Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-20-2019 8:25 PM
29 online now:
Coragyps, DrJones*, dwise1, Tanypteryx (4 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Happy Birthday: Percy
Post Volume:
Total: 851,663 Year: 6,700/19,786 Month: 1,241/1,581 Week: 63/393 Day: 46/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456
...
16NextFF
Author Topic:   The Flood - Animals and their minimum food requirement
Faith
Member
Posts: 31253
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 16 of 239 (326826)
06-27-2006 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Jazzns
06-27-2006 11:49 AM


Re: Dino's you say?
I mean seriously, there were dinos that alone would fill the entire volume of the ark if you ground them up into sausage.

Don't be ridiculous. We're talking about a space as big as a football field with three stories of that size.

However, I don't think they took any big dinosaurs on the ark, only a small variety.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Jazzns, posted 06-27-2006 11:49 AM Jazzns has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 06-27-2006 3:51 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 129 by nator, posted 07-02-2006 9:07 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Brian
Member (Idle past 3095 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 17 of 239 (326828)
06-27-2006 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
06-27-2006 1:09 PM


Re: You laugh at you know not what
There is absolutely no doubt that the dinosaur fossils are evidence of the flood as in fact all the fossils over the earth are evidence of the flood.

If this is true, why is it that there isn't a single science department in any high school or university that teach this?

There may be no doubt in you mind, but history and archaeology has shown the Flood to be a myth.

Brian.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:09 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:28 PM Brian has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 31253
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 18 of 239 (326829)
06-27-2006 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
06-27-2006 5:43 AM


a way little or no food was required
A state of hibernation-like-torpor induced by food deprivation is a theory I just ran across yesterday. Makes sense to me.

http://www.creationism.org/caesar/tough.htm

The enormous difficulty Noah and his family members would have had in feeding all the animals on the ark would have led to many animals’ not receiving adequate amounts of food. As it turns out, lack of food is one of the chief causes of hibernation or estivation among animals. Richard G. Van Gelder, Chairman of the Department of Mammology at the American Museum of Natural History, writes:

Although hibernation and estivation are generally thought of as mechanisms enabling an animal to avoid a season of excessive heat or cold, it seems that these dormant states are as much as, or more, related to A TIME OF LITTLE OR NO FOOD as to temperature. There are actually various levels of dormancy, the most extreme being called true hibernation. It involves a marked drop in body temperature, reduced metabolism, and a condition of torpidity, in which the animal has lost sensibility or the power of motion partially or completely. (1) [emphasis added]

He further notes:

Akin to hibernation, and perhaps identical to it, is estivation. This summer torpidity has been far less studied than has hibernation. THE INDUCEMENT FOR ESTIVATION SEEMS TO BE THE DISAPPEARANCE OF GREEN VEGETATION early in the summer in, for example, some parts of western United States. The Washington ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni) emerges from hibernation in late January or early February and breeds, the young being born in February or March. By the end of June the adults have gone into estivation, and, without emerging from their burrows, go into hibernation, remaining in a state of torpor for seven or eight months. (2) [emphasis added]

Such a state of languor, induced both by adverse climatic conditions and a lack of food — particularly greens, which could not stay fresh for long aboard the ark — would have annulled the need for Noah and his seven shipmates to feed and clean up after an enormous number of animals. They would only have needed food and upkeep (Gen. 6:19-21) for the small number of species which under no circumstances slip into hibernation or estivation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 5:43 AM CK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by deerbreh, posted 06-27-2006 3:31 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 31253
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 19 of 239 (326831)
06-27-2006 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Brian
06-27-2006 1:19 PM


Re: You laugh at you know not what
There is absolutely no doubt that the dinosaur fossils are evidence of the flood as in fact all the fossils over the earth are evidence of the flood.

If this is true, why is it that there isn't a single science department in any high school or university that teach this?

Denial I'm sure. It's obviously true, Brian, the fossils themselves prove the Flood. Denial is the only way to explain why it isn't recognized, and that has to be because 150-200 years ago somebody decided that there was no flood and that things have been the same forever, and nobody is willing or able to question this received wisdom except us creationists.

There may be no doubt in you mind, but history and archaeology has shown the Flood to be a myth.

That's the myth. They've shown nothing of the kind. They just decided long ago that it's a myth because they liked the idea of assuming that the fossils evolved from each other up that stack of disparate sediments that they laughably labeled eras in time.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Brian, posted 06-27-2006 1:19 PM Brian has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brian, posted 06-27-2006 1:36 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Brian
Member (Idle past 3095 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 20 of 239 (326833)
06-27-2006 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
06-27-2006 1:28 PM


Re: You laugh at you know not what
Denial I'm sure. It's obviously true, Brian, the fossils themselves prove the Flood. Denial is the only way to explain why it isn't recognized, and that has to be because 150-200 years ago somebody decided that there was no flood and that things have been the same forever, and nobody is willing or able to question this received wisdom except us creationists.

