|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total) |
| |
anil dahar | |
Total: 919,516 Year: 6,773/9,624 Month: 113/238 Week: 30/83 Day: 6/3 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How did the Aborigines get to Australia? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1665 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Portillo, sorry for the delay.
RAZD writes: Please cite chapter and verse where the bible states this happens. In Psalm 104, it says "Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains." ... But that is not what the question was about:
Message 166: ... and pushed up after the flood. After the flood, the mountains went up and the basins went down. So you have a complete reconfiguration of the topography and geography of the world. ... Please cite chapter and verse where the bible states this happens. Your answer does not state that the mountains pushed up after the flood, so this is actually you making up stuff, not anything quoted from the bible, yes?
... 95% of the fossil record is marine invertebrates. 95% of the remaining fossils are plants. The rest is mostly fish and insects. The land dwelling vertebrates make up less than 1% of the record. Is it any surprise that the planet is filled with water, marine fossils, sedimentary deposits and fossil graveyards? The planet is covered with evidence of a watery catastrophe. Curiously a significant portion of that fossil record of marine life is inconsistent with catastrophic endings. Rather they show a gradual transition from generation to generation of mature ecologies growing on the deposits of previous generations. For instance brachiopods growing with their stalks attached to the shells of previous brachiopods, critters that spend a year in a larval stage before settling onto the bottom and building their first stalk\shell, critters that have growth rings in their shells showing lifetimes measured in decades on top of shells that took decades to form ... and that is but one of many such examples. Please try again. Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : there/their typo fixed (saw in roxrcool's post)by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4421 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
"The mountains rose; and the valleys sank down". Isnt that what you were asking? If the Bible says that the mountains rose and the basins sank down?As truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord. - Numbers 14:21
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Isnt that what you were asking? If the Bible says that the mountains rose and the basins sank down? The question is whether the statement is made in connection with Noah's flood events. Everything else in Psalm 104:1-25 seems to be about creation. I understand that Hovind and Ham think otherwise, but most commentary I can find indicates that these two are out to lunch. One example: http://www.godandscience.org/...h/psalm104.html#.UEIgZcGPWDE
quote: Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1665 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Portillo
"The mountains rose; and the valleys sank down". Isnt that what you were asking? If the Bible says that the mountains rose and the basins sank down? Yes. With specific wording to that effect, and that it was after the flood (as you claimed), so it is not a matter or interpretation. What you quoted did not do that. Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1249 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
Curiously a significant portion of that fossil record of marine life is inconsistent with catastrophic endings. Rather they show a gradual transition from generation to generation of mature ecologies growing on the deposits of previous generations. For instance brachiopods growing with their stalks attached to the shells of previous brachiopods, critters that spend a year in a larval stage before settling onto the bottom and building their first stalk\shell, critters that have growth rings in there shells showing lifetimes measured in decades on top of shells that took decades to form ... and that is but one of many such examples.
The above is what Portillo needs to address. Creationists always ignore what they can't explain. Marine fossils make up the majority of the fossil record because of the environment in which they form. The primary geological process operating in the ocean is one of deposition, while above surface it is erosion. That alone should be reason enough why marine fossils would be more common than land-dwelling fossils, but also consider that during the history of the earth: the ocean has made up as little as 70% of it's surface area, comprised greater than 90% of the habitable space on the planet, that 94* (today) to 100% of life on the planet has been aquatic, and that an average of less than 5% of all life are vertebrates. Of that, how many have been land-dwellers? Slightly more than what is represented in the fossil record? Likely, I'd say. *With the possible exception of the Permian-Triassic and other extinction events. Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1665 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Portillo
... a great land bridge that connected Indochina to Australia. Never happened. The Australian plate is moving towards the Indochina plate and there is a subduction zone between them. No land bridge. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6077 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Kangaroos/wallabies got to Australia from a great land bridge that connected Indochina to Australia.
