Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 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:   Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 226 of 991 (705719)
08-31-2013 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by mindspawn
08-31-2013 5:40 AM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
That's your perception. You probaby think you are winning this debate as well. lol!
Generally speaking, when someone provides citations that disprove their own argument, as you did repeatedly, that person is considered the loser.
Here's my summation in that thread, you see there was not ONE good argument proposed against the geological evidence of a flood at the P-T boundary.
Apart from the fact that there were no humans. And no worldwide flooding.
Obviously the marine transgression and regression cannot be denied, because these are recorded.
You are denying them. The events you cite were not worldwide. They may have been very major, but they were still not universal. That refutes your entire thesis.
The fossil argument was not completed by the time of summation,
Damn right it wasn't. I eagerly await your proof of humans in the Permian.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by mindspawn, posted 08-31-2013 5:40 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by mindspawn, posted 09-01-2013 8:04 PM Granny Magda has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 227 of 991 (705722)
08-31-2013 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by mindspawn
08-31-2013 5:02 AM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
Your links are irrelevant. At the time of the PT boundary there were no humans in existence.
But even if there had been a world-wide flood at the PT boundary (and your links do not show or indicate that) it simply doesn't matter.
They are also irrelevant based on the links I provided you. In this thread alone read Message 96 and Message 108.
Dating doesn't matter. Whether you want to pretend that the PT-Boundary or the KT-Boundary are the imaginary world-wide flood is irrelevant.
The Biblical Flood stories are just that, stories. They never happened.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by mindspawn, posted 08-31-2013 5:02 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by mindspawn, posted 09-01-2013 7:24 PM jar has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 228 of 991 (705724)
08-31-2013 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by mindspawn
08-31-2013 4:28 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
fish were specifically excluded.
The word "fish" is never mentioned. Fish therefore have not been specifically excluded from anything in exactly the same way that squid, crabs and dolphins haven't been.
Equivocating over what earth means is pointless when we know God's actual words and intentions. This is made perfectly plain so that "a non-neutral reader of that text can see that"....
"....I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made.
... means that he intends to kill every living creature that he made. Which includes fish.
But I do not intend to pursue this any further as it's tedious and irrelevant anyway because of this nonsense:
I agree. Only fish that could survive brackish water survived.
This is garbage. Some fish, almost entirely a very small range of specialist estuary dwelling and swamp fish, can survive brackish water. These fish live in shallow waters and would die within days of having 30,000 feet of water above them. They are adapted to a specialised habitat which the benevolent lord has just totally obliterated along with their food source.
The text says that Noah waited 5 months since the first mountaintops were seen. More than enough time for your scenario. One week is enough for a seed that has sprouted then to have visible greenery.
As for your claims of 5 months to recover - I've tried to describe to you the time each phase of the flood is supposed to have taken using the genesis text but maybe a picture will help:
http://home.earthlink.net/~arktracker/ark/Timeline.html
The ground, by the way, is still poisoned with salt so virtually nothing will grow for a long time.
The Hebrew word means "foliage" or "leaf". It can even be used to describe branches. the word derives from a root word that means growth. Cotyledons would fall under that category.
I'm not interested in equivocation about words.
My point is that the first leaves sprouting from an olive stone are cotyledons. Cotyledons are not true leaves - they are different shape and structure from true leaves and perform a different purpose. So unless Noah was a botanist he wouldn't be able to tell them apart from any other type of cotyledon sprouting from a seed.
But again - the obvious message was that there was an olive tree out there not a little sprout and I challenge you to grow an olive from seed in salty soil in a week.
Why do you need to try to make an impossible natural case for the flood? Why not call it all miraculous and have done with it? After all, the flood itself was miraculous - why quibble over the detail?
Edited by Tangle, : crap first attempt

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by mindspawn, posted 08-31-2013 4:28 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by mindspawn, posted 09-01-2013 8:21 PM Tangle has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 229 of 991 (705727)
08-31-2013 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by mindspawn
08-31-2013 4:28 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
Its only logical that many became extinct.
That would explain why the ark was so big - not near big enough to preserve every species but far bigger than was necessary to preserve Noah and his livestock. It was all a crapshhoot; most would die but a few would survive.
I bet most creationists would be horrified by that scenario.
Most of God's creation was just wasted. Why would He even bother to create so many species that He was just going to destroy? So Adam could have fun naming them? Maybe He was weeding out the mistakes? (Just like evolution does?)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by mindspawn, posted 08-31-2013 4:28 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 991 (705731)
09-01-2013 1:37 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by Tangle
08-31-2013 3:24 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
1. God said "4 For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made.
And you are sure that "the face of the earth" must include the earth? It cannot mean only things on earth's surface?
