Biogeography falsifies the worldwide flood.

quote:

---

This is totally irrelevant to the problem of biogeography unless you think Noah was dropping off animals at various places during the trip.

---

I'm surprised the Flood geologists haven't suggested this themselves.

quote:

---

However, it is also irrelevant unless there was a land bridge created with a magic gatekeeper who only allowed marsupials, monotremes and specific flightless birds to pass by land

---

An angel with a flaming sword, perhaps?

I believe that the present state of the argument is that random mutations and conservative natural selection remand that ONLY ONE AGE is what is being observed in ANY substantive uniformitarianism that Gould denies. If Noah was to drop off stuffed sea monkeys etc around the world in 80 days or 40 the issue of extinction vs dentition that Croizat raised with respect to Lizards would have been solved IN SIMPSONS' notion of Gould's two homoplasic categorizations. Apoptosis between plants and animals shows that this stuffing is still not what we had for thanksgiving that we still have something to talk about.

Brad, I am still waiting for a coherent and comprehensive explanation of how vicariance events can separate the members of 13 families of marsupials, two families of monotremes and a fair number of flightless birds from more than 100 families of placental mammals comprised of thousands of species, if they all started at the same place thousands of miles away. You really haven't come close to providing one and you can't do so because biogeography falsifies the flood of Noah as a worldwide event.Randy

your gonna have to wait a bit longer because I just watched the Provine-Johnson debate 1994 at Stanford in which I found out that thanks to you and Loudmouth I have on the Evolution-distnguishing Barmins thread actually answered a question that neither Provine nor Johnson NEITHER answered as to if a middle ground exists. Answering you means I have an answer better than anything that could be informed biochemically out of that adult videotape. Lets just do what we can while we are alive. There is a real issue here that I can answer but it does require using a plausibility structure of two different sized "leaps of faith". I recognize that you may not want to even USE Provine's larger leap but as they framed the teachable issues this way they should have answered the question that was thanks to some interactivity on the baramin"" thread. Once the social plausibility is constructed we can see if your question can be answered again. I had not realized that Provine actually situtated Johnson WITHIN evolutionary theory. If you insist on making the two leaps of faith not socially plausible on the basis that there are not current evoltionary thinking able to handle it all that would be wrong but this doesnt yet give you the tracks you need. I have gotten the argument up to limits in cold-blooded the warms need the equations to go futher and this is what Provine thought he could do on the base of free will OR no free will. He was wrong. I'll be back to the marsups when the scorps are doing playing video games. Thanks again. I am still waiting myself as to what Croizat's "panbiogeographic uniformitarianism" connotes given the little I have since we last spoke"" been able to see it denote. Note down beat.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 11-29-2003]

I thought I would just bump this because I see Brad around on some other threads in other forums. What I am looking for is a coherent, comprehensive and comprehensible, global flood based explanation of biogeography from Brad or any other YEC for that matter.Randy

Randy, We all know the bible doesn't infer that only Noah and them on the ark survived, if you disagree, check what the word "only" means in hebrew [means: non the less], within the context with this verse, interestingly, The bible states it was summer in the southern hemisphere at the time of the flood, so the platapus would of survived quite well swimming out the flood, but cattle wouldn't of been able to survive a deluge, cause they couldn't of climbed unto the floating mats of refuge, but the platapus could have and even today they are commonly seen sleeping on floating branches on rivers, but no native cattle like creatures in Australia, because they all drowned, proving it was a biogeographical world flood, unless you can prove Austraila has hoofed creatures native to Australia, etc...P.S. I don't believe you will find any native hoofed creatures to Australia, cause hoofed creatures wouldn't of been able to survive a worldwide flood, outside of an ark, and without a land bridge, non could migrate to Australia, cause no land bridge after the biblical deluge, etc...

quote:

---

Randy, We all know the bible doesn't infer that only Noah and them on the ark survived, if you disagree, check what the word "only" means in hebrew.

