shiloh writes:
First, Noah was commanded to take 7 of each; that is male and female -prob. 14 tot. for one "kind" of clean animal and 4 - 8 tot. of unclean.(Gen.7:2-3). Furthermore, "kind" and modern day species do not necessarily belong in the same catagory. These numbers are fine for repopulation esp. with great genetic diversity within these early "kinds." Also, there would have been extra room on the ark for storage of food. There is also the issue of hybernation, and the fact that they may well have eaten one of the pairs. Although meat intake is relativly small comp. to herbavoirs and insectavoirs. Don't forget dried food as weel. This is not nearly exhaustive but lastly if you can get past Gen. 1:1 this should be no problem for God.
(1) Define "kind" for us.
(2) Hybernation? Lions don't hybernate for a year. Dogs don't hybernate for a year. Birds don't hybernate for a year. Heck, even bears don't hybernate for a year.
(3) Do you have any idea how much room it takes to store enough food for that many animal for a year?
(4) They may have eaten one of the pairs? We're talking about a whole year here. Why don't you do an experiment for us. Don't eat anything except a pair of animal of your choosing for a year and see how you'll survive.
(5) No problem for god? In other words, magic, right? Might as well throw up your hands and stop trying to find answer for anything. Goddunit ought to explain just about everything. Hey, why don't you send in a paper with your "goddunit" theory and have it peer reviewed? I'd like to see the wonderful inventions and scientific discoveries with your "goddunit" theory.
Two, The "problem" of light is not the only problem reguarding cosmology. There are many unresovled problem although not with theory's. One for the evolutionist is called the horizion problem. Nonetheless there are other models to explain this light problem, not to mention whether certain constants are not actually constant. To qoute a quick explanation of the horizion problem by David F. Coppedge:
The Light-Distance Problem | The Institute for Creation Research
"According to the Big Bang theory, the universe expanded in all directions from its initial state of high density. In your mind's eye, follow a tiny region on its path; at no time would it come in contact with the particles going in a different direction. The universe would never have mixed; each part of space was beyond the "horizon" of each other part. Herein is the problem. The universe looks homogeneous and isotropic. This means all parts of space appear uniform at large scales. The temperature of the cosmic background radiation is uniform to within one part in 100,000. If no parts ever mixed, how could they achieve such striking uniformity of temperature?
The horizon problem is recognized as a serious difficulty by all secular cosmologists. It was part of the motivation behind an ad-hoc proposal in 1980 called inflation. In addition, the standard Big-Bang model is plagued by the lumpiness problem (matter is structured into stars and galaxