How did the earth recover after the flood?
Published: 29 June 2014 (GMT+10)
Rainbows and vegetation growth
We are often asked about the catastrophic effects of the Flood and how the earth could have recovered. S.K., Germany, writes:
Mr. Michael Oard,
During my studies for the APO111 class I encountered your book “Frozen in Time”. Finally I found answers to some of the mysteries that nagged my mind for quite some time. Thank you for your great work!
In Chapter 7 you explained your theory that volcanic dust shaded the word globally right after the flood that led to a higher albedo of the outer atmosphere resulting in decrease of usable energy on the surface triggering the ice age.
My questions to this condition:
Would a rainbow be possible to form without supernatural interaction? Would the vegetation destroyed on the landmasses and decimated in the oceans get enough sunlight to regrow?
The dust of the volcanoes was washed away by the continuous rain of the flood. The reduced vegetation reduced the evapotranspiration causing a decrease in the greenhouse effect that would lead to colder temperatures. This would also explain how mammoths had time enough to grow into so big numbers after being reduced to 2–5.
Michael Oard replies:
I am very happy that you found answers in some of my writing … that is why I do it.
In answer to your question, yes a rainbow would be quite possible right after the Flood, because a lot of sunlight would still penetrate through the volcanic ash and small particles called aerosols. And yes, there would be enough sunlight for plants to grow. I estimated that possibly about 25% of the sunlight would be reflected, meaning about 75% would pass into the lower atmosphere.
During the Flood, a lot of the volcanic ash in the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) would have been washed away during the Flood, but weather systems do not penetrate the stratosphere (except in strong thunderstorms). So the ash and small particles in the stratosphere would take a lot of time to settle out by gravity, and the rain at lower altitudes will not help. The ash particles would have settled out in days to months, while the small particles would have taken years.
In regard to the greenhouse effect, warm oceans would cause a lot of evaporation and heat the air, especially in winter. Also, there probably would have been high levels of carbon dioxide after the Flood. High levels of water vapor and carbon dioxide can have a strong greenhouse effect, but with less solar radiation, the greenhouse effect would be less. I think there were plenty of plants for evapotranspiration. Determining the greenhouse effect early in the Ice Age right after the Flood will be challenging.
It would not take long for two mammoths to multiply into millions right after the Flood. The population expands by geometric progression, the environment was healthy, and there were few predators.
I hope this helps.
J.G., U.S.A., writes:
I have long had a burning question I have been meaning to ask.
The flood being a global and very dramatic event would have put a thin layer of salt on all the continents. Do we find this? Why? How would it have affected salt deposits? Was there enough salt in the ocean back then to show any deposits?
If you could post this question it would be greatly appreciated. I have not found any current articles that touch on this particular topic.
Thanks for all you guys do.
Keep up the good work,
Dr Tas Walker responds:
Much of the salt left on the continents after the Flood would have been washed away by rain in the post-Flood period. Some is still present on the continents but it has accumulated in inland basins such as the Dead Sea and Lake Eyre. It has also accumulated in the groundwater. We assume there was salt in the ocean before the Flood but that is something that we need to speculate about because we were not there at the time.
All the best,