Bible got water cycle right (Talk.Origins)

Claim CH133:


 * Ancient people thought that the water from rivers flowing into oceans spilled over the ends of the earth. On the other hand, Ecclesiastes 1:7 says, "All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again." This shows the Bible's unexpected accuracy.

Source:
 * Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, p. 201-202.

CreationWiki response:

True, but accuracy on many points supports overall accuracy.

Talk Origins is taking this verse out of context. Verse 23 shows that this is not a reference to the normal source of snow and hail, but a special holding area for snow and hail to be used in a future judgment. Revelation 16,21 speaks of hail stones weighing a whopping 100 lb towards the end of the tribulation. These are not normal hail stones, which would explain why God has them in cold storage until the day when they are needed.

Genesis 2:5-6 is talking about a time before the Flood when it did not rain. There is some debate as to whether or not this indicates that it did not rain before the Flood, but this reference has nothing to do with the post Flood water cycle.

Furthermore, TalkOrigins is ignorant of the fact that science has shown this kind of cycle does exist today in rare circumstances, giving credence to the claim the earth's water cycle once operated this way, since forests have been found that water themselves using seasonal fog exactly like the Genesis 2 account. In fact, the California Redwood Forest waters itself also, and the Amazon Rainforest is almost completely self-watering as well through use of a process called transpiration.

Yes, it is not a complete description of the water cycle, but then again the above quote of the claim does not say that it is. Interestingly Talk Origins totally ignores the previous verse (Ecclesiastes 1:6) which  does an excellent job of describing the wind cycle.

But Ecclesiastes 1:7 does not say this.

Note the misinterpretation of the Bible here. The verse says "there is nothing new under the sun", not that "there is no new knowledge under the sun", what TalkOrigins concludes. In fact, a clear reading of the verses in shows that it's referring to historical events, essentially the origination of the saying, "History repeats itself", and has nothing to do with human knowledge, the misinterpretation made by TalkOrigins.

TalkOrigins completely ignored phrases like "thing that hath been" and "that which is done" showing this was referring to actions and events, not human knowledge. They completely ignored the surrounding verses to seemingly intentionally misinterpret what the Bible said.

This a Non Sequitur since it has no bearing on the accuracy of Ecclesiastes 1:7.

There are three main ways of viewing this reference that render this moot.
 * 1) Solomon was referring to his own time in history.
 * 2) Solomon was only talking generally.
 * 3) Pre Flood man developed a level of knowledge, that even in the 21 century A.D. has not been totally caught up with or surpassed.

No problem since the point is not special knowledge, but overall Biblical scientific accuracy.