Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Ark
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 248 of 302 (269855)
12-15-2005 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 247 by NotSoBlindFaith
12-15-2005 11:15 PM


Expanations
A: Fossil sea life on mountains, some found with fossils of land plants.
This was already explained to you. Did you read it?
Now you explain the nature of that life. What sort of sea life is it? How is it related to todays sea life. Why is it like that?
B: How mass graves of dinosaurs exist all over the world, many of which even evolutionists say drown in a flood.
Explain why this are not all of the same type. Why did they not all die at the same time? Explain why some are the result of water deposition but not others and why that water deposition is often river.
C: How unfossilized dinosaur bones can still exist. If they died 65 million years ago, there bones should be ether completely fossilized or dust by now.
Teeth are already equivalent to minerals. What other bones of dinosaurs are not fossilized. As far as I know they are ALL permineralized. Give details.
D: How so many water carved features exist all over the globe (ex. Devils Tower, Columbia River basin, Grand canyon.) Oh, and be sure to go into detail.
There are threads on these details. The details can not be explained by single flood. They did not all happen at the same time. There are such features from a wide range of times. Please explain, in detail, how this is done by one flood.
ABE
On second thought don't explain here. That is ALL off topic for this thread. Take it to "Geology and the Great Flood" threads.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 12-15-2005 11:23 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by NotSoBlindFaith, posted 12-15-2005 11:15 PM NotSoBlindFaith has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 249 of 302 (269858)
12-15-2005 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 247 by NotSoBlindFaith
12-15-2005 11:15 PM


Re: Perfect?
Moles would be Talpidae (That in includes moles, mole shrews, and others). Dogs of course belong to the Canine family, along with wolves, foxes, dingoes, and African hunting dogs, all of which would come from a single pair of canines on the ark.
So, it appears from your examples that "kinds" are at about the family level. So you agree that our current animals that belong to one family all evolved (and very, very rapidly) from a single pair (or 7) at the time of the ark?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by NotSoBlindFaith, posted 12-15-2005 11:15 PM NotSoBlindFaith has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 253 of 302 (269879)
12-16-2005 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by arachnophilia
12-16-2005 12:25 AM


Re: Anybody up for some sums?
I'd say pretty much at this simplified level. That is one a day!
However, it assumes a constant rate. That means that we were getting 1 a day in a population of about 30,000 some thousand individuals at the beginning. In addition, we have to put a stop to this hyper evolution long before today. So we have much less than 5,000 years to play with.
For example, there is no hint in the Bible that this hadn't finished by the time of Christ. So we have about half as much time not the full 5,000 years. Earlier commentary in the OT also gives no hint that this was going on so it might be reasonable to presume that the rapid appearance of new life forms stopped sometime before.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by arachnophilia, posted 12-16-2005 12:25 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by arachnophilia, posted 12-16-2005 2:44 AM NosyNed has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 268 of 302 (270910)
12-19-2005 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Nighttrain
12-19-2005 6:12 PM


Ice Free Corridors
Any flaws in my reasoning?
Your reasoning is fine but your premises are flawed. There were, apparently, ice free corridors. In addition, there is just a hint of evidence that migrations were down the edges of the continent which are now flooded. The sea levels lowering didn't only expose the bering land bridge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Nighttrain, posted 12-19-2005 6:12 PM Nighttrain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Nighttrain, posted 12-19-2005 9:15 PM NosyNed has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 272 of 302 (270982)
12-20-2005 12:56 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Nighttrain
12-19-2005 9:15 PM


Dear Departed Ice Free Corridors
Through the investigation of pre-Clovis archaeological sites and the reconstruction of North America's glacial past, scientists are now suggesting that the ice-free corridor may not have been a feasible route for the early Americans.
(underline mine)
From: Geotimes - February 2004 - The Ice-Free Corridor Revisited
and
Thus it would appear that evidence for the earliest human migrations to the mid-continent should be sought elsewhere, and the west coast is becoming more and more credible as an alternative.
It appears that you are right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Nighttrain, posted 12-19-2005 9:15 PM Nighttrain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by jar, posted 12-20-2005 1:00 AM NosyNed has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 295 of 302 (274437)
12-31-2005 3:57 PM


NSBF's big post has not been very well answered
NotSoBlindFaith made a number of points but I guess they will have to be discussed in a continuation thread that picks on those points specifically. If someone expresses and interest I'll PNT a few of them.
For one, the fact that finding a new species doesn't equal speciation may be true but it is also not evidence that it isn't a new species. That point has been rather rushed over.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024