|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
QuickSearch
|
|
| |||||||
| Chatting now: | Chat room empty | ||||||
| hiimearl | |||||||
|
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Does The Flood Add up? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member  Posts: 10373 From: frozen wasteland Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
The two anteaters ate the two ants and promptly starved to death - which is why there are no anteaters or ants alive today. :D More complications: a lot of living things have a lifespan shorter than the one-year flood, so they must have reproduced. There would have been a whole lotta reproduction goin' on - unless Noah laid in a supply of mouse condoms and elephant condoms, etc. What with the on-board extinctions and population explosions, it's pretty hard to estimate the post-flood contents of the ark. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
jar Member  Posts: 25421 From: Texas!! Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Not really. The Ark and the whole flood myth were pretty much full of it. ;) Piles and piles of it. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
deerbreh Member Posts: 880 Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Lots of carpenter ants working on that gopher wood I imagine. Not to mention termites. Noah likely made a special exception to his no screwing rule for the anteaters so that there would be enough anteaters to keep up with the demand.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gullwind Inactive Member |
How could they have done any fishing? They only had two worms! Ba-dum-dum.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Crue Knight Inactive Member |
So how could they have brought any meat? [joke]Maybe they used their appendixes! They had eight of em![/joke]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jon Member  Posts: 4451 From: Minnesota, U.S.A. Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
No, that's not really how it works. The Mayan year that we call 3114 B.C. is, to the Maya, the year zero. Their calendar was operating years before that. From the book Lost Languages by Andrew Robinson: quote: Now, you may have found an arbitrary coincidence, but I'm not even ready to give you that. Based on what others have pointed out, your chronology of the Bible is off to begin with. It truly is mysterious why the Mayan picked that date, but it is no-bit mysterious as to why you picked it ;). Also, if this date is so important, why is it only seen in one ancient culture? Literalists will always try to find correlations between their story and reality, always completely ignoring any contradictions. It seems to me that this is exactly what you are doing, though poorly. Jon
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jon Member Posts: 4451 From: Minnesota, U.S.A. Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
If God was all-knowing, He would certainly know that with His UNLIMITED power, all He would have to do is kill 'em all off, and start over from scratch. Unless, He had already forgotten what He had made. God did it arguments don't logically hold up, and certainly not in a science forum. Of course, you can try the old "God works in mysterious ways" thing too, but I don't know how well that will fly either... :rolleyes: Jon
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MUTTY6969 Member (Idle past 2753 days)  Posts: 65 From: ARIZONA Joined: |
I only see faith dipping her toe in on one vague response but avoiding all the other good questions. Plenty of biblical literists on this forum and the ones like iano and faith who post the most choose to ignore the 10 or 15 good questions that one would think are quit easy to answer.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jon Member Posts: 4451 From: Minnesota, U.S.A. Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
That's really nothing new. Rarely on these forums do the good questions get answered. Some of the best posts made (and directed at Creationists) get no imput from them. Jon
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MUTTY6969 Member (Idle past 2753 days) Posts: 65 From: ARIZONA Joined: |
I was wondering if one of these fine, never evading the question, fundamentalist would answer this? If there is only kind, not species, on the ark as they say, lets be generous and say 10,000 kind, and the earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old, would we not have noticed the huge jump in species we see today? I mean there are approximately 1.5 million species on our planet right now, so what explanation is their for such a huge jump in speciation in such a short period of time?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DrJones* Member  Posts: 1558 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
Not a creationist but I'll give you their likely answer. 1. The original prototype "kinds" had all sorts of genetic variation built into them, which allowed them to have so many different species. 2. These original kinds very quickly "micro-evoloved" into the differnet species. I have seen no answer as to what caused this fast "micro-evolution". Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MUTTY6969 Member (Idle past 2753 days) Posts: 65 From: ARIZONA Joined: |
There has to be some mental instability with that sort of logic.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jon Member Posts: 4451 From: Minnesota, U.S.A. Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
That well sums up the whole argument, yes. I've heard of this one many times too--a sort of "hyper evolution" as I've heard it been called. It really is an admision to "evolution", though just not of the scientific kind. Oh, yes, and this question you've just asked is very much the kind not likely to be touched by the Creationists. We will just have to sit around and guess at what their explanation is (if they even have one). They say we don't understand their logic, and when we ask for an explanation, they go plain cold on us. I just don't get it myself. Jon
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 2154 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Hay is not very dense even if baled, biblically its the seeds that
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member Posts: 10373 From: frozen wasteland Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
What gets me is the change, from no pre-flood evolution to post-flood hyper-evolution to no evolution again today. I can see the hyper-evolution petering out as the "genetic potential" is used up - but how (and why) did it start? Did God flip the switch? If it took a miracle, why all the pretense of a "scientific" scenario at all? (And to hold all that "genetic potential", the pre-flood animals must have had DNA strands a mile long. :D ) Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2015
