That's the assumption that the "expanse" that divided the waters was only the crust.
And there is a lot we don't know.
Because we have other events in scripture that defy laws of physics.
It is an explanation of why such vast age differences occur before and after the flood.
Or it happened some other way.
#2 makes no sense since God made a covenant that He is the one that would not let it happen again.
Again, you seem to think that any starting assumption invalidates a theory.
That does not mean that everything has to be supernatural.
Why do we need to assume a supernatural cause/effect?
How so? It does a poor job of explaining life before the flood.
It might.
That does not invalidate the fact that the conditions that caused the flood are long gone.
Both are perfectly valid. Of course we know that God does not lie.
Yeah, we have no idea how tall hills were before the flood.
No idea at all?
Nah, just that it is only an assumption of a possibility.
Please investigate the actual assumptions that the HPT is based on. They are quite reasonable.
I think there was a water canopy of some sort as well. But be careful about saying "canopy theory" because that has, in general, a meaning that the flood waters came in large part from said canopy.
As JR has pointed out, God called the crust of the earth (the firmament between the waters) "Heaven" in Genesis 1:8
I don't understand what the "problem" is with the water under the crust.
Ok. I'd say if it were the crust opening like a window (not a modern window but a small opening in a structure that would let light or air through) that would somehow be different than the walls of heaven?
It makes the crust fragile, prone to breaking and letting the water out.
What makes the crust fragile, prone to breaking and letting the water out? Just water?
I mean fragile relative to no water under the crust. Had it not been for the water under the crust, it would not have broken
None of that does anything to diminish the HPT. The Bible does say that God created water under the crust (water divided by the crust). The crust is called "firmament". The "firmament of the heaven" is clearly something else.
Playing with fire there. It'll burn you one day.
The canopy theory has been falsified for something like twenty years. You should drop it entirely. No way human beings survive the atmospheric pressure that would be created, for one thing. That alone is sufficient to falsify it but there are quite a lot of problems with it. It's a relic from the 80's (maybe earlier) that I wish people would just forget about.
The bible does indicate that and the hydroplate theory explains this quite well. It also accounts for the changes in human lifespan. If you thought the canopy theory was good, you need to read up on the hydroplate theory. It is superior in every possible way.
* Decrease in Human (and other) Lifespans: Another major argument for the vapor canopy has been the longer lifespans of the antediluvians, of people and of other organisms. Hydroplate Theory events may explain even better than the Canopy Theory why people, plants, animals, and insects may not live as long today as they did prior to the flood. Since the flood the Earth's crust has been loaded with radioactive (unstable) elements. Radioactive decay is dangerous to biological organisms for it not only harms the individual but degrades the functionality of the overall genome of an entire species. Today, multiple mutations occur with every single cell division, trillions of times over within, for example, a human body. See rsr.org/radioactivity and rsr.org/uranium for an introduction to the Hydroplate Theory's explanation for the origin of Earth's radioactivity. If the reduction of atmospheric pressure and reduced oxygen content were the primary reason for decreased health and lifespan, the consequences might have been seen in a more immediate drop (to current levels). Instead, charting the reduced lifespans shows an exponential decay over a few centuries which seems to fit better with the gradual deterioration of the genome that took the edge off the extraordinary precision biology that had continued to function in the post-Fall world. (See rsr.org/genetic-entropy, rsr.org/evidence#abrahams-marriage, and consider that relatively great longevity persisted till the flood even without the help of the leaves and fruit of the Tree of Life). So rather than a decrease in atmospheric pressure, the flood's origin of Earth's radioactivity explains better mankind's decreasing biological lifespan.
Huh? Of course it doesn't diminish HPT. It supports it.
Yes, we agree on this 100%.
I would tend to say that the water canopy (I'm not saying Canopy Theory since that evokes ideas that the canopy was the main driver of the flood when it was just a footnote on the water it provided) could also contribute to the solutions that were attributed to it.Playing with fire there. It'll burn you one day.
Rejecting Genesis as history has logical consequences that you won't like. You're only inches away from theistic evolution and from there the denial that Jesus was the Creator. Sounds like hyperbole but it isn't, I promise. It's best to put your trust in God's word, as written, and let the chips fall where they may.
The canopy theory has been falsified for something like twenty years. You should drop it entirely. No way human beings survive the atmospheric pressure that would be created, for one thing. That alone is sufficient to falsify it but there are quite a lot of problems with it. It's a relic from the 80's (maybe earlier) that I wish people would just forget about.
The bible does indicate that and the hydroplate theory explains this quite well. It also accounts for the changes in human lifespan. If you thought the canopy theory was good, you need to read up on the hydroplate theory. It is superior in every possible way.
From "Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory"...
Clete
As Clete said, the atmospheric pressure would not support life. So it does need to be abandoned completely.
