Problems with Genesis Creation

In the thread "A Logical Account of Creation" Nuggin said: I would like to continue this discussion in the proper forum.Edited by jjsemsch, : Changed Title from Problems with Creation to Problems with Genesis Creation

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Maths time. Now, the formula the amount of food an endothermic carnivore needs per day is x = 0.11(mass in kg)^0.75. Your average Tyrannosaurus rex massed 5000 kg, and that's being generous on your part. That's about 65.4 kg of meat per day. Noah's Ark floated for one year, according to the Bible. For two T. rex, assuming they would be unclean, that would mean Noah would need about 47746.7 kg of meat, and would need it to remain edible for that time. Now, meat's specific gravity is around 0.9, if I remember correctly, so that would take up around 53 cubic meters of space.Now, let's extend this to the other large, predatory dinosaurs. Like the 4500 kg Spinosaurus. Or the 8000 kg Giganotosaurus. Or Carcharodontosaurus, which massed around 5000 kg. Tarbosaurus is another 5000 kg beastie, as is "Megalosaurus" ignens, the giant ceratosaurid.Just those five animals boosts the amount of meat needed to around 303,031.1 kg of meat, which would take up around 336.7 cubic meters.I can go on, if you want. There's dozens more theropods that mass around the ones I've already shown, and hundreds that mass less.Edited by Cthulhu, : Fixing math.

well clearly if god is powerful enough to make the Rexes not want to eat noah, then he could totally shrink them and their appetite.another problem with fables... how did god change the waters of the flood to kill all the water animals? of was there enough salinity change in the mixing of salt and fresh to do that? what about brackish type creatures? do sea mammals need salt water to live? i don't even know. are blue whales clean? could you fit two on the ark?

Just want to clarify something.you mention T-rex and all those other massive dinosaur carnivores. Just how positive are we that they are warm-blooded? The last thing I've read about this was from a book by Bakker (i think he's the author--massive book too) and that was when I was a 5th grader (so . . .8 years ago?). A good case then, just want to check. I just know someone's going to argue "uh uh, them dino's was cold-blooded lizards".

What does any of the Ark/Flood stuff have to do with the Creation myths in Genesis?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Isn't the great flood story found within the chapter of Genesis?

Not in the portions related to Creation.Look, the various Creation Myths in Genesis are silly enough. Try to stick to them and not unrelated areas.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Let's take one very specific sequence from Genesis, chapter 1: Here we have trees, herbs, and grass on Creative Day Three, water-dwelling critters and things-with-wings on Day Five, and land-bound animals on Day Six. Let's leave aside, for now, any considerations of whether Genesis Days were 24 hours or not, whether Genesis's events were a few thousand years ago or much more ancient, or whether Moah's Flood happened or not. Let's only look at the order of events presented above and compare it to what we see in the rocks here on our planet. (Note: this argument is nearing its 200th birthday, and was settled to my satisfaction about 180 years ago by Christian clergymen who studied/originated geology as a science.)If you go dig up rocks that have abundant trilobite fossils in them, you will never, never, ever find grass pollen fossilized there. You will find strange-looking jawless fish and bizarre huge "sea-scorpions." None of these critters are found alive anywhere today. Ever. For all that, mososaurs and pleisiosaurs are never found alive today, and are also never found fossilized with trilobites!Now go find some more recent rocks where grass pollen is abundant. It's hard to find modern sediment that has no grass pollen at all - the stuff blows all over the place, and only far out in the ocean do you fail to find some on/in the seafloor. Look through those rocks for trilobite fossils. Heck, look through any rock with grass pollen fossilized in it for mososaur or pleisiosaur fossils. You won't find one. Ever.Grass hadn't evolved when these critters lived and later went extinct. Grass did not precede sea creatures, or, for that matter, birds or land creatures. The very oldest rocks in which grass-related fossils appear also contain the fossils of very last of the dinosaurs.The order given in Genesis is just plain wrong.

