Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 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?
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 376 of 991 (706010)
09-05-2013 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 8:03 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
mindspawn writes:
The reason for my participation in this thread is to show that a biblical flood has never been disproved.
It has. The Beaufort Group.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 8:03 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 377 of 991 (706012)
09-05-2013 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 8:03 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
Now I have proved vast flooding in various places around the world at the P-T boundary, can anyone back up their statements and provide ANY evidence that the water did not cover the highest peaks then?
Well, yes. We know how far inland the water got, that's how transgressions are measured. I told you. If you're going to cite a paper by Anthony Hallam, of all people, then it behooves you not to completely ignore his methods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 8:03 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 378 of 991 (706013)
09-05-2013 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 7:00 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
This one was funny.
mindspawn writes:
Nope. The variations may be influenced by the environment, not the "readings":"These measurements exhibit strong variations in time of year and time of day, which may be due in part to environmental influences"
Read it again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 7:00 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 379 of 991 (706014)
09-05-2013 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 7:00 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
Ok so these rates are "annual" and not "seasonal". See how they always peak in June/July? Very interesting how these decay rates vary annually. The entire theory of ancient rocks is based on constancy, yet something unknown is causing variation.
Again, the fluctuations have not been demonstrated to be variations in decay rates.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 7:00 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 380 of 991 (706015)
09-05-2013 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 8:03 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
In post 166 Catholic scientist said "we know that the entire planet has never been covered in water"
Hey! That's not what I said. Have you really resorted to quote-mining!?
In Message 166, I wrote:
quote:
We know that the entire planet has never been covered in water since humans have existed.
So, did you change what I wrote on purpose or are you really that obtuse?
.
The whole bit about a human settlement under some basalt is a ridiculous fantasy. If The Flood occured, there'd have been dead bodies everywhere. If it happened at the P-T boudary (regardless of any dating method or timeframe), there would be human remains in those layers. There would also be all of the modern animals found in those layers. But there ain't. There's only primitive creatures found during that time.
And everyone knows that most of the surface of the planet was covered in water during the time of Pangea. And you're whole transgression argument is dumb.
Now I have proved vast flooding in various places around the world at the P-T boundary, can anyone back up their statements and provide ANY evidence that the water did not cover the highest peaks then?
The fact that they're talking about a transgression means that they're talking about where the water meets the land. That means there has to be land that is not covered in water. That means its not a universal flood.
If The Flood really happened as described in the Bible, then the evidence would be so overwhelming it would be undeniable.
The only reason that you grasp at such straws and make up so much stuff, is because you cannot accept that the Bible got some stuff wrong, isn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 8:03 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 9:59 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 381 of 991 (706016)
09-05-2013 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 7:00 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
mindspawn writes:
Ok , sorry I misunderstood you. You feel the data could be faulty because of external influences on the equipment?
Yes. That's also what the researchers hinted at.
mindspawn writes:
I agree that any studies showing daily/seasonal variations should be checked against environmental influences on the equipment.
Yes. Everything so far has shown that the 'seasonal variations' are a result of influences on the equipment. The atom theory is very robust and has stood the test of time.
mindspawn writes:
I would assume that institutions like The Geological Survey of Israel, and Purdue University would adjust the data for any such influences.
They sure should do it. From that source you provided, it seems as if the institutions did their part of the job, but the researchers didn't do theirs.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Remember that one.
Edited by Pressie, : Whole reply changed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 7:00 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 9:43 AM Pressie has not replied

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


Message 382 of 991 (706026)
09-05-2013 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 381 by Pressie
09-05-2013 9:10 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
Yes. Everything so far has shown that the 'seasonal variations' are a result of influences on the equipment.
Where is your evidence for this? The article you quoted does not hint at that. You are saying the environment could influence the equipment, you need to find some support for your position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by Pressie, posted 09-05-2013 9:10 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 383 of 991 (706027)
09-05-2013 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 358 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 3:07 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
Anyway you have wasted many posts trying to make a side-point, this thread is about evolutionists trying to prove a flood impossible.
For purposes of clarity, this thread is not about proving the flood impossible. It's about what we should expect to see in the global distribution of fauna had the world been repopulated from a single point in the Middle East around 5000 years ago.
For purposes of general discussion, no thread is about proving anything impossible. The onus is on the claimant to provide positive evidence in favor, not for others to provide evidence in opposition. Claims aren't true simply because counter-evidence is absent. Look up the celestial teapot.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 358 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 3:07 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 10:08 AM Admin has replied