---

Are you saying that in Hebrew died doesn't mean dead? Have you even read Genesis? I don't think it matters much what only means.Genesis 7:21 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:7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.7:23 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.

quote:

---

The bible states it was summer in the southern hemisphere at the time of the flood, so the platapus would of survived quite well swimming out the flood, but cattle wouldn't of been able to survive a deluge, cause they couldn't of climbed unto the floating mats of refuge, but the platapus could have and even today they are commonly seen sleeping on floating branches on rivers,

---

Right and they live on them for a year at a time no doubt.

quote:

---

but no native cattle like creatures in Australia, because they all drowned, proving it was a biogeographical world flood. unless you can prove Austraila has hoofed creatures native to Australia, etc...

---

We are not just talking about playtypus, There are echinda, marsupial moles, Antechinus(marsupial mice), planigales, bilbies, kangaroos, Wallabies, koalas, wombats, numbats, sugar gliders, dunnarts, ninauis, tasmanian tigers, tasmanian devils, phascogales, bandicoots, quols, potoroos, and bettongs and the rest of the 180 unique species in 13 families that live in Australia not to mention all the flightless birds found only in the area such as the Casowary and the Kiwi which is native to New Zealand. Are you saying these animals didn't live on land or have the breath of life in their nostrils? Even if you think they all could have survived a year on floating vegetation which is absurd the Bible disagrees.

quote:

---

P.S. I don't believe you will find any native hoofed creatures to Australia, cause hoofed creatures wouldn't of been able to survive a worldwide flood, outside of an ark, and without a land bridge, non could migrate to Australia, cause no land bridge after the biblical deluge, etc...

---

Did you even read the opening post of the thread or any of the other posts? There are a lot of animals that couldn't have made it back to Australia in the list above and that is part of the point. The other part is that many other animals that came off the ark were more mobile and any postulated mechanism to allow the return of marsupials and monotremes to Australia should have allowed hundreds or maybe even thousands of placental mammals to arive there as well.RandyThis message has been edited by Randy, 05-30-2004 10:46 PM

Randy, If you read the bible a bit more literally, you will see that all the creatures that drowned perished on the surface of the earth, but the ones that survived would of survived above the surface of the earth(walrus, seals, whales, dolphins, snakes, insects, etc...), etc...P.S. It says all that had the breath through nostrils that was "of" the dry land perished, means to me they drowned cause they were of the dry land, thats why you will find no native like cattle creatures that survived the deluge, though all the other creatures would of had claws to climb aboard the floating debris or was able to swim out the flood like certain sea birds, penquins, etc..., with all the fresh water rising up over the continents, given the deluge lasted only 40 days, but after a year the earth was dry land again, and the creatures, plants seeds, grass, herbs, reseeded Australia, it was not like the northern hemisphere that was glaciated, etc...This message has been edited by whatever, 05-30-2004 11:04 PM

quote:

---

Randy, If you read the bible a bit more literally, you will see that all the creatures that drowned perished on the surface of the earth, but the ones that survived would of survived above the surface of the earth(walrus, seals, whales, dolphins, snakes, insects, etc...), etc...
P.S. It says all that had the breath through nostrils that was "of" the dry land perished, means to me they drowned cause they were of the dry land, thats why you will find no native like cattle creatures that survived the deluge, though all the other creatures would of had claws to climb aboard the floating debris or was able to swim out the flood like certain sea birds, penquins, etc..., with all the fresh water rising up over the continents, given the deluge lasted only 40 days, but after a year the earth was dry land again, and the creatures, plants seeds, grass, herbs, reseeded Australia, it was not like the northern hemisphere that was glaciated, etc...