Here's my top 20 problems with Creationism - in no particular order - and I'm sure people will suggest others - this list certainly isnt definative.1) Comparitive Religion - Why do we pick Judeo-Christian creation as the right one? There are hundreds of Creation stories. This one is not the earliest, nor the latest, nor the most reasonable? It's not the only one which appears in a book, it's not the only one proclaimed true by a God, it wasn't even the most popular one when it was created.2) Anthropology - How does Creationism account all the cultures in the world which pre-date the 6,000 year old time line of Creation.3) Paleo-Anthropology - How does Creationism account for the dozens of early homonid forms?4) Paleontology - How does Creationism account for the millions of years of dinosaur fossils, all of which existed prior to 6k years ago.5) Paleontology 2 - How does Creationism account for the millions of years of pre-dinosaur fossils?6) Paleontology 3 - How does Creationism account for the mega-faunal, a period of time coinciding with expansion into North America, where we see a vast array of large species (wooly mammoth, giant groundsloth, giant elk, etc)7) Nuclear Physics - How does Creationism account for the steady state of radioactive decay which we've observed, the implications of which help us date the Earth to FAR older than 6000 years.8) Radio-Carbon - How does Creationism deal with radio-carbon dating, which allows us to date biological materials to FAR older than 6000 years.9) Hydro-dynamics - How does Creationism deal with the fact the water today behaves VERY differently than it would have had to behave during the time of the "Flood".10) Conservation of Matter - How does Creationism explain the apparent lack of water needed to cover the entire world ? Where did that water come from? Where did that water go?11) Magic! - Why does Creationism rely on the use of "magic" to answer virtually every question put before it? Why isn't that Magic being observed today?12) Dendochrinology - If tree rings gain a ring a year, and we can count back more than 10,000 years in Germany alone, where were these tree growing during the 4,000 years they existed prior to the rest of the universe.13) Incest - According to Creationism, all mankind descended from an incestous pairing between Adam and Eve, then subsequently re-descended from an additional incestuous pairing of Noah and his family. What gives?14) Non-existance of fossils - According to Creationists, all the fossils of dinosaurs etc were laid down during the Great Flood, however, at the same time whole civilizations would have been wiped out. Why don't we find human tools and bones with dinosaurs?15) Organization of Fossils - Why, during the Great Flood, did all the fossils sort out so neatly so that the more primative forms sank to the bottom first and the less primative forms floated?16) Swimming Dinos - Why did the swimming dinosaurs perish during the great flood, along side the primative fishes and shellfish, while apparently the dolphins and sharks survived?17) Bio-diversity & Bio-isolation - How does Creationism account for the massive diversity of life everyone in the world, if all of it came from the same place at the same time - when Noah landed the arc. Why is it that Turkeys exist in North America and Kangaroos in Australia? They all got off the Arc at the same place, did all the Kangaroos just make a run for Australia and not stop to eat like everyone else?18) Viruses - If God created everything at the "time of Creation" how do we account for current fears over Bird Flu. Bird flu either exists as is and will stay that way forever, or Bird flu is a risk to us because a strain could infect humans. Why aren't true Creationists also Christian Scientists and refusing medication and surgery?19) Experimentation - Evolution has been demonstrated through experimentation, Creation has not. Why don't Creationists cause something to spontaneously appear if that's the primary method by which things exist?20) Occam's Razor - This is from a Friar! "Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity" or put another way "the simpliest solution is the best solution." You may look at evolution is being complex, but it isn't nearly as complex as magic.Special note about the complexity of magic:
You and I are both using computers. We push buttons, letters appear, we click submit, the message gets posted.It's been said that sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguisable from magic. That's only if viewed from the point of the ignorant.I assume that you do not believe that computers are magic. However, I'm willing to bet that you can not explain every step between push the key and the letter appearing, nor every step between clicking submit and the message going onto the internet.The reason you don't believe that computers are magic is that you know that there are people out there who can explain the steps in between. That, given enough time, you can learn the specifics of every piece that makes the computer work.Well, the same is true about evolution. You can learn the pieces that make it work. You can understand how fantastically amazing the world is, without having to rely on "its magic".Just like you wouldn't trust your computer to a guy with a pointy hat, why would you trust your education to that same guy?

I am a creationist. I believe God spoke the universe into being.I have no problem with any date Science wants to put on the universe.
I base that belief on the first 5 chapters of Genesis.In fact I think in a few years science will have a better way of being able to tell how old the universe is and will discover that it is much older than they now think it to be.

Icant, if what you are saying is:
"The universe is a big and wonderful place. God is the one who set it all up. It's several billion years old, and life on Earth evolved."I've got new for you, you aren't a "Creationist" as we talk about them here.In fact, that position is extremely common among scientists.Welcome to the club.

As I understand it, the flood is a second 'creation,' the restart of mankind after years of sin and evil and God making the Noahic covenant with mankind. So I do suppose you are sort of correct. Genesis doesn't need the flood, but Christanity does.

Feel free to start a thread on it because that too is simply not true.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I can’t speak for everyone, but I can tell you why I personally believe the Genesis account of creation. One of the biggest reasons for me is fulfilled prophecy. For example Genesis 3:15 says, The phrase “her Seed” is prophecy that Jesus will be born of a virgin. Also the phrase “and you shall bruise His heel,” is prophecy that Jesus will be pierced through the heel as you can read about during His crucifixion.