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


Message 384 of 991 (706028)
09-05-2013 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by New Cat's Eye
09-05-2013 9:01 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
The whole bit about a human settlement under some basalt is a ridiculous fantasy. If The Flood occured, there'd have been dead bodies everywhere. If it happened at the P-T boudary (regardless of any dating method or timeframe), there would be human remains in those layers. There would also be all of the modern animals found in those layers. But there ain't. There's only primitive creatures found during that time.
Humans normal live in the safest areas, considering that the lower latitudes experienced major extinction it makes sense that humans would have lived in the higher latitudes. That ENTIRE REGION was covered by basalt. So this "ridiculous fantasy" is just dramatic wording for a logical place to find human fossils.
The fact that they're talking about a transgression means that they're talking about where the water meets the land. That means there has to be land that is not covered in water. That means its not a universal flood.[/qs]
That logic makes no sense when I have already posted evidence that vast interiors were flooded too. A transgression means sea levels rise. A major transgression means there are major rises in sea levels. How high? No-one has yet proven a limit to this transgression.
If The Flood really happened as described in the Bible, then the evidence would be so overwhelming it would be undeniable.
Exactly , I haven't even begun to scratch the surface of the amount of evidence there is. I have not yet begun to post evidence of large movements of sediment within Pangea found on nearly every continent. Also I have not focussed yet on the subsequent regression, middle Permian layers missing from the record , followed by early Triassic sedimentation. The proof of transgression and regression at the P-T boundary encompass nearly the entire Pangea, just from already existing studies.
The only reason that you grasp at such straws and make up so much stuff, is because you cannot accept that the Bible got some stuff wrong, isn't it?
I'm not grasping at straws. I'm proving an incredible flood event of massive proportions across the entire continent of Pangea. I haven't even scratched the surface of the amount of scientific focus there has been on the P-T boundary. Science is rapidly seeing this transgression and regression event as highly significant to the P-T extinction. I agree though that the initial cause is not the flood itself, but the Siberian Traps.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-05-2013 9:01 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 387 by Theodoric, posted 09-05-2013 10:08 AM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 400 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-05-2013 9:02 PM mindspawn has not replied
 Message 401 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-05-2013 9:12 PM mindspawn has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 385 of 991 (706029)
09-05-2013 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 321 by mindspawn
09-04-2013 5:22 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
You miss my point. I was joking.
All I was trying to point out is that it is absurd for you to claim that there are "unknown" problems with radiometric dating. That's just gibberish. If you knew of an unknown problem with the dating, then it would cease to be unknown, now would it?
This is what I mean when I say that you need to be more precise in what you write. If you are so sloppy that you repeatedly write things that cannot possibly be true, then you can expect a certain degree of ridicule.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by mindspawn, posted 09-04-2013 5:22 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 11:09 AM Granny Magda has replied

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


(1)
Message 386 of 991 (706030)
09-05-2013 10:05 AM


What animals would we see if any of the Biblical Flood Myths were true?
If any of the Biblical Flood Myths were true then there are several things that must be seen.
All animals will have a most recent common ancestor just 4500 years ago.
Most transplant operations like skin grafts should be easy with little or no rejection within species.
The genetic bottleneck must appear in EVERY species of animal and plant.

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

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 387 of 991 (706031)
09-05-2013 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 384 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 9:59 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
How about posting about the topic?
If you want to discuss proof for the flood how about starting a topic on it or posting one one of the many topics discussing it.
In case you are having some sort of reading and cognition issues here is the topic of the thread.
Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 9:59 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


Message 388 of 991 (706032)
09-05-2013 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 383 by Admin
09-05-2013 9:43 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
For purposes of clarity, this thread is not about proving the flood impossible. It's about what we should expect to see in the global distribution of fauna had the world been repopulated from a single point in the Middle East around 5000 years ago.
For purposes of general discussion, no thread is about proving anything impossible. The onus is on the claimant to provide positive evidence in favor, not for others to provide evidence in opposition. Claims aren't true simply because counter-evidence is absent. Look up the celestial teapot.
Claims are true if proven.
If the first few posts claim that most fauna would die off, they must have some evidence for it.
If anyone feels too many predators were on the ark, they must give their estimated breakdown of the predator/prey ratios on the ark with some intelligent points why they feel that distribution would be so likely.
If someone claims that vegetation cannot gain a sufficient foothold on land inundated with salt water for 5 months and then left to recover for 5 months, then they must post their studies why this is impossible.
If anyone feels that salt water fish cannot ever be selected to handle fresh water in a few hundred years, they must provide evidence for this.
If someone wishes to claim that the massive flooding during the P-T boundary did not reach to mountains , they must provide evidence.
These are not claims I am making, these are claims made by others on this thread, if they wish to make those claims, they must back them up. Or they should refrain from making the claims.
(the first to make a claim, must back up their statements, only then can debate ensue once the evidence is looked at)
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 383 by Admin, posted 09-05-2013 9:43 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 413 by Admin, posted 09-06-2013 7:33 AM mindspawn has replied

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


(1)
Message 389 of 991 (706033)
09-05-2013 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 364 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 5:15 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
A sea level rise does equate to a global flood (flooding on every coastline on the planet.)
I will take this as your admission that the P-T sea level rise was not Noah's flood.
Which the rest of us knew all along.

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 364 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 5:15 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


Message 390 of 991 (706034)
09-05-2013 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by Granny Magda
09-05-2013 10:01 AM


Re: Another brief off topic note
You miss my point. I was joking.
All I was trying to point out is that it is absurd for you to claim that there are "unknown" problems with radiometric dating. That's just gibberish. If you knew of an unknown problem with the dating, then it would cease to be unknown, now would it?
This is what I mean when I say that you need to be more precise in what you write. If you are so sloppy that you repeatedly write things that cannot possibly be true, then you can expect a certain degree of ridicule.
Mutate and Survive
Expect ridicule? That's something only rude people do to others who know less or make semantic errors. More mature people educate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Granny Magda, posted 09-05-2013 10:01 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by Granny Magda, posted 09-05-2013 11:17 AM mindspawn 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