Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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?
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 397 of 991 (706043)
09-05-2013 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 396 by mindspawn
09-05-2013 12:02 PM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
I've never claimed I can scientifically prove that P-T boundary flooding covered over mountains.
Good. Then the Biblical flood is a non-starter scientifically.
mindspawn writes:
My proof of flooding in the P-T boundary was merely in response to claims that it has already being disproved.
"Disproved" probably isn't appropriate terminology. "Not a shred of evidence to support it" would be better. What people are telling you is that there is no scientific evidence that thre Flood happened or even that it could happen. How's that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 396 by mindspawn, posted 09-05-2013 12:02 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by mindspawn, posted 09-06-2013 6:25 AM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 423 of 991 (706147)
09-06-2013 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 409 by mindspawn
09-06-2013 6:25 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
Signs of widespread confirmed flooding in every continent at the same time is more than a "shred" of evidence.
As I mentioned, you can find "widespread confirmed flooding in every continent at the same time" today.
Note that the signs of this year's flood will not be distinguishable from the signs of last year's flood in the distant future. "Flooding" evidence can include overlapped individual floods over a period of time.
What you don't have a shred of evidence for is the extrapolation of many floods into one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 409 by mindspawn, posted 09-06-2013 6:25 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


(1)
Message 424 of 991 (706148)
09-06-2013 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 411 by mindspawn
09-06-2013 7:12 AM


Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
mindspawn writes:
If the predators ate the fish, they didn't need to eat the poor cow.
As I already mentioned, many predators can not eat dead fish.
mindspawn writes:
The cow could then eat the growing vegetation.
There's another easy experiment that creationists could do. Drown grass - or anything else that cows can eat - and then turn a cow loose on it.
Seriously, why aren't creationists doing these things instead of just saying they woulda/coulda/shoulda happened?
mindspawn writes:
Impossible to say, but whatever way it happened there were specific plans before the flood, to keep seed alive on the land.
The word "seed" as used in Genesis doesn't refer specifically to plant "seeds" as we know them. For example, God put enmity between the serpent's seed and Eve's seed.
I suppose some creationists would say that snakes grew from seeds before the flood. They had legs, you know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by mindspawn, posted 09-06-2013 7:12 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


(1)
Message 445 of 991 (706232)
09-08-2013 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 443 by mindspawn
09-08-2013 4:21 PM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
mindspawn writes:
The first cave dwellings are in Turkey. The first building is found in Turkey. The first towns are found in Turkey.
It's interesting that you talk about "firsts" when you don't accept the dating methods used to determine chronology.
But since this thread is about animals, you should really be pointing to evidence of kangaroos in Turkey, giraffes in Turkey, penguins in Turkey, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 443 by mindspawn, posted 09-08-2013 4:21 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by mindspawn, posted 09-08-2013 7:37 PM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 486 of 991 (706296)
09-09-2013 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 456 by mindspawn
09-08-2013 7:37 PM


Re: The flood story (getting pretty off the topic core)
mindspawn writes:
(except for the penguin which can spend several months at sea).
How long can it spend getting to the sea? Can it live on dead fish on the way? Did it go by way of the Black Sea and the Med or did it take a shortcut to the Persian Gulf?
mindspawn writes:
The answer is....
You're not presenting answers. You're presenting excuses for why there's no evidence to back up your speculations.
mindspawn writes:
... and there has been much speciation since....
There has been a lot of microevolution since the dawn of man but not nearly as much macroevolution as creationists claim.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by mindspawn, posted 09-08-2013 7:37 PM mindspawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 487 by Theodoric, posted 09-09-2013 12:52 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 502 of 991 (706379)
09-10-2013 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 498 by mindspawn
09-10-2013 6:32 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
Due to lack of space, its more likely that they used calves.
Herd animals such as bison would already have been extra-vulnerable to predators if reduced to only two or fourteen individuals. Sending inexperienced calves out into the cold cruel world would have increased the extinction rate immensely. It seems unlikely that there would have been any left for all of the present species to flash-evolve from.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 498 by mindspawn, posted 09-10-2013 6:32 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 509 by mindspawn, posted 09-11-2013 5:44 AM ringo has replied

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


(2)
Message 524 of 991 (706422)
09-11-2013 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 509 by mindspawn
09-11-2013 5:44 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
... so I don't foresee space problems on that huge ark.
Well of course you don't foresee any problems because as soon as a problem crops up you have a new ad hoc what-if to cover it. That isn't science. It isn't even good fiction.
For every "maybe" that you cite, I'd like to see you suggest an experiment to test whether what might be really is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 509 by mindspawn, posted 09-11-2013 5:44 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 528 by mindspawn, posted 09-11-2013 4:07 PM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 530 of 991 (706445)
09-11-2013 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 528 by mindspawn
09-11-2013 4:07 PM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
So many aspects of this discussion are in the realm of guesswork.
This is a science thread. We don't stop at guesswork.
As I have suggested more than once, you need to be proposing experiments to test your guesses, not just pretending that one guess is as good as the next.
The "evolutionists" have mentioned the experiments that have already been done. Your only counter has been to guess that the experiments are wrong. Gotcha again: You have to propose experiments to show that the other experiments are wrong.
Science is an infinite loop. There's no escape.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 528 by mindspawn, posted 09-11-2013 4:07 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 531 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-11-2013 5:27 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 533 by mindspawn, posted 09-12-2013 4:33 AM ringo has replied

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


Message 543 of 991 (706484)
09-12-2013 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 533 by mindspawn
09-12-2013 4:33 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
If participants of this thread cannot refute the flood, why make confident claims based on guesswork?
This thread isn't about refuting the flood. That has been done in a myriad of other threads. You have ample opportunity to back up your guesswork over there.
In this thread, you need to substantiate your wild guesses.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 533 by mindspawn, posted 09-12-2013 4:33 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


(1)
Message 589 of 991 (706843)
09-18-2013 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 584 by mindspawn
09-18-2013 9:26 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
... both evolutionary assumptions and creationist assumptions would predict many more such scenarios across many species.
First, assumptions are not just wild guesses that somebody made up. The assumptions in one train of thought are the conclusions from another train of thought. Good assumptions have already been tested and found to be correct.
Second, any goober with a keyboard can "predict scenarios". Science isn't about making up assumptions and making up scenarios about what woulda/coulda/shoulda happened. It's about using tested assumptions to predict scenarios that can be tested.
The keyword, in case you missed it, is "tested". The target can be tested for holes and lack of holes is evidence that you missed the target. You can predict until the cows come home to eat their beans that you woulda/coulda/shoulda hit the target but there are no holes in the target. The test "proves", if you like, that your scenario doesn't work.
Edited by ringo, : Speling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by mindspawn, posted 09-18-2013 9:26 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 596 by mindspawn, posted 09-19-2013 3:51 AM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 609 of 991 (706906)
09-19-2013 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 596 by mindspawn
09-19-2013 3:51 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
Which test? Without evidence, you are making an assumption yourself. I would like to see your evidence that my scenario does not work.
You have been shown the evidence. You have been shown the positive evidence that your shots hit the wall beside the target. You have also been shown the negative evidence that there are no holes in the target.
You can't just handwave the evidence away with more "scenarios". You can't just say cows woulda/coulda/shoulda eaten something else. You have to show that cows can live on something else and that that something else can survive a flood and propogate in a post-flood environment.
You are the one who needs to show evidence that your scenario will work. That is the essence of science.
You're in the minority position here. Nobody here gives a flying f*ck if you are convinced. You're trying to convince us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 596 by mindspawn, posted 09-19-2013 3:51 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 610 by Coyote, posted 09-19-2013 2:08 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 615 by mindspawn, posted 09-20-2013 3:08 AM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 632 of 991 (706980)
09-20-2013 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 615 by mindspawn
09-20-2013 3:08 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
The first to make a statement must prove it.
That isn't how science works. The one who is challenging the accepted theory has to back up his challenge.
And what really separates the scientists from the creationists is that scientists test their own challenges before concluding that they are right and everybody else is wrong.
mindspawn writes:
Am I the only one that has to back up every comment?
You're the one who is challenging the entire body of biological knowledge. Yes, you do have to back up that challenge. And no, the world doesn't owe you a spoon-feeding of that knowledge first.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 615 by mindspawn, posted 09-20-2013 3:08 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 638 by mindspawn, posted 09-20-2013 12:42 PM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 641 of 991 (706998)
09-20-2013 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 638 by mindspawn
09-20-2013 12:42 PM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
So is the accepted theory that all vegetation dies off in a flood?
Not "all" vegetation, "enough" vegetation. It is the accepted theory - supported by observations of small floods every year for the entire history of mankind - that floods destroy vegetation and it takes a while to come back. When rivers flood, herders have to move their livestock to new pastures for a while. Of course after the Big Flood there were no new pastures.
mindspawn writes:
Is the accepted theory that all animals do not have bottlenecks?
You have that backwards. There only has to be ONE species with no bottleneck at the time of the Flood to disprove the Flood. If there is ONE species that didn't come from two (or fourteen) ancestors, the myth is factually wrong.
Edited by ringo, : Splling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 638 by mindspawn, posted 09-20-2013 12:42 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 668 by mindspawn, posted 09-22-2013 7:26 PM ringo has replied

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


(1)
Message 677 of 991 (707104)
09-23-2013 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 668 by mindspawn
09-22-2013 7:26 PM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
I need your evidence now to show how most floods do not involve a quick recovery of vegetation.
You're equivocationg again, "most floods" with THE Flood. The reason that vegetation can recover quickly from "most floods" is because there is unflooded vegetation nearby to propagate from. With THE Flood, you have no such source of propagation; it's all gone. The only vegetation that could ever recover from THE Flood would be whatever seeds had not been killed by it.
mindspawn writes:
You should only apply that rule to large terrestrial animals, otherwise its a strawman argument.
What part of ONE did you not understand? You only need ONE species, large or small, without a bottleneck to disprove the Flood. Others have already mentioned that the human genome shows no such bottleneck. You need to address that evidence.
Edited by ringo, : Added, comma.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 668 by mindspawn, posted 09-22-2013 7:26 PM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 691 by mindspawn, posted 09-25-2013 5:46 AM ringo has replied

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


(3)
Message 703 of 991 (707261)
09-25-2013 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 691 by mindspawn
09-25-2013 5:46 AM


Re: If the ARK was real here is what we must see.
mindspawn writes:
Some people like to add stuff to the bible. I prefer not to.
And yet you do:
quote:
... there could have been the types of insects and small rodents that currently are found as pests on ships, that added to their core numbers.
Speculating that there coulda/woulda/shoulda been something that is not mentioned in the Bible is adding to the Bible. Your thinking about the Bible seems to be as topsy-turvy as your thinking about science.
mindspawn writes:
All terrestrial animals were killed off, not marine.
What that is is an indication that the authors of the Flood story didn't know what would happen in a flood like the one they describe.
mindspawn writes:
Sure, show me how DNA analysis refutes 4500 years of mutations since 14 common ancestors in any ONE large mammal.
That... has... been... done.
Humans.
Your only response has been, "Nuh uh."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 691 by mindspawn, posted 09-25-2013 5:46 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 723 by mindspawn, posted 10-08-2013 5:03 AM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024