That has already been covered in this topic. As I explained in Message 97 in response to Granny Magda's question:
DWise1 writes:
RAZD in turn replied to me in Message 99, describing Wallace's Line with coincides with my description ("Separating Australia from that Southeast Asian land bridging is a trench that is thousands of feet deep. Not land-bridge material, that."):
I realize that your actual point was that Ice Age land bridges would not account for the presence of marsupials in Australia because fossil evidence shows that they were already there millions of years before. Kind of like trying to claim that the arrival yesterday in New York of an airliner from Western Europe accounts for the presence of Europeans in the Americas. {More for the benefit of lurkers, though I'm sure that Chuck will stubbornly cling to his blessed ignorance:} However, land bridges did exist during the last ice age and, I'm sure, during the previous ice ages as well. During the last ice age, so much water was tied up in the ice caps that sea level was about 200 feet lower. That means that sea floor that is less than 200 feet down had been dry land during that time, thus forming what we call land bridges. Take a look at maps that also display sea depth; Google Earth provides that feature as well. The Persian Gulf is less than 200 feet deep, though beyond the Strait of Hormuz it starts to drop off; that means that during the Ice Age that was dry land. I suspect that the flooding of that region which must have been well populated may have formed the basis for Mesopotamian flood myths. Much of the Bering Strait and the Bering Sea is less than 200 feet deep, so that would have formed a well-known land bridge between Asia and North America. We can also see lots of land bridges extending from Southeast Asia through Indonesia and even extending up into the Philippines, though there doesn't seem to have been any land bridge providing a direct connection to Papua New Guinea, since most of the ocean floor there is thousands of feet deep. However, there is no land bridge connecting Asia with Australia. Separating Australia from that Southeast Asian land bridging is a trench that is thousands of feet deep. Not land-bridge material, that. Also, it looks very much like so many other trenches where one tectonic plate collides with another and the one trench starts subtending beneath the other. There is a land bridge between Australia and Papua New Guinea, but there is no land bridge connection from there to Southeast Asia, so still no land-bridge route for marsupials to take from Asia to Australia. Therefore, CMI's land bridge claim does not hold water. BTW, supporting Percy's source that marsupials migrated from Antarctica when it and Australia were next to each other, when we look at the sea bottom between Australia and Antarctica we see the signs of spreading that occurs when plates move away from each other, such as we see in the mid-Atlantic expansion zone.RAZD writes:
Ignoring what has already been discussed will not help your case in the least.
Hence causing what is known as the Wallace Line that divides species on one side from those on the other (except for those that could fly or swim the distance).
quote: You can also see this subduction zone trench formation continue along the east side of the Philippines, and another to the east that is the Mariana trench, the deepest part of ocean in the world.
If you want a land bridge here, you are going to need to wait for a while ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4421 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
Apparently there was a land bridge.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.As truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord. - Numbers 14:21
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2366 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
An area with gaps of 15 miles or so of water does not make a land bridge.
Check the Bering land bridge for comparison. Something like 1,000 miles north to south, all dry land. That's a land bridge.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.3
|
can you swim 15 miles?
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6077 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Do you mean that red circle between Australia and Papua/New Guinea? But how is Papua/New Guinea connected to Asia? Where's that land bridge? Through those deep-sea trenches. And the deep water barrier that coincides with Wallace's Line (see again Message 187).
There's a reason why Wallace found such a great difference between animals on either side of that line: there was no land bridge across that line. And hence no land bridge connecting Asia and Australia.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1665 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Portillo
If you mean the red circle, as dwise1 points out, you are looking in the wrong place -- the gap in question is further north. As noted in Message 99 quote: That red line is the subduction zone between the colliding plates, and this formation means that there was no land bridge in this area. All the other islands do appear to be connected to either the Indonesian plate or the Australian plate by land bridges. Enjoy Edited by Admin, : Reduce image width.by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6077 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
But what then of the Weber Line and Lydekker's Line?
In reality, there's an entire region, Wallacea with Wallace's Line as its western boundary and Weber's Line as the boundary for Australian mammals and Lydekker's Line as its eastern boundary. This is all described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallacea and at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_Line. The bottom line is still as I described back in Message 97, repeated in Message 187:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
saab93f Member (Idle past 1654 days) Posts: 265 From: Finland Joined:
|
quote: It does not matter in the parallel cretin universe - in the map legend it said that the water is only 100 feet deep so you don’t drown that badly. Even though I am well aware that it isnt constructive as far as the debating goes but I am in awe about the intellectual somersaults the cretins have to be able to make. Kudos to them OTOH - a "lesser" man would lose his mind with that
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22954 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 7.1
|
I'm sure a brief summary has already been presented to Portillo, but I'll just say it again.
Kangaroos and wallabies did not arrive in Australia at anything remotely near the same time as the aborigines. At around 50,000 years ago, the aborigines are relatively recent arrivals to Australia. We know this because of the archaeological record. They obviously arrived at a time when Australia was geographically isolated from other continents, and it is assumed they used boats for at least part of their migration route. Kangaroos and wallabies are indigenous to Australia. We know this because of the paleontological record. Their evolutionary ancestors were already in Australia when it separated from Asia around 5 million years ago. They didn't have to cross a land bridge to get to Australia because they were already there. Prior to 5 million years ago Australia was joined to Asia. The remote ancestors of kangaroos and wallabies could roam freely throughout Asia and Australia because they were a single continent. Modern maps of the region between Asia and Australia bear no resemblance to what it looked like while they were joined. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024