bible says we should kill anyone nothing about what God is allowed to do to "His" creation.

Thank You
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.