Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8945 total)
42 online now:
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,175 Year: 20,211/19,786 Month: 608/2,023 Week: 116/392 Day: 29/87 Hour: 4/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How did the Aborigines get to Australia?
Percy
Member
Posts: 18950
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 91 of 226 (648281)
01-14-2012 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Granny Magda
01-14-2012 7:22 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Granny Magda writes:

Evidence for the ark?

Maybe for this discussion we should just take the ark as a given.

Chuck hasn't made any claims that are physically impossible. Animals do migrate, land bridges such as in the Bering Straight did exist when the oceans were lower. What I think we hope Chuck will come to understand is that there is no evidence that what he proposes ever existed or happened within the last few thousand years.

Chuck doesn't seem to understand the necessity to have evidence standing behind ideas. When your teenager comes home late he doesn't make up a story about being kidnapped by elves, he makes up a story that could actually happen, but the fact that it could have actually happened doesn't mean that it did happen. This is what creationists like Chuck don't seem to understand. Developing a hypothesis that isn't physically impossible is the easy part, anyone can do it. Developing a hypothesis actually supported by evidence is the hard part.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Granny Magda, posted 01-14-2012 7:22 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Granny Magda, posted 01-14-2012 8:13 AM Percy has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 92 of 226 (648284)
01-14-2012 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Percy
01-14-2012 8:09 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Maybe for this discussion we should just take the ark as a given.

That's a pretty big given! I'm not sure I'm that giving a person.

Still, okay, if you think so.

Animals do migrate, land bridges such as in the Bering Straight did exist when the oceans were lower.

To Australia? To Antarctica? Those are some mighty impressive bridges.

This is what creationists like Chuck don't seem to understand. Developing a hypothesis that isn't physically impossible is the easy part, anyone can do it. Developing a hypothesis actually supported by evidence is the hard part.

Agreed. Their refusal to learn or debate doesn't help either.

Mutate and Survive


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 8:09 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 8:45 AM Granny Magda has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18950
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 93 of 226 (648291)
01-14-2012 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Granny Magda
01-14-2012 8:13 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Granny Magda writes:

That's a pretty big given! I'm not sure I'm that giving a person.

Maybe I could have better said, "Maybe this discussion shouldn't focus much attention on issues regarding the ark since it's not the topic. There are plenty of threads already about the ark."

To Australia? To Antarctica? Those are some mighty impressive bridges.

Right, but at least Chuck wasn't throwing out some fanciful idea relying on magic. There is such a thing as land bridges. Land bridges do exist. The key question is whether there is any evidence for recent land bridges where Chuck needs them. At least Chuck hasn't proposed anything that is impossible.

The key question is what evidence Chuck has that causes him to propose that marsupials migrated to Australia around 5000 years ago. We already know the answer to this question, but I'm not sure Chuck has considered it yet, mainly because he's not accustomed to seeking evidence for beliefs whose origin was religion rather than science.

While many people have no problem maintaining different scientific and religious beliefs, in the evangelical world there is only one set of beliefs. Chuck has many things that he believes are true, and some of them come from science and have evidence, and some of them come from religion and don't have evidence. The problem for Chuck is that he doesn't know which of his beliefs are science and which are religion, and so he thinks they must all have evidence. He hasn't yet explored whether some of his most fundamental beliefs about the world have evidence. He might not know the evidence himself, but he's sure the evidence is out there somewhere, and as is also clear, he's highly suspicious of us and thinks we are ignoring the evidence that he's sure is out there.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Granny Magda, posted 01-14-2012 8:13 AM Granny Magda has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by NoNukes, posted 01-14-2012 12:08 PM Percy has responded
 Message 101 by Chuck77, posted 01-15-2012 12:59 AM Percy has responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 226 (648310)
01-14-2012 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Percy
01-14-2012 8:45 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Right, but at least Chuck wasn't throwing out some fanciful idea relying on magic. There is such a thing as land bridges. Land bridges do exist.

Yes. And there are also such things as tsunamis and sandbars.

Chuck77 does not need evidence because for him, what is important is that scientific evidence that the flood did not happen exactly according to his interpretation of Genesis does not constitute iron clad proof that the Bible is wrong.

So any proposed scenario for anything that might have happened in the Bible, that cannot be ruled out with 100% certainty, particularly if the scenario does not even require the supernatural, serves the same purpose as for a creationist, that real, and convincing evidence serves for non-Biblical propositions.

Science has evidence but not absolute certainty about the flood, which of course is as nothing compared to the Word of God, and Chuck77 believes that the Word says that the earth was flooded about 4500 years ago. And Chuck77 is not going to agree to any proposition that costs him eternal life. Few would.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 8:45 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 12:39 PM NoNukes has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18950
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 95 of 226 (648315)
01-14-2012 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by NoNukes
01-14-2012 12:08 PM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
If the goal is to convince Chuck or any creationist, then I don't think that's going to happen. It's just human nature. You'll never convince believers in alien abductions or ghosts or Bigfoot or the flood or whatever that there's no such thing. People believe weird things. Doesn't matter why, they just do.

