Flood of Genesis Noah Hydroplate Theory Why not allow scientific evaluations of differing theories of geology, without dogmatic stipulations of conformity to uniformitarianism? Criticisms of the belief in literal interpretation of the Flood of Genesis depend on the philosophy of naturalism (commonly portrayed as "science" in some developed nations). So what's wrong with using an approach that is popular with many modern scientists? Believe what you will, but that popular approach to criticizing the creationist interpretation is not scientific; most of it is political maneuvering for a particular philosophy: strict- naturalism. Please consider the following points. What is strict-naturalism philosophy? In biology it includes the General Theory of Evolution; in popular geology (at least popular in the twentieth century) it includes uniformitarianism. But its essence includes rejection of any creative or judgmental God who has actively created or destroyed the world. A Flood critic who uses that approach dogmatically--that person can hardly avoid introducing bias to his reasoning, for Genesis includes both creative and destructive activities of God. Can the reality of the Genesis account of the Flood of  Noah be evaluated objectively, scientifically? Yes, but only for the person who can separate both the philosophy of scientists from scientific data and the human traditions of religionists from scriptures. Otherwise it's just the same philosophical debate between strict- naturalists and strictly-traditional religionists. Criticism of the Flood of Noah Flood of Genesis Map From The Center for Scientific Creation: “. . . the earth has experienced a devastating, worldwide flood, whose waters violently burst forth from under earth’s crust. Standard ‘text- book’ explanations for many of earth’s major features are scientifically flawed. We can now explain, using well-understood phenomena, how this cataclysmic event rapidly formed so many features. . . . far more catastrophic than almost anyone has imagined. . . .” “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seven- teenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up . . .” (Genesis 7:11) “And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills . . . were covered . . . the mountains were covered.”  (Gen. 7:19-20) The Hydroplate Theory may explain more things than does the Plate Tectonics theory, in geology Searching for Ropens and Finding God with a few references to the Old Testa- ment, including the Flood of Noah - also the “fiery flying serpent,” which could relate to the ropen of Papua New Guinea Copyright 2006-2014 Jonathan David Whitcomb A classic work of art: the animals disembarking from the Ark Should not the worldwide Flood of Genesis have caused many organisms to have become fossilized? Of course.