Plants in the Flood

[BigRed11]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood? It seems unreasonable that each species could have been loaded onto a boat and impossible that they all survived underwater, so what gives?

 

[Dannager]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood? It seems unreasonable that each species could have been loaded onto a boat and impossible that they all survived underwater, so what gives?

Creationists like to explaining it away by saying plants survived on floating vegetation mats, ignoring the biological impossibility of such a survival method for many of the plants we see today.

 

[fromdownunder]

We know there were some plant seeds on the Ark, after all the first thing Noah did when he got off the Ark was to make a vineyard and grow grapes to produce wine.

The earth has been almost mortally wounded, there 'aint much left, so Noah decides to have a few drinks.

There's a man who had his priorities right.

Norm

 

[JohnR7]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood?

The plants we read about in the Bible can of course be found in that part of the world. I am sure you can find a web site that will talk about the different plants.

One of the plants: "spikenard" is a very expensive pain killer used on the skin. It is still expensive in it's pure state today and other medicines are a lot more cost effective.

John 12:3
Then Mary took a pound of very costly oil of spikenard, anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the oil.

 

[dad]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood? It seems unreasonable that each species could have been loaded onto a boat and impossible that they all survived underwater, so what gives?

God took care of that department. Noah had the animal department. AS proof, the bird was sent out looking for plants. Noah had nothing to do with them, on a planetary scale. No need. A bird did bring back a fresh twig with fruit on it. They were happy.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood? It seems unreasonable that each species could have been loaded onto a boat and impossible that they all survived underwater, so what gives?

You are right that most seeds would not survive a year in water but it's even worse than that. According to "flood geologists" the flood swept across the land depositing thousands of feet variously layered geologic strata (they can't say exactly which strata but that's another subject). This means there would be no topsoil for plants to grow in. Also the vast majority of insects species would have been wiped out so there would be no insects to pollinate the many plants that require insect pollination if they did somehow grow. The great diversity of plant life around the world including many species whose seeds can't survive in water is just one more in a huge list of falsification of the flood as a worldwide event.

 

[dad]

... This means there would be no topsoil for plants to grow in. Also the vast majority of insects species would have been wiped out so there would be no insects to pollinate the many plants that require insect pollination if they did somehow grow. ...

Ever hear of the dust bowl? Topsoil was blown around. Ever heard of a great wind after the flood? Plenty of things were different enough to have it just like God, not you, said.

 

[BigRed11]

Attributing it to God seems like too easy of an explanation, as if there is no other viable one.

 

[Split Rock]

Ever hear of the dust bowl? Topsoil was blown around. Ever heard of a great wind after the flood? Plenty of things were different enough to have it just like God, not you, said.

Yes, the Dust Bowl was a disaster for farmers who lost all they had... great example of God's help for Noah!

 

[dad]

Yes, the Dust Bowl was a disaster for farmers who lost all they had... great example of God's help for Noah!

Dirt in the past could grow things faster. Wherever it came from. We came from dust too. We grow pretty good. Dirt doesn't disappear, it was on the earth still. The waters had some in it too. The waters dryed up, the dirt settled down. Some rock, and layers were not upset by the flood. They were beneath. Just cause Frumy says there was no more ditrt, doesnn't mean there wasn't.

 

[dad]

Attributing it to God seems like too easy of an explanation, as if there is no other viable one.

God is viable, science is just a litle too primitive and limited to realize that yet. Who did you think orchestrated the flood? Carl Sagan?

 

[Split Rock]

Dirt in the past could grow things faster. Wherever it came from. We came from dust too. We grow pretty good. Dirt doesn't disappear, it was on the earth still. The waters had some in it too. The waters dryed up, the dirt settled down. Some rock, and layers were not upset by the flood. They were beneath. Just cause Frumy says there was no more ditrt, doesnn't mean there wasn't.

If the Dust Bowl had just blown topsoil around it would not have been so bad. What it did was to make topsoil inaccessable to the people who needed it. In your Flood scenario, most of the topsoil would have been washed away into the oceans, or into what ever drainage hole the waters were supposed to have gone. For all intends and purposes, that topsoil would be lost.

 

[TexasSky]

I've never really bothered to look into this by reading the bible, but what is said of plant species during the flood? It seems unreasonable that each species could have been loaded onto a boat and impossible that they all survived underwater, so what gives?

1) Plant life survives being underwater all the time.
2) Plants survive floods all the time.
3) All a plant needs to return is a viable root system
4) All Noah would have needed to preserve would be seeds, though in this case, even that wouldn't have been necessary.
5) The bible says that even after the waters receded the land was barren for days, and that they didn't disembark until the dove brought back signs of plant life returning.

 

[Jet Black]

1) Plant life survives being underwater all the time.
2) Plants survive floods all the time.

underwater, for a year? with all those sedimentary rocks piling up above them?

3) All a plant needs to return is a viable root system

that's not true for all plants.

do you still think tiktaalik is a crocodile/tadpole by the way?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

1) Plant life survives being underwater all the time.

Some plants can survive immersion in water others can't.

2) Plants survive floods all the time.

Some plants survive short floods. Show us some plants that have survived a year long flood.

3) All a plant needs to return is a viable root system

The YEC flood supposedly rearranged all the world's geology and deposited thousands of feet of sedimentary layers. How would any plants have viable root systems?