---

This is totally absurd. Did you even read my post?? Are you saying that echinda, marsupial moles, Antechinus(marsupial mice), planigales, bilbies, kangaroos, Wallabies, koalas, wombats, numbats, sugar gliders, dunnarts, ninauis, tasmanian tigers, tasmanian devils, phascogales, bandicoots, quols, potoroos, and bettongs and the rest of the 180 unique species in 13 families that live in Australia not to mention all the flightless birds found only in the area such as the Casowary and the Kiwi which is native to Australia didn't live on land or have the breath of life in their nostrils? Do you think that all these animals could have lived for such a long time on floating vegetation? The idea is ridiculous.Marsupial moles live by tunneling in dry sand and you are trying to tell us they are not "of the dry land" and could have survived a year on floating vegetation.Do you know what the moa was?
Carleton University
Do you think they lived on floating vegetation? Do flightless birds not count as the fowls of the air that all died because they can't fly? How could it be that flightless birds could survive and no flying birds could?YECs never fail to amaze me with their monumental illogic.Randy

I suppose if anyone wants a good laugh before going to bed tonight they can try to imagine kangaroos hopping around on mats of floating vegetation for at least 150 days while being pursued by tasmanian tigers during a flood that was depositing thousands of feet of sediments nearly everywhere and rearranging all the world's geology.Randy

Randy, I'd think a mole would come out of the ground as the water filled his tunnels, and it would of climbed upward, cause it had claws, if birds could float(even if they couldn't fly), they could of swam out the flood, not sure about small birds, but the albratross, penquins, ostrich, when it talks about all that breathed through their nostrils on the earth perished, if the waters covered the earth and you remained on the surface you too would perish, but Noah survived cause he was not on the surface of the earth, but floating up above the surface as was all these other creatures, like in South America, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, etc...P.S. What one of your creatures have hoofs, that survived the flood, if you have none, then its because they were creatures of the earth, and perished on the surface of the earth, because they were creatures of the dry land, they couldn't climb aboard the floating debris cause they had hoofs, and because they breathed through their nostrils they perished on the surface of the earth (drowned)(lungs filled with water), etc...You need to look at the whole world, certain creatures in certain locals, not native to other locals, etc...The hoofed creatures survived aboard the ark, it even talks of Noah and the cattle aboard the ark, granted he had lots of the other creatures too, birds that wouldn't of survived outside the ark, but no need for walrus, seals, cause they would of survived quite well outside the ark, even though they too breathed through nostrils, but they were not bound to the surface of the earth, so in reading the verse, yes all creatures that were on the surface of the earth perished, but that can only mean that the ones that remained not on the surface of the earth didn't all perish, that's my take on it all, cause if they remained not on the surface of the earth they would still beable to breath through their nostrils, however the ones that remained on the earths surface cause they were creatures of the dry land, their lungs filled with water and they all perished, etc...P.S. Kangaroo's have claws, smaller varieties are tree dwellers, and they swim extremely well, still waiting for your hoofed creatures, if you have none, its cause they all perished in the world flood, etc...This message has been edited by whatever, 05-31-2004 12:06 AM

quote:

---

I suppose if anyone wants a good laugh before going to bed tonight they can try to imagine kangaroos hopping around on mats of floating vegetation for at least 150 days while being pursued by tasmanian tigers during a flood that was depositing thousands of feet of sediments nearly everywhere and rearranging all the world's geology.

---

And yet humans were too stupid(?) to figure out how to survive on these floating mats that were so large they could create huge coal fields...RRRRiiiiight!

Whatever, your illogic is truely stunning. Genesis also says that every creeping thing died. I suppose you are going to us that moles aren't creeping things. It says that every living thing on the face of the ground died. Are you going to tell us that moles don't live on the face of the ground? I wonder if you can possibly imagine how absurd your statements are. I do have to thank you for the image of kangaroos hopping around on floating vegetation during a flood that rearranged all the world's geology. That one is really hilarious. I guess the idea of echidna waddling around on floating vegetation is pretty funny too when I think about it.Just think about that whole list of marsupials, monotremes and flightless birds somehow surviving on floating vegetation for several months while the flood was supposedly depositing most of the earth's geology and fossil record. It is so far beyond ridiculous that I don't even really know how to characterize it.Randy

edge, Humans didn't have claws, so would not they have had a big disadvantage clinging over 150 days to floating debris, etc...

whateverWhat the hell makes you think that any animal could possibly have any advantage that would allow them to cling to debris for 150 days of exposure without food or water. It is ludicrous in the extreme to assume that this was the case.