quote:
Coral- The flood was brief enough for some coral to survive.
Some did not survive and was restarted by new growth.
[b]I'm sorry. Your quick assumption that coral survived won't cut it. the coral would have died, along with nearly every other non-brackish fish in the sea! Why? Because during the flood, salt and fresh water would have mixed. most fish cannot tolerate even slight changes in salinity. They die RIGHT AWAY. NO, THEY COULDN'T HAVE SURVIVED THE FLOOD (AND ANYWAY, THE FRESH WATER WOULD HAVE TAKEN A LONG TIME TO RESTORE THE OCEAN TO THE NORMAL LEVELS OF SALINITY). In addition, the rise in the ocean levels would have been so dramatic that it would have taken many days for it to return to normal levels. Coral could not have possibly survived this long.
quote:
Some did not survive and was restarted by new growth.
Nope! coral takes MILLIONS of years to regrow. Even of this quick regrowth had indeed occured, we would see evidence of this.
The flood would have made farming impossible (salt water destroys land), despite the fact farming was recorded several yrs after the flood. The flood would have killed all plants, including aquatic plants, which would have died without the shining of the sun. The chines and the Egyptians have made no record of the flood. Funny how they'd fail to even mention a rainstorm that covered the entire surface of the planet in 100s of ft of water. Shortly after the "flood", Chinese and Egyptians, who would have been moving back to their distant lands, were recording normally. If the flood had occured, the pyramids would have been destroyed. American species (we'll say the llama) would have travel across the deserts of the Mideast, the tropics of south asia, the temperates of china, the siberian tundra, the thick forest of alaska, the steep cliffs of the rockies, the thick forests of the cascades, the deserts of california, the mountains of mexico, and then finally home to their various homes in South america. all this without any food (where would you find food after a giant flood [noah, by the way, did not save plants]). they also did this without leaving one fossil behind. no remains either.
and here's an article THAT I DIDN'T WRITE. THE AUTHOR LEFT THE FOLLOWING NOTE ON HIS SITE:
R. J. Riggins
email me
Use or repost at your pleasure, just leave my name on it, please.
Here is the article:
Koalas
They live only in Australia. Their diet is so restricted--to a few subspecies of eucalyptus--that they're threatened now by destruction of the only kinds of trees they will eat. It's also hard to imagine them migrating. Over many generations they might slowly spread through an area--but travelers, they ain't.
And when they did migrate over 9,000 miles, in a tiny herd from Ararat to New South Wales, eating a convenient trail of long-disappeared eucalyptus (which took how many years after the Flood to grow?), they left no trail of koala fossils behind.
A suggestion for creation "researchers": instead of wasting endless hours combing through the writings of real scientists to find phrases to yank out of context that make them seem to doubt evolution--instead of that, put together a real research expedition! Find us that bee-line trail from northern Turkey to Australia. Find us those fossilized eucalyptus leaves, koala footprints, and koala bones. While you're at it, it would be lovely if you turned up a few kangaroos, giant moas, marsupial lions, Tasmanian wolves, and platypuses along that superhighway to the South Pacific.
WOW! Now that you've seen all this, still believe?
thank you
™ Version 4.2