If the tallest mountain was covered by 22.5′ of water, what would be theevaporation rate until the surface of the earth was visible, does the Gensisaccount get anywhere close to what would be proveable, just wondering?
A couple of comments. First of all, the flood is clearly presented as a supernatural miracle. For this reason, we should not spend too much time trying to find a natural explanation of where the water came from or where the water went to. Therefore, any calculation of the rate of evaporation is irrelevant. If hundreds or thousands of extra feet of water were added to the earth, it simply could not evaporate away, no matter the evaporation rate, because the atmosphere can only hold a certain amount of water in any case. This is a miracle and not a natural event. It is not proveable scientifically, even if we can provide some evidence suggesting some sort of great flood happened.
Second, the meaning of the statement that the mountains were covered up to twenty feet is not clear. Does this mean that about twenty feet of rain, in total, fell? Does it mean it went to 20 feet higher than Mt. Everest (a VERY unlikely interpretation)? We cannot know the meaning. We can only make reasonable inferences, and then ought to admit we are not sure. My conclusions are as follows:
1. The main point is that this was a judgement for man’s sin. It is counter productive and distracts from the purpose intended by God to get into detailed interpretations about the literal meaning if we get away from this.
2. It rained a lot–a whole lot. This was no natural event.
3. The language and meaning is not absolutely clear as to how much water is involved, and it really does not matter from our distance.
4. How the water appeared and how it disappeared are not given, but I assume both are miraculous and not natural events.
John Oakes, PhD