4) All Noah would have needed to preserve would be seeds, though in this case, even that wouldn't have been necessary.

And how did Noah reseed Northern Europe, North and South America, Asia, India, Australia, New Zealand, Madagascar and the rest of the world?

5) The bible says that even after the waters receded the land was barren for days, and that they didn't disembark until the dove brought back signs of plant life returning.

So plant life just sprung up from nothing on a flood devastated landscape with no living seeds and no topsoils? Virtually everything about the global flood myth is impossible and so is the supposed recovery of plant life.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[Split Rock]

3) All a plant needs to return is a viable root system

Unfortunately, immersion in water will kill the root systems of most plant species. They need oxygen, and will die if left in water too long.

The best you can do is say that God re-seeded the Earth after the Flood waters receded (no pun intended).

 

[TexasSky]

If the Dust Bowl had just blown topsoil around it would not have been so bad. What it did was to make topsoil inaccessable to the people who needed it. In your Flood scenario, most of the topsoil would have been washed away into the oceans, or into what ever drainage hole the waters were supposed to have gone. For all intends and purposes, that topsoil would be lost.

This is a fallicious argument. SOME topsoil might be lost, but then we don't know how much topsoil was present before the flood do we?

ALL topsoil NEVER goes away in a flood. In fact, sometimes floods have a unique way of "invigorating" "dead" soil. They deposits nutrients from other areas and things.

This impression of a "huge waves crashing around" is not what the bible describes.

Water came up from the earth, and then down from the sky. It rose over a 40 day period. As water rises in such situations, it drops things that it picked up. They sink. (This is why after major local flooding people are spending months afterwards trying to shovel mud out of their homes.)

The water set in place for 150 days. Which is a LOT of time to "settle" and "ease down" and "redeposit" top soil, seed, etc. Then the bible says that after the 150 days of just sitting, the "fountains of the deep" were stopped, and the "windows of heaven" were stopped, and "the waters receded continually from the earth" and for three months the waters decreased. Then, after 3 months, the tops of mountains could be seen. Noah sent out a bird, but it couldn't rest. Noah waited 7 days, and sent her out again, waited 7 days and sent her out again.

Pretending it Noah used a modern calendar, and that 2nd month of his correlated with 2nd month of ours (it doesn't) - It was the equivalent of February 17 of the year Noah turned 600 when the waters of the deep started spewing from the earth. It was January 1, the year he turned 601, that he opened the ark and looked out. It was February 27 when the earth was dry enough for Noah to leave the ark.

BTW - Regarding the argument that "there isn't enough water" - - - according to the bible - the earth spewed out water, and the amount of water on earth "greatly increased" then receded back to where it came from.

So the arguements of, "all the water in the ocean" and "all the waters in rivers" don't equal enough water - don't really apply to the great flood.

And the reason this is important to Christians - God promised:

Genesis 7:21b
Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

22 “While the earth remains,
Seedtime and harvest,
Cold and heat,
Winter and summer,
And day and night
Shall not cease.”


If this was about local flooding - God broke His promise.
For there have been local floods that destroyed everyone and everything in some regions.

If it was a larger flood - God has kept His word.

 

[TexasSky]

Unfortunately, immersion in water will kill the root systems of most plant species. They need oxygen, and will die if left in water too long.

The best you can do is say that God re-seeded the Earth after the Flood waters receded (no pun intended).

I'm sorry, but I grew up in flood regions, and I have seen, time and time and time and time again, where plants that seemed to be destroyed because they were trapped under water for months - returned after the water receded and the sun returned.

Plants need sun and oxygen to bloom and go to seed, but the root systems of many, many, many plants seem to have the ability to survive prolonged lengths of time under water, and those that don't have seeds that are able to do so.

 

[shinbits]

The same God who originally spoke them into existence could very easily do it again.


You can't remove the supernatural when talking about the creation; that's like removing ID when talking about computers.

 

[TexasSky]

underwater, for a year? with all those sedimentary rocks piling up above them?



that's not true for all plants.

do you still think tiktaalik is a crocodile/tadpole by the way?

As a matter of fact, I haven't seen ANYTHING to convince me that the tiktaalik is an amazing missing-link discovery. Nothing that has been presented in these forums on in the literature produced about it convinces me that it is anything other than a previously undiscovered creature making a transition from fish to amphibian. Nothing convinces me the thing is a mammal.

And who said "all plants" ? I didn't.

I said many have root systems that will survive.

And I said those who don't have root systems that will survive have seeds that will.

The entire earth shows SOME flood evidence. The debate has NEVER been about the idea that some parts of the earth didn't appear to have ever been under water. The debate has ALWAYS been about the depth of the water, the ability for these floods to have been simultaneous, and other details.

So, given that the entire earth, EVEN the moutains, show evidence of flooding - how do you explain the presence of plant life?

And have you lived in flood plane? Or wandered along a dry creek bed? Plants are amazing.

One of the forms of cotton our technology research center works with today is LITERALLY grown from seeds that they found buried BENEATH pyramid stones.

Grow cotton in the deserts of Egypt??
Seeds survive buried in desert sands for hundreds of years without water or sunlight?
Impossible!

Except - they planted them and the darn things grew.

Impossible! Couldn't happen! Those plants must be our imagination!