But, Faith, it is some conspiracy theory! EVERY science department doesn't take the flood seriously there must be some evidence against it. Scientists cannot just say something is untrue, they need to produce evidence to support their theories, or else they'd be picked apart by other scientists.

That's the myth. They've shown nothing of the kind. They just decided long ago that it's a myth because they liked the idea of assuming that the fossils evolved from each other up that stack of disparate sediments that they laughably labeled eras in time.

I didn't mention science here because i'm not a scientist, but archaeology and history has shown the flood to be a myth. many cultures hav an unbroken history that goes right through the date of the flood. Take the Egyptians as an example, they have a continuous history right through the flood period and their structures (e.g. great pyramid) has no water erosion.

Anyway, why would scientists want to deny the flood if it is so obvious? We do have Christian and Jewish scientists don't we?

Brian.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:28 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
CK
Member (Idle past 2264 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 21 of 239 (326839)
06-27-2006 1:46 PM


TOPIC WARNING
This topic has nothing to do with fossils - if you want to discuss fossils and the flood - start a thread. It has nothing at all to do with the topic.

This topic has nothing to do with theories of "hibernation-like-torpor" - if you want to propose that, start a thread. It has nothing at all to do with the topic.

This is a topic to discuss the food requirements of animals that might have been present on the ark. If people want to suggest alternative reasons why they did not need to eat - start a thread.


Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Jazzns, posted 06-27-2006 3:56 PM CK has responded

  
kalimero
Member (Idle past 580 days)
Posts: 251
From: Israel
Joined: 04-08-2006


Message 22 of 239 (326849)
06-27-2006 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
06-27-2006 1:09 PM


Re: You laugh at you know not what
The saureans you have listed were most likely merely varieties of an original Kind, only two of which would have been taken on the ark, and not necessarily the largest specimens either, or necessarily full grown. Much of what is today called a "species" is in other words most likely just a variety of the original Kind.

There is absolutely no doubt that the dinosaur fossils are evidence of the flood as in fact all the fossils over the earth are evidence of the flood. Such an event, causing rapid burial of intact creatures, is the only way the conditions for such preservation could have occurred. Some of the dinosaur beds show great numbers of them all piled up together as if washed into their grave by one great rush of water.

How exactly were so many species of dinosaurs "washed into their grave" if the only one around was the one "original kind"?
Or maybe the one "kind" somehow turned into all other "kindes" and then another flood came and buried them all but did not bury any animals that would be considered "modern"?

I'm unclear how many animals were still vegetarian at the time of the ark, although perhaps a vegetarian variety of dino was taken on the ark.

So how many "kindes" were there? And how exactly does a predator, that is so "inteligently designed" (even by god) survive on vegitables?

I read on one creationist site recently that it is very likely most of the animals on the ark went into a state of dormancy or torpor, like hibernation, or a similar condition that occurs in some animals in hot weather that I can't remember the name of, and that this state of torpor may also occur under conditions of food deprivation.

Can you give a link to this site?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:09 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 1029 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 23 of 239 (326875)
06-27-2006 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
06-27-2006 1:24 PM


Re: a way little or no food was required
They would only have needed food and upkeep (Gen. 6:19-21) for the small number of species which under no circumstances slip into hibernation or estivation.

Kind of a big logical leap there is it not? From "some animals have the ability to hibernate or aestivate in response to no food" to "the small number of species which under no circumstances.....".

Where is the documentation that it is a small number? Many birds migrate instead of hibernating. There is little evidence of hibernation/aestivation in the tropics, food or no food. So far there is one documented case, a lemur in Madascar.
http://www.answers.com/topic/hibernation

I think hibernation is not a viable solution to the question of food supply/waste removal on the Ark until someone comes up with some evidence most animals can in fact hibernate. You would think it would have been mentioned in Genesis also. Kind of an important fact to leave out if you wanted your story to be believed. All that detail on the Ark construction and not one peep about hibernation to conserve food.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:24 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 3:59 PM deerbreh has not yet responded

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 3970 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 24 of 239 (326884)
06-27-2006 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
06-27-2006 1:17 PM


Re: Dino's you say?
Don't be ridiculous. We're talking about a space as big as a football field with three stories of that size.

However, I don't think they took any big dinosaurs on the ark, only a small variety.

