Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   animals on the ark
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 196 (6550)
03-11-2002 8:47 AM


testing testi

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 196 (6551)
03-11-2002 8:47 AM


testing testi

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Percy, posted 03-11-2002 9:34 AM quicksink has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 63 of 196 (6552)
03-11-2002 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by John Paul
03-10-2002 4:31 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by John Paul:
[b] John Paul:
And you have to be crazy if you believe life arose from non-life via purely natural processes.[/QUOTE]
ROTFLMAO!
Nice try at changing the subject, but do try to stay focused, JP!
We are talking about the feasibility of just two horses being adequately fed and watered for a year while onboard an Ark, not Abiogenesis.
LOL!
quote:
The book I mentioned is fully referenced. Before you scoff at it perhaps it would be a good idea to read it.
I would LOVE to read the book, actually, but I have, as yet, not found it in any used book stores. I don't pay full price for such books, on principle.
If you have the book, which you obviously do because you quoted from it, perhaps you could provide some relevant references concerning herbivore feeding for me?
In particular, I would very much like to know what Bible-age technology was used to compress hay and produce pelleted horse feed.
(giggle)
quote:
Waste managemnet, manpower studies, floor space allotments, feeding challenges, basic living conditions, the recovery of the earth's biosphere etc., are all covered.
Oh, I'm sure they are.
quote:
If you are not going to read the book that's OK. Just don't go around saying that these issues haven't been addressed.
Maybe you could find the part in the book which tells us where Noah got the pelleted feed from? Surely they 'address' that technological breakthrough!
quote:
That would be a lie.
Ohhhh, now you're playing tough!
ROTFLMAO!!
[/b][/QUOTE]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by John Paul, posted 03-10-2002 4:31 PM John Paul has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 64 of 196 (6556)
03-11-2002 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by Punisher
03-11-2002 7:36 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Punisher:
[b]It is doubtful whether the humans had to clean the cages every morning. Possibly they had sloped floors or slatted cages,[/QUOTE]
Sloped floors, unless they were only very slightly sloped, would be likely to make horses lame if they stood on them long enough. Also, slats make it more likely hat a hoof will get caught.
quote:
where the manure could fall away from the animals and be flushed away (plenty of water around)
Lots of salt water would be pretty bad for the horse's skin, and probably other animals', too.
quote:
or destroyed by vermicomposting which would also provide earthworms as a food source.
I don't think that earthworms can live in composting fresh manure because the decomposition raises the temperature too high. At least, parasites are killed in 'hot' manure, which is why you either want to compost it or spread it out in the sun.
quote:
Very deep bedding can sometimes last for a year without needing a change.
Sometimes...
quote:
Absorbent material (e.g. sawdust, softwood wood shavings and especially peat moss) would reduce the moisture content and hence the odor.
Please tell me where the peat bogs were located in the Middle East.
Also, tell me where the forests of trees and sawmills were which produced the humdreds and hundreds of pounds of shavings and sawdust needed to bed the stalls.
From Creation Ex Nihilo 19(2):16-19,
March-May 1997 [/b][/QUOTE]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Punisher, posted 03-11-2002 7:36 AM Punisher has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 65 of 196 (6561)
03-11-2002 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by quicksink
03-11-2002 8:47 AM


Hi Quicksink!
quote:
Originally posted by quicksink:
testing testin
Are you having some kind of difficulty that I can help with?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by quicksink, posted 03-11-2002 8:47 AM quicksink has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Peter, posted 03-11-2002 10:16 AM Percy has replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 66 of 196 (6566)
03-11-2002 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Percy
03-11-2002 9:34 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Hi Quicksink!
Are you having some kind of difficulty that I can help with?
--Percy

I think quicksink might be having a similar problem to one I
experience on my PC at home ...
To see messages I have posted I have to navigate with the function
buttons, and even then my cached version gets loaded instead of
the updated page.
I just keep trying and eventually see it ... I have faith in the
boards ability to put my posts in place

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Percy, posted 03-11-2002 9:34 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Punisher, posted 03-11-2002 10:38 AM Peter has not replied
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 03-11-2002 11:45 AM Peter has not replied
 Message 76 by TrueCreation, posted 03-11-2002 4:21 PM Peter has not replied

  
Punisher
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 196 (6568)
03-11-2002 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Peter
03-11-2002 10:16 AM