But what you *can* do is ask them to produce their evidence. And they'll be able to produce some, be it mysterious and almost alien metallic objects or ghostly images or tufts of hair from a large mammal or seashells on mountain tops, but evidence like this has already been found wholly unpersuasive, and none of these wacky ideas have found much traction within science. Getting creationists to struggle with producing evidence and, when they have some, interpret it properly is all that need be done.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by NoNukes, posted 01-14-2012 12:08 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by NoNukes, posted 01-14-2012 1:19 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 226 (648321)
01-14-2012 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Percy
01-14-2012 12:39 PM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
All true. I'm beginning to appreciate slevesque a bit more. Where is that dude?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 12:39 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3838
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 97 of 226 (648343)
01-14-2012 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Granny Magda
01-14-2012 7:22 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
CMI writes:

As ocean levels rose at the end of the Ice Age, land bridges were eliminated and the migrant marsupials were stuck where they were.

What land bridges? Care to provide any evidence for these land bridges? During the Ice Age!? Really, this is spectacularly silly stuff. There is fossil evidence of Australian marsupials millions of years before the Ice Age.

I realize that your actual point was that Ice Age land bridges would not account for the presence of marsupials in Australia because fossil evidence shows that they were already there millions of years before. Kind of like trying to claim that the arrival yesterday in New York of an airliner from Western Europe accounts for the presence of Europeans in the Americas.

{More for the benefit of lurkers, though I'm sure that Chuck will stubbornly cling to his blessed ignorance:}

However, land bridges did exist during the last ice age and, I'm sure, during the previous ice ages as well. During the last ice age, so much water was tied up in the ice caps that sea level was about 200 feet lower. That means that sea floor that is less than 200 feet down had been dry land during that time, thus forming what we call land bridges.

Take a look at maps that also display sea depth; Google Earth provides that feature as well. The Persian Gulf is less than 200 feet deep, though beyond the Strait of Hormuz it starts to drop off; that means that during the Ice Age that was dry land. I suspect that the flooding of that region which must have been well populated may have formed the basis for Mesopotamian flood myths. Much of the Bering Strait and the Bering Sea is less than 200 feet deep, so that would have formed a well-known land bridge between Asia and North America. We can also see lots of land bridges extending from Southeast Asia through Indonesia and even extending up into the Philippines, though there doesn't seem to have been any land bridge providing a direct connection to Papua New Guinea, since most of the ocean floor there is thousands of feet deep.

However, there is no land bridge connecting Asia with Australia. Separating Australia from that Southeast Asian land bridging is a trench that is thousands of feet deep. Not land-bridge material, that. Also, it looks very much like so many other trenches where one tectonic plate collides with another and the one trench starts subtending beneath the other. There is a land bridge between Australia and Papua New Guinea, but there is no land bridge connection from there to Southeast Asia, so still no land-bridge route for marsupials to take from Asia to Australia.

Therefore, CMI's land bridge claim does not hold water.

BTW, supporting Percy's source that marsupials migrated from Antarctica when it and Australia were next to each other, when we look at the sea bottom between Australia and Antarctica we see the signs of spreading that occurs when plates move away from each other, such as we see in the mid-Atlantic expansion zone.

CMI writes:

They could have dispersed before many of the other mammalian varieties.

Why? How?

I concur, though I would have started with "huh?". Creationist migration scenarios make absolutely no sense, even if we ignore the fact that with so many species pared down to such incredibly small initial populations, it would have taken very few acts of predation (hey, carnivores have to eat too) to have brought nearly all prey species to extinction. Plus, with so many species' specialized diets, such as the koala's that require leaves from mature eucalyptus trees (of which there would have been none right after The Flood, let alone along the long trek to Australia), what would the herbivores have had to eat while trying to out-run the carnivores trying to eat them? And most of all, how did the sloths make their own migration from Central Asia to Central America? And how were they able to out-run all those hungry carnivores when their top ground speed is little better than that of a snail?

As they say (I think David Ruse was credited), "Creationism is more fun than science!"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Granny Magda, posted 01-14-2012 7:22 AM Granny Magda has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2012 8:23 PM dwise1 has not yet responded
 Message 99 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2012 9:34 PM dwise1 has not yet responded
 Message 100 by Chuck77, posted 01-15-2012 12:54 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 7.3


(1)
Message 98 of 226 (648346)
01-14-2012 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by dwise1
01-14-2012 6:36 PM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
I concur, though I would have started with "huh?". Creationist migration scenarios make absolutely no sense, even if we ignore the fact that with so many species pared down to such incredibly small initial populations, it would have taken very few acts of predation (hey, carnivores have to eat too) to have brought nearly all prey species to extinction.

Well that's why Australia doesn't have any goberoos, rumbats, or marsupial unicorns. They were all eaten by the last marsupial bear, which then broke its neck pursuing the last worraburra.

You see how perfectly it all fits together?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by dwise1, posted 01-14-2012 6:36 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20225
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 99 of 226 (648350)
01-14-2012 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by dwise1
01-14-2012 6:36 PM


The Wallace Line and Biogeography
Hi dwise1,

However, there is no land bridge connecting Asia with Australia. Separating Australia from that Southeast Asian land bridging is a trench that is thousands of feet deep. Not land-bridge material, that. Also, it looks very much like so many other trenches where one tectonic plate collides with another and the one trench starts subtending beneath the other. There is a land bridge between Australia and Papua New Guinea, but there is no land bridge connection from there to Southeast Asia, so still no land-bridge route for marsupials to take from Asia to Australia.

