Fish must be very holy

[Drich]

It wouldn't matter, drich. Atmospheric pressure (from your link) is defined as the weight of air from sea level to the top of the atmosphere. As water level increases, the atmosphere doesn't get taller. If sea level were to be re-established at the top of Mt Everest, you'd be five miles closer to the top of the atmosphere, so the pressure would be correspondingly less - you don't get five more miles of atmosphere to compensate.

So.. They don't have the term 'displacement' where you live?

If so, then know if you add 5 miles of water to the circumference of the earth then the atmosphere is also displaced 5 miles.

Meaning because water is more dense than air it would now occupy the space that was once occupied by air, thus displacing the air up wards. So I. Effect you would get 5 more miles of atmosphere because 5 miles of water displaced it.. What was 5 miles above sea level becomes sea level.

If you do not think this is th case and account for the displaced air. Where does it go?

Your earlier point about the definition of 'har' fails as well, since the verse in Genesis includes all mountains 'under the heavens', not just the ones the myth-makers knew about.

Boru

Oh, my..

Take out the word mountain in that passage and add the word har. Now the passage should read that all the har was covered by 15 cubits of water yes?

Now define har. Because whatever har is was covered by 15 cubits.

As per the links I provided har is most often times translated tall hill sometimes translated mountain.

The opposite of this is the hebrew word harar. It is primarly translated mountain. But sometimes translated tall hill. Why?

BECAUSE ANCIENT HEBREWS DID NOT MEASURE MOUNTAINS AS WE DO!!!

They could only guesstimate. When we say mountain we mean a natural earth formation rising 1000 ft above sea level.

When one of them says mountain (harar) it would mean the author thought it was taller than the standard measure of a hill (Har)

So when we translate into English with all of our modern maps and measures as our standards we find that sometimes when a writer references a har it is technically a mountain, so the translator says mountain. Like wise in reverse sometimes a writer would identify a harar, and it would turn out to be a hill or range of hills.

In the case of Genesis however the author had access to both har and harar to describe how the flood encompassed the earth. He did not use the term harar to describe what happened, he used the term har.

This means my explaination here as well stands.