Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
31 online now:
DrJones*, Theodoric (2 members, 29 visitors)
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,983 Year: 19,019/19,786 Month: 1,439/1,705 Week: 245/446 Day: 43/98 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Super Evolution and the Flood
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3246 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 91 of 173 (459873)
03-10-2008 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by AZPaul3
03-09-2008 7:58 PM


AZPaul3 writes:

So where did all insect-kind come from after the flud? The book doesn't relate any additional creation after the flud. Where did all the bees and wasps and butterflies come from?

"Creeping thing" can refer just to reptiles, so it is not necessary from a biblical standpoint that insects were on the ark. They could survive on floating debris, but that is a separate issue. The focus here is what can fit on the ark that would have to be maintained in a cage. Sure there would be some insects on the ark, and they could be anywhere, but I agree that it would be unreasonable to be maintaining insects in little itty bitty cages.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by AZPaul3, posted 03-09-2008 7:58 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by RAZD, posted 03-11-2008 1:07 AM graft2vine has not yet responded
 Message 117 by Blue Jay, posted 03-12-2008 9:51 PM graft2vine has responded

    
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 2406 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 92 of 173 (459915)
03-10-2008 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by graft2vine
03-10-2008 11:49 AM


quote:
Each one if they worked just 12 hours a day 10 minutes per cage,

You've obviously never done any farm work. 10 minutes a day per cage for two animals is ridiculously underestimating the necessary time. You can spend hours cleaning a cage, feeding animals, moving them in and out of cages and curing sickness for two horses and smaller mammals. As for hibernation, you need to give evidence for hibernation in animals that show no such behavior now.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by graft2vine, posted 03-10-2008 11:49 AM graft2vine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by graft2vine, posted 03-11-2008 1:29 AM obvious Child has responded
 Message 95 by randman, posted 03-11-2008 2:44 AM obvious Child has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20156
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 93 of 173 (459921)
03-11-2008 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by graft2vine
03-10-2008 12:28 PM


BZZZZZZZZZZZT
"Creeping thing" can refer just to reptiles, so it is not necessary from a biblical standpoint that insects were on the ark. They could survive on floating debris, but that is a separate issue.

And magic koalas floated on mats of eucalyptus trees and eventually ended up in Australia, while all the marine dinosaur types perished.

Fascinating. What was the purpose of the ark again? To give Noah & family a token job?

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[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) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by graft2vine, posted 03-10-2008 12:28 PM graft2vine has not yet responded

  
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3246 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 94 of 173 (459923)
03-11-2008 1:29 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by obvious Child
03-10-2008 9:57 PM


Well, there is a big difference between cleaning a pig pen and cleaning a litter box. Some cages would certainly take longer than others. We need to average it out somewhere... I am open to suggestions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by obvious Child, posted 03-10-2008 9:57 PM obvious Child has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by obvious Child, posted 03-12-2008 4:03 PM graft2vine has not yet responded

    
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3190 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 95 of 173 (459927)
03-11-2008 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by obvious Child
03-10-2008 9:57 PM


As for hibernation, you need to give evidence for hibernation in animals that show no such behavior now.

Why assume in a story with God as an active agent (He closed the door for example) that we need some sort of natural evidence of animal behaviour?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by obvious Child, posted 03-10-2008 9:57 PM obvious Child has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Taz, posted 03-11-2008 10:04 AM randman has responded
 Message 98 by obvious Child, posted 03-12-2008 4:03 PM randman has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1582 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 96 of 173 (459949)
03-11-2008 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by randman
03-11-2008 2:44 AM


randman writes:

Why assume in a story with God as an active agent (He closed the door for example) that we need some sort of natural evidence of animal behaviour?


Well, the whole point of the young earth creationist movement is that the whole thing is suppose to be "scientifically sound" with no supernatural elements so it could be accepted in the science classroom. By citing "godditit", you're effectively undermining the YEC's purpose.


Thou shalt accept Prometheus as thy savior for HE is the true light of Humanity and the World.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by randman, posted 03-11-2008 2:44 AM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by randman, posted 03-12-2008 4:10 PM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 102 by graft2vine, posted 03-12-2008 5:10 PM Taz has responded

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 2406 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 97 of 173 (460084)
03-12-2008 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by graft2vine
03-11-2008 1:29 AM


Not really. You obviously haven't accounted for the time for moving the animals from one pen to another. You can't just take two ferrets out and leave them outside and expect them not to move around. Even trying to get one of them into a cage without having the other escape is a feat for some smaller faster species. Moving two horses out of a cage can take hours and that's not even counting the time for cleaning, replacing their bedding, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by graft2vine, posted 03-11-2008 1:29 AM graft2vine has not yet responded

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 2406 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 98 of 173 (460085)
03-12-2008 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by randman
03-11-2008 2:44 AM


So when faced with a fundamental lack of evidence, your argument is Goddidit?