I find your attempt to interpret the Bible literally, but then to say "I'm sure the writers meant to leave fish out" an impossible position to maintain. After all, whoever wrote the Bible also wrote the words attributed to God.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Tangle, posted 08-31-2013 3:24 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Tangle, posted 09-01-2013 3:58 AM NoNukes has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 231 of 991 (705732)
09-01-2013 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by NoNukes
09-01-2013 1:37 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
NoNukes writes:
And you are sure that "the face of the earth" must include the earth? It cannot mean only things on earth's surface?
I find your attempt to interpret the Bible literally, but then to say "I'm sure the writers meant to leave fish out" an impossible position to maintain. After all, whoever wrote the Bible also wrote the words attributed to God.
The entire thing is a fantasy and simply doesn't stand up to a word by word analysis. But a straightforward reading of the story makes God's intentions very clear....
"1. God said "4 For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made.
God made everything so it's clear that it was god's intention to kill everything that he'd made.
But because it's a fantasy, the story tellers just wrote about what they knew - it wasn't just fish they forgot to mention it was plants too and no-one seems to want to argue that they stayed alive - even though the dove bring back an olive leaf implies it.
"I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die"
But I'm really not going to argue that fish have flesh but plants don't, that dolphins have a nostril and breathes air, that earth means planet, that surface means both land and sea and on and on - therein madness lies.
But the intent is clear - everything dies that's not in the boat - and in practice that's what would have actually happened.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 09-01-2013 1:37 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by jar, posted 09-01-2013 9:09 AM Tangle has not replied
 Message 235 by NoNukes, posted 09-01-2013 7:29 PM Tangle has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 232 of 991 (705736)
09-01-2013 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Tangle
09-01-2013 3:58 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
But it is not "story", rather at least two different stories all mushed together. Genesis 6 says:
quote:
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."
while Genesis 7 says:
quote:
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
Granted, neither story explains why God was pissed at the birds; likely he parked under a tree where doves roost, but we will never know.
So it really depends on which Genesis Flood story you are working with.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Tangle, posted 09-01-2013 3:58 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by NoNukes, posted 09-01-2013 8:00 PM jar has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 233 of 991 (705746)
09-01-2013 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Granny Magda
08-31-2013 5:32 AM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
Do the studies you refer to mention a worldwide flood? Yes or no mindspawn..
The answer is YES. They don't use the word "flood" , using the more applicable term of "transgression".
" A marine transgression is a geologic event during which sea level rises relative to the land and the shoreline moves toward higher ground, resulting in flooding. Transgressions can be caused either by the land sinking or the ocean basins filling with water (or decreasing in capacity)."
http://studentresearch.wcp.muohio.edu/...inctionsealevel.pdf
"The end Permian mass extinction has long been related to a severe, first order lowstand of sea level Newell, N.D., 1967. Revolutions in the history of life. Geol. w Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 89, 63—91. based primarily on the widespread absence of latest Permian ammonoid markers, but field x evidence reveals that the interval coincides with a major transgression."
The extinction at the end-Permian coincides with a MAJOR transgression.
This means that there was a major increase in sea levels relative to land. Science isn't claiming a biblical flood, but science is certainly claiming a worldwide flood at the P-T boundary.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Granny Magda, posted 08-31-2013 5:32 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Coyote, posted 09-01-2013 7:40 PM mindspawn has replied
 Message 273 by Granny Magda, posted 09-02-2013 10:16 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 234 of 991 (705747)
09-01-2013 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by jar
08-31-2013 9:28 AM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
They are also irrelevant based on the links I provided you. In this thread alone read Message 96 and Message 108.
As far as I know there is no complete database of DNA analysis of all species. When complete sequencing is done across large samples of individual species of a number of "ark" animals (eg mammals) and this is compared to the genetic diversity found within large sample of individual species of non-ark animals (eg fish) then you may have a case.
Just a moment...
Evidence of past genetic bottlenecks in numerous biological systems, from mammals to viruses, has been described.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by jar, posted 08-31-2013 9:28 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by jar, posted 09-01-2013 7:43 PM mindspawn has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 235 of 991 (705748)
09-01-2013 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by Tangle
09-01-2013 3:58 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
God made everything so it's clear that it was god's intention to kill everything that he'd made.
God also, according to the author, intended to restore life on the earth, yet there were no fish on the ark. The clear implication is that the fish were not going to be destroyed. It is fairly easy to read the words in Genesis in that way.
As I see it, evil humans were God's target according to the story. Land animals and birds were collateral damage.
