new

(regarding Pinochet's fascism)

It beats socialist totalitarianism where the state tries to control your thoughts, shuts down churches, confiscates all property, forces everyone to work for the state and takes your children away from you.

I was a student in Chile during this era. I can tell you flat out everyone on this forum who defends Allende would have prefered Pinochet in they were in country on the ground as I was (unless a person has no conscious and wanted to be in the ranks of elite communists who were looting the country and creating the same type of two class system we saw in the Soviet Empire).

Btw...under Truman America started the policy of supporting authoritarian dictators, if needed, in order to prevent an expansion of socialist totalitarianism. That was our policy all during the cold war. Of course some dissented from it. They supported the totalitarians in the Soviet Union. The names are well known: ACLU director Corliss Lamont, "Independent" journalist Izzy Stone, Carl Bernstein's faither Albert, New Republic publisher and member of the Cambridge Spy Ring Michael Whitney Straight, George Bernard Shaw, Lillian Hellman, Julius Rosenberg, Joel Barr, 11 term U.S. Congressman Samuel Dickstein (D-NY) New York Times reporters Walter Duranty, Herbert Matthews, Harold Denny, Anthony Lewis...the list goes on and on.

Its no wonder considering the cast which took the other side in the Cold War the the history of the Allende era has been so twisted.

America was the villian. The CIA was involved in the coup. But what about the Soviets? What about the thousands of agents from communist regimes who flooded into Chile the day after Allende squeaked out a plurality? Why no concern about that? Those agents represented the most brutal regimes the world has ever seen.

Here's my take on where the Flood waters went. If it sounds too far-fetched, no problem, it's just a hypothesis (or theory, or guess, or whatever it's called):

My take on this is that the waters, which predominantly came from within the earth, went back down. As it was raining on the surface, water was also coming from below, and the people were sandwiched between the two sources.

When the rains stopped, the waters began falling back down through the holes in the earth. Sort of like a giant bathtub with many plugs that had been pulled.

Now comes the interesting part, a sort of modified Boyle's Law.
pV = k, or pressure x volume = a constant
Isaiah had something interesting to say about Hell:

Originally Posted by Isaiah 5:14
Therefore hell hath enlarged herself...

Here's the entire verse:
Isaiah 5:14
Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.

Using Isaiah 5:14 to modify Boyle's Law gives us this:
pm = k, or pressure x mass = a constant
Since pressure (or more appropriately density) is defined as mass/volume, I conclude this:
(mass/volume) x mass = a constant, or
mass2/volume = a constant
To explain this using a simple example, let's say:
mass = 5
volume = 5
Then the constant is 5 --- (5 x 5 / 5 = 5).

However, double the mass without changing the constant, and what happens? The volume has to compensate for the change:
mass = 10
volume = ?
constant = 5
Thus 10 x 10 / ? = 5, and ? = 20.

This, then, is what Isaiah is basically saying:
As Hell acquires more mass, it enlarges to compensate for its temperature.
Now back to the Flood:

Everyone on earth died except for 8 people, and Hell "super-enlarged" to compensate for the large influx of souls, and the expanding diameter could have engulfed the water reservoirs.

Just a pet theory of mine --- submitted for "peer review".

p.s. The only problem I see with this, is that Christianity teaches that Hell is not a constant temperature, but is in fact, a tiered structure, being hotter in the lower levels.