Kind of weak don't you think?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by randman, posted 03-11-2008 2:44 AM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by randman, posted 03-12-2008 4:08 PM obvious Child has responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3190 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 99 of 173 (460086)
03-12-2008 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by obvious Child
03-12-2008 4:03 PM


The story is explicit that God did it and so must be judged on those grounds. To act like arguing God did it is due a lack of evidence strikes me as silly.

The Bible doesn't state God caused the Flood, etc,... by naturally occuring means, and in fact explicitly states God Himself closed the door. So the story contains God as an active agent, not as an indirect agent.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by obvious Child, posted 03-12-2008 4:03 PM obvious Child has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by bluegenes, posted 03-12-2008 4:31 PM randman has responded
 Message 112 by obvious Child, posted 03-12-2008 7:22 PM randman has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3190 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 100 of 173 (460087)
03-12-2008 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Taz
03-11-2008 10:04 AM


I am not a YECer so I don't really care if it undermines YECism or not. It puzzles me how someone could view no supernatural element involved for the story when the story explicitly says God closed the door of the Ark, not Noah.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Taz, posted 03-11-2008 10:04 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 768 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 101 of 173 (460090)
03-12-2008 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by randman
03-12-2008 4:08 PM


randman writes:

The story is explicit that God did it and so must be judged on those grounds. To act like arguing God did it is due a lack of evidence strikes me as silly.
The Bible doesn't state God caused the Flood, etc,... by naturally occuring means, and in fact explicitly states God Himself closed the door. So the story contains God as an active agent, not as an indirect agent.

I agree. The whole thing's supposed to be magic, so attempting scientific explanations is pointless, as magic can always be brought in to solve the problems. But, if you think this through, the same thing can be said for anything involving mysterious intelligent designers, as we can never know what level of magic they've done or are doing.

So, that should help you to understand why "I.D." as well as YEC creationism doesn't make it as science.

We can always make up magic explanations for anything, including super-evolution after a 4,300 year old flood. Bringing magic in used to be very popular, but it never helped our ancestors' understanding of the universe.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by randman, posted 03-12-2008 4:08 PM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by randman, posted 03-12-2008 6:08 PM bluegenes has responded

  
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3246 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 102 of 173 (460093)
03-12-2008 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Taz
03-11-2008 10:04 AM


True Believer writes:

Well, the whole point of the young earth creationist movement is that the whole thing is suppose to be "scientifically sound" with no supernatural elements so it could be accepted in the science classroom. By citing "godditit", you're effectively undermining the YEC's purpose.

I think you are confusing YEC with ID. The ID movement will actually distance themselves from the Bible in order to get creation in the classroom. YEC's are just defending their view of the Bible and see evolution as a threat to it. You can't believe the Bible without accepting the supernatural elements.

I don't believe there is any conflict between science and the supernatural. Science only deals with the natural... the supernatural is not within its scope.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Taz, posted 03-11-2008 10:04 AM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Taz, posted 03-12-2008 5:14 PM graft2vine has responded

    
Taz
Member (Idle past 1582 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 103 of 173 (460094)
03-12-2008 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by graft2vine
03-12-2008 5:10 PM


graft2vine writes:

YEC's are just defending their view of the Bible and see evolution as a threat to it. You can't believe the Bible without accepting the supernatural elements.


Actually, some YECs here have tried to pass the flood off as scientific and therefore should be taught in the classroom. The link to that article you linked to proves this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by graft2vine, posted 03-12-2008 5:10 PM graft2vine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by graft2vine, posted 03-12-2008 5:32 PM Taz has responded

  
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3246 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 104 of 173 (460097)
03-12-2008 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Taz
03-12-2008 5:14 PM


Actually, some YECs here have tried to pass the flood off as scientific and therefore should be taught in the classroom. The link to that article you linked to proves this.

But I don't think I see them distancing themselves from the supernatural. A point could be made here: While the cause of the Flood is supernatural and cannot be studied, the effect of the flood is natural, could be seen and studied. That is what YECers want in the classroom, the natural effect, but science won't accept the natural effect because it does not have a natural cause.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Taz, posted 03-12-2008 5:14 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Taz, posted 03-12-2008 5:34 PM graft2vine has responded
 Message 109 by randman, posted 03-12-2008 6:10 PM graft2vine has not yet responded
 Message 113 by obvious Child, posted 03-12-2008 7:26 PM graft2vine has not yet responded

    
Taz
Member (Idle past 1582 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 105 of 173 (460098)
03-12-2008 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by graft2vine
03-12-2008 5:32 PM


graft2vine writes:

But I don't think I see them distancing themselves from the supernatural.


What are you talking about? Some YECs have made a career coming up with bullshit theories like the hydroplate theory to try to explain the flood in a purely naturalistic way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by graft2vine, posted 03-12-2008 5:32 PM graft2vine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by graft2vine, posted 03-12-2008 5:42 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019