Um, faith.... dinosaurs never lived when people did.....

the ark never happened..... to continue to believe it is pure idiocy. The facts are irrefutable.

Even an aircraft carrier would not be nearly large enough


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 1:17 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2047 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 25 of 239 (326885)
06-27-2006 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by CK
06-27-2006 1:46 PM


Hibernation changes food requirements
I think the super-awesome-hibernation-skillz of the animals may be a "valid" *cough* response to the whole food requirements problem. What would be interesting would be to take the total food requirments once we have it and see how much we would have to shrink it to fit in the ark. That percentage would be what the hibernating animals would have to live on. I imagine we are looking at fractions of a percent which STILL makes the story look....well....like a story.

It is like slipping on a bannana peel but making it look like you really MEANT to fall over because you felt like break dancing. Yea....uh...thats it. It is fun to take analogies to the extreme.


Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 1:46 PM CK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 3:58 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

  
CK
Member (Idle past 2264 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 26 of 239 (326888)
06-27-2006 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Jazzns
06-27-2006 3:56 PM


Re: Hibernation changes food requirements
quote:
I think the super-awesome-hibernation-skillz of the animals may be a "valid" *cough* response to the whole food requirements problem. What would be interesting would be to take the total food requirments once we have it and see how much we would have to shrink it to fit in the ark. That percentage would be what the hibernating animals would have to live on.

That seems fairly sensible to me - but I REFUSE to budge on anyone introducing the idea that Noah had refrigerators on the ark or access to pizza delivery.

Edited by CK, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Jazzns, posted 06-27-2006 3:56 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31253
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 27 of 239 (326889)
06-27-2006 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by deerbreh
06-27-2006 3:31 PM


Re: a way little or no food was required
In any case, animals confined in stalls and cages for a year aren't going to be consuming a lot of calories.

All that detail about the construction ought to be enough evidence of the truth of the story. God isn't in the business of proving every little thing. He provides enough evidence to convict the scoffers of guilt, and otherwise expects to be believed because of Who He is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by deerbreh, posted 06-27-2006 3:31 PM deerbreh has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 4:04 PM Faith has responded
 Message 130 by nator, posted 07-02-2006 9:13 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
CK
Member (Idle past 2264 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 28 of 239 (326891)
06-27-2006 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Faith
06-27-2006 3:59 PM


Why is Faith allowed to drag every fucking topic off course?
quote:
All that detail about the construction ought to be enough evidence of the truth of the story.

What does the construction of the Ark have to do with the op? How the material was actually stored is NOT the purpose of this topic.

quote:
God isn't in the business of proving every little thing. He provides enough evidence to convict the scoffers of guilt, and otherwise expects to be believed because of Who He is.

What does that statement add to this very specific discussion?

Do you have anything sensible or useful to say? Anything more useful than "God said" - you have the faith and belief forums for that.

What is difficult to understand about the fact that the science forums are for the discussion of SCIENCE?

Edited by CK, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 3:59 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 4:11 PM CK has not yet responded
 Message 35 by deerbreh, posted 06-27-2006 4:28 PM CK has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31253
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 29 of 239 (326895)
06-27-2006 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by CK
06-27-2006 4:04 PM


Re: Why is Faith allowed to drag every fucking topic off course?
I was just answering the usual stupid ideas about the flood that you haven't bothered to call off topic until I answered them. So sorry, I will leave you alone now.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 4:04 PM CK has not yet responded

    
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2047 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 30 of 239 (326896)
06-27-2006 4:16 PM


Can we get a number?
Rather than being specific to each "kind" lets talk about averages. You'll never be able to get a "real" accurate number because we just don't know about the representative of each kind.

Take the info for a horse and cut it in half and call that the average amount of food/water for each animal. That would be ~2500 pounds of food and ~1000 gallons of water.

Now multiply that by the total number of proposed members.

~2500 x ~15000 = 37.5 million pounds of food
~1000 x ~15000 = 15 million gallons of water

What is the volume of 37.5 million pounds of hay and 15 million gallons of water?

What is the volume of the ark?

What percentage of the total food requirements for the average, non-super-awesome-hibernation-skillz creature can we ACTUALLY fit into the space allotted by "Crazy John" for food?

Under ideal hibernation conditions, how far off is the estimate?


Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 06-27-2006 4:20 PM Jazzns has responded
 Message 33 by CK, posted 06-27-2006 4:22 PM Jazzns has not yet responded
 Message 40 by Discreet Label, posted 06-27-2006 5:08 PM Jazzns has not yet responded
 Message 79 by ohnhai, posted 06-27-2006 11:35 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
3456
...
16NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019