Again, your own interpretation despite its arguably more literal nature, makes far less sense. Assuming, as I do, that the story is not true, the story as you interpret it requires not mere suspension of belief, which is excusable for fiction and myth, but outright inconsistency between motives and action, which I find inexcusable for fiction.
Secondly your interpretation attributes the silliness to God, whereas I believe the correct place to attribute the silliness is to the authors of the story. The authors thought that fish would survive a global flood. Well they were wrong about that, but so what. They did not think God was an idiot. And the story isn't even true to boot.
But a straightforward reading of the story makes God's intentions very clear....
Your reading makes is not the only logical one. And your reading makes for a far sillier story. Perhaps for you that is part of its attraction.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Tangle, posted 09-01-2013 3:58 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Tangle, posted 09-02-2013 4:24 AM NoNukes has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 236 of 991 (705749)
09-01-2013 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by mindspawn
09-01-2013 6:55 PM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
Those papers don't say what you claim they say.
I reviewed the literature, particularly the paper you cited, and there is no claim of a worldwide flood at the P-T boundary.
The paper at "studentresearch.wcp" includes the citation to Newell in the abstract, but refutes his "first order lowstand" without calling for a worldwide flood.
If you actually read the paper you cited, you wouldn't make these silly mistakes.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by mindspawn, posted 09-01-2013 6:55 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by mindspawn, posted 09-02-2013 5:07 AM Coyote has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 237 of 991 (705750)
09-01-2013 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by mindspawn
09-01-2013 7:24 PM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
That's really tough. Too bad it's irrelevant.
If any of the Biblical floods myths happened then EVERY living critter, every single living critter would show the same bottleneck and at the same time. If it doesn't show up in even one critter then the flood myths are kaput along with the Garden of Eden, Conquest of Canaan and Exodus.
And it doesn't show up.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by mindspawn, posted 09-01-2013 7:24 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by mindspawn, posted 09-03-2013 10:24 AM jar has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 238 of 991 (705751)
09-01-2013 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by jar
09-01-2013 9:09 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
But it is not "story", rather at least two different stories all mushed together. Genesis 6 says:
The issue Tangle describes would apply to both accounts. Genesis 6 also says this:
quote:
17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Genesis 6:13 expresses a similar sentiment.
Fish are surely flesh, so Tangle might argue that they too were going to be destroyed despite the fact that they were not included in the list in Genesis 6:7.
Similarly, Genesis 7 does not avoid the issue.
Your post suggests that 7:4 might be interpreted as Tangle suggests, that is with the death of all animals on land and at sea. Yet in the enumeration of which animals died in Genesis 7:21-23, (esp. 7:22), no sea creatures are named as dying.
quote:
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark
I'll also make what I think is a new argument for this thread, although we've hashed it out here before. The words earth and ground as used in these texts are probably synonymous. Most likely the authors did not view earth as a planet. So removing all animals from the face of the earth might likely meant terrestrial animals only.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by jar, posted 09-01-2013 9:09 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by jar, posted 09-01-2013 8:14 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 239 of 991 (705752)
09-01-2013 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by Granny Magda
08-31-2013 5:48 AM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
You are denying them. The events you cite were not worldwide. They may have been very major, but they were still not universal. That refutes your entire thesis.
I cannot prove the biblical flood. But I can prove a major rise in sea levels, at the same time as major movements of water-borne sediment across the whole world, at the same time as a volcanic layer of clay across the world. This occurred at the time that the Siberian traps spewed forth major volcanic activity. This fits in with the biblical description of the fountains of the great deep bursting forth. Most of the world's fauna and flora died off then.
As for human remains, the list of anomalies is endless. None of them are taken seriously by the scientific establishment. And these anomalies are becoming more and more common, the establishment will have to take notice soon:
CNN - Breaking News, Latest News and Videos
Ooparts: Out of place Artefacts
http://voiceofrussia.com/...d-in-Russian-city-of-Vladivostok

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Granny Magda, posted 08-31-2013 5:48 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Theodoric, posted 09-01-2013 9:40 PM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 245 by PaulK, posted 09-02-2013 1:40 AM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 274 by Granny Magda, posted 09-02-2013 10:23 AM mindspawn has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 240 of 991 (705755)
09-01-2013 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by NoNukes
09-01-2013 8:00 PM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
I would say with a fairly high level of confidence that the writers of the stories had no idea of "planet" or "world" comparable to what we have today.
But what we see today is a mishmash of old fireside stories and I doubt anyone, author, teller or audience considered them as factual.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by NoNukes, posted 09-01-2013 8:00 PM NoNukes has seen this message but 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