Hence causing what is known as the Wallace Line that divides species on one side from those on the other (except for those that could fly or swim the distance).

quote:
Alfred Russel Wallace, the so-called father of animal geography, formulated his ideas on evolution by natural selection while observing and collecting wildlife in the islands of Southeast Asia. He was particularly impressed by the sudden difference in bird families he encountered when he sailed some twenty miles east of the island of Bali and landed on Lombok. On Bali the birds were clearly related to those of the larger islands of Java and Sumatra and mainland Malaysia. On Lombok the birds were clearly related to those of New Guinea and Australia. He marked the channel between Bali and Lombok as the divide between two great zoogeographic regions, the Oriental and Australian. In his honor this dividing line, which extends northward between Borneo and Sulawesi, is still referred to today as Wallace's Line. (See the map below.)


You can also see this subduction zone trench formation continue along the east side of the Philippines, and another to the east that is the Mariana trench, the deepest part of ocean in the world.

If you want a land bridge here, you are going to need to wait for a while ...

Enjoy.

Edited by Zen Deist, : lastline

Edited by Zen Deist, : graphy not ology


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by dwise1, posted 01-14-2012 6:36 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 226 (648355)
01-15-2012 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by dwise1
01-14-2012 6:36 PM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
dwise quotes Granny Magda writes:

What land bridges? Care to provide any evidence for these land bridges? During the Ice Age!? Really, this is spectacularly silly stuff.

I think it's a pretty good model. Of course you don't have to agree with it. I find many things evolution teaches silly too.

There is fossil evidence of Australian marsupials millions of years before the Ice Age.

We have a different opinion on how these dates are calculated.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by dwise1, posted 01-14-2012 6:36 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Coyote, posted 01-15-2012 2:46 AM Chuck77 has responded
 Message 127 by jar, posted 01-15-2012 9:13 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 226 (648356)
01-15-2012 12:59 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Percy
01-14-2012 8:45 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Percy writes:

The key question is what evidence Chuck has that causes him to propose that marsupials migrated to Australia around 5000 years ago. We already know the answer to this question, but I'm not sure Chuck has considered it yet

If it's possible why is it not an acceptable alternative? Of course I have no evidence for land bridges 5000 yrs ago but it's not such a terrible stretch considering what damage the flood caused and the aftermath of it all.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 01-14-2012 8:45 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by rueh, posted 01-15-2012 2:23 AM Chuck77 has responded
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 01-15-2012 7:51 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 102 of 226 (648357)
01-15-2012 1:05 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Granny Magda
01-14-2012 7:22 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
CMI writes:

They could have dispersed before many of the other mammalian varieties.

Why? Why did they disperse you mean?

How? They walked...and humans could have played a part also.

Care to explain how human travellers managed to introduce marsupials to Australia when the marsupials pre-date human presence?

I believe humans are no more than 6000 yrs old.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Granny Magda, posted 01-14-2012 7:22 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by DrJones*, posted 01-15-2012 1:16 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded
 Message 128 by Granny Magda, posted 01-15-2012 9:25 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1984
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 103 of 226 (648359)
01-15-2012 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Chuck77
01-15-2012 1:05 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
I believe humans are no more than 6000 yrs old.

That's great but its not what the evidence shows

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Chuck77, posted 01-15-2012 1:05 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Portillo, posted 01-15-2012 3:30 PM DrJones* has responded

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 1972 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 104 of 226 (648361)
01-15-2012 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Chuck77
01-15-2012 12:59 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Hello Chuck77
Chuck77 writes:

Of course I have no evidence for land bridges 5000 yrs ago but it's not such a terrible stretch considering what damage the flood caused and the aftermath of it all.


To me it is a terrible stretch of the imagination because. You are proposing a flood reaping massive damage to geological structures. So much so that it erases every scrap of their existence. Yet at the same time allows them to be in place for the marsupials to utilize in their migration to Australia after the flood subsides. So which is it? Were the land bridges left intact for the marsupials to use or were they washed away by the process of the flood? And if they were there to use than why do we not see any evidence of their existence in a post flood world?

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Chuck77, posted 01-15-2012 12:59 AM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Chuck77, posted 01-15-2012 2:30 AM rueh has responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 226 (648362)
01-15-2012 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by rueh
01-15-2012 2:23 AM


Re: Chuck's CMI Lies
Yeah, the land bridges could have been in tact long enough for the trek and some time after.

And if they were there to use than why do we not see any evidence of their existence in a post flood world?

What do you mean? There is a good hypothesis that at one time there was one land mass connecting all land. After the flood the land mass split and now we have different continents. It didn't happen all at once. It took time. What evidence are you specifically asking for...pictures?

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by rueh, posted 01-15-2012 2:23 AM rueh has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by rueh, posted 01-15-2012 2:52 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019