I see a cached version upon my initial visit as well. I got in the habit of hitting 'refresh' button for IE to see the most recent version of the page. Hope that helps.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Peter, posted 03-11-2002 10:16 AM Peter has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2765 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 68 of 196 (6573)
03-11-2002 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by Punisher
03-11-2002 7:36 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Punisher:
It is doubtful whether the humans had to clean the cages every morning. Possibly they had sloped floors or slatted cages, where the manure could fall away from the animals and be flushed away (plenty of water around) or destroyed by vermicomposting which would also provide earthworms as a food source. Very deep bedding can sometimes last for a year without needing a change. Absorbent material (e.g. sawdust, softwood wood shavings and especially peat moss) would reduce the moisture content and hence the odor.
From Creation Ex Nihilo 19(2):16-19,
March-May 1997

Consider the stores of food and water estimated by the book in question,
quote:
Originally posted by John Paul, message #29:
The food was started at 2,500 tons and the water at 4,070 tons. On page 19 of the book Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study it breaks it down.
settled barn-dried hay- 21,800 cubic meters
lightly-compressed hay pellet- 7,060 cubic meters
doubly-compressed hay- 5,410 cubic meters
pellted horse food and pellted cattle food- 3,030 cubic meters
dried fruits- 2,930 cubic meters.
fresh meat- 6,633 cubic meters
dried meat(not compressed)- 3,980 cubic meters
dried meat (compressed)- 1,923 cubic meters
dried fish- 12,800 cubic meters

4000 tons of water is about 1,000,000 gallons. Do you construct a tank in the upper levels in order to use gravity flow for watering? Or do you keep it as a lake in the bottom of the boat and risk contamination with nearly a million gallons of urine running down those "sloped floors"?
The tally for foodstuffs runs 65,000 cubic meters. Most of this will end up as feces. If you wash it down with salt water, how do you get the water into the boat and direct it to where it will be used. How do you drain it? Is there a drain plug in the bottom of the boat?
As for the number of people in the ark, the Apostle says there were eight (8).
1 Peter 3:20
[edited for content]
------------------
Bachelor of Arts - Loma Linda University
Major - Biology; Minor - Religion
Anatomy and Physiology - LLU School of Medicine
Embryology - La Sierra University
Biblical languages - Pacific Union College
Bible doctrines - Walla Walla College
[This message has been edited by doctrbill, 03-11-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Punisher, posted 03-11-2002 7:36 AM Punisher has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 69 of 196 (6575)
03-11-2002 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Peter
03-11-2002 10:16 AM


Yes, depending upon the browser, the cached version can sometimes get loaded. Usually just clicking the refresh (Internet Explorer) or reload (Netscape) button loads the latest version. Is this sometimes not working for either of you?
Internet Explorer, and probably Netscape, too, allows you to set the options so that it always reloads the page, ie, it never uses the cached version. This will always work except when the WebHost is overloaded and hasn't yet produced the new page.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Peter, posted 03-11-2002 10:16 AM Peter has not replied

  
2MuchTalk
Inactive Junior Member


Message 70 of 196 (6585)
03-11-2002 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by nator
03-07-2002 5:20 AM


I tire of constant "master theological geological biologists" arguing things for which cannot be proven through scientific fact either way. Who was around before the flood that can bring material evidence of the world then? Who, on a human basis, sat on God's shoulder while the universe was made. Or who watched the big bang as it lightened up the nothingness?
Here are the facts. I'm sure neither quicksink nor J.P. have all the valid facts to argue...I mean debate the flood. You are both arguing from, at least partial, ignorance. There is no proof, that can be remade, to prove either. Quick has just as much faith in his beliefs as J.P., but neither are proof of the flood.
As for me, I am a Christian who believes in Creationism. Can I prove it scientifically? No. Can I prove all came from a single author by the way everything is connected around me, organic and inorganic? I believe so. Do I tire of evolutionists acting like they have proof of their beliefs and ridiculing mine. Absolutely! Faith, by its own definition, cannot be proved. These theories are based on faith. Who can argue that?!
My faith says we were created by God, with His Spirit indwelling, for a specific purpose. I choose not to believe I am some jumble of molecules without purpose, aimless in a lonely universe. How do I scientifically prove that? As easily as an atheistic evolutionist (not all evolutionists are atheists, I know) can prove the opposite is true. It is faith being argued here, not facts because none of us have them.
Quicksink. When you prove, with scientific data, your theory is absolute, I'll stop and listen and decide.
J.P. Do not get pulled into the arguments this creates. God is not on trial. He doesn't need our fights. I choose to argue immediately after I see Scientific proof of evolution. You would be wise to do the same.
God bless both your lives and endeavors. 2MT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 03-07-2002 5:20 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Brachinus, posted 03-11-2002 1:52 PM 2MuchTalk has not replied
 Message 72 by joz, posted 03-11-2002 2:07 PM 2MuchTalk has not replied
 Message 78 by nator, posted 03-11-2002 6:22 PM 2MuchTalk has replied

  
Brachinus
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 196 (6593)
03-11-2002 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by 2MuchTalk
03-11-2002 12:56 PM


quote:
Originally posted by 2MuchTalk:
Can I prove all came from a single author by the way everything is connected around me, organic and inorganic? I believe so.

Great! Maybe we can settle this thing once and for all. Looking forward to your proof.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by 2MuchTalk, posted 03-11-2002 12:56 PM 2MuchTalk has not replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 196 (6595)
03-11-2002 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by 2MuchTalk
03-11-2002 12:56 PM


quote:
Originally posted by 2MuchTalk:
1)I tire of constant "master theological geological biologists" arguing things for which cannot be proven through scientific fact either way.
2)Who was around before the flood that can bring material evidence of the world then?
3)Who, on a human basis, sat on God's shoulder while the universe was made. Or who watched the big bang as it lightened up the nothingness?
4)These theories are based on faith. Who can argue that?!
5)I choose not to believe I am some jumble of molecules without purpose, aimless in a lonely universe.
6)How do I scientifically prove that? As easily as an atheistic evolutionist (not all evolutionists are atheists, I know) can prove the opposite is true. It is faith being argued here, not facts because none of us have them.
7)Quicksink. When you prove, with scientific data, your theory is absolute, I'll stop and listen and decide.

1)Science does not prove, proof exsists in law and maths not science....
2)Hmmmm.... the sumerians, the egyptians, possibly the hittites, add long list of ancient cultures here.....
3)Certainly not the middle eastern authors of a certain religious text....
Also there is a defined limit to what can be observed which is that only events after the end of the Planck era can be observed....
4)No scientific theories are based on evidence....
Its what makes them scientific...
5)Ahh the real reason you are a creationist, the alternative doesn`t fit your vanity and need to feel special...
6)To be frank I`d be amazed to see you *prove* anything scientificaly, hey I`d be amazed to see anyone *prove* anything scientificaly...
7)Just a small point if he were somehow to *prove* a theory you wouldn`t get to decide you would by nature of the *proof* subscribe to that viewpoint....
A lot of what you posted shows an ignorance of how science works and what it does, please, just so we don`t have to go over it for th 8th time go and find out about the scientific method before posting about science *proving* things....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by 2MuchTalk, posted 03-11-2002 12:56 PM 2MuchTalk has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 196 (6599)
03-11-2002 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by quicksink
03-10-2002 2:00 AM


"tc- address n2c's issue."
--No problem, I had thought I already had, though I believe that was because I had written it in a text document.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by quicksink, posted 03-10-2002 2:00 AM quicksink has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 196 (6600)
03-11-2002 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by no2creation
03-09-2002 10:33 PM


"So how did Noahs family keep all these animals alive? How did they keep them from eating each other? There must have been more then just Noahs family on-board to feed and take care of all these animals. "
--Take into account lethargy, a large quantity of the present animals on-board would become drastically lethargic, decreasing metabolism and activity, thus the need for care. And why would anything eat anything else if it had not desire to.
"The Philadelphia ZOO employs about 400 people FULL TIME, and there are about 1800 animals housed at this ZOO. I can guarantee you that more then 2% (8 people out of 400) are employed full time to feed and take care of these 1800 animals. How did Noah and his small family keep these animals alive?"
--And people complain to me on compairing apples and oranges. :\
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by no2creation, posted 03-09-2002 10:33 PM no2creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by no2creation, posted 03-11-2002 5:30 PM TrueCreation has not replied
 Message 79 by nator, posted 03-11-2002 6:38 PM TrueCreation has replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 196 (6601)
03-11-2002 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by quicksink
03-10-2002 2:06 AM


"here is another issue- on the ark, did animals hold their bladders and butts?
is someone going to tell me that 8 or so people removed all this waste from the ship?"
--Excellent vocabulary and choice of words.. I think that I must side with John Paul (I believe it was JP) on this one that you really should attempt to locate a copy of the book, Noah's Ark - A feasable study. Excretory requirnments and removal of feces from 'cages' or wherever the animal were located could be one of many processes. They could have possibly had sloped flores or slatted cages in which waists would roll and be flushed out, there sertainly is no problem with all the water present in a Global Flood. AiG - "Absorbent material (e.g. sawdust, softwood wood shavings and especially peat moss) would reduce the moisture content and hence the odour."
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by quicksink, posted 03-10-2002 2:06 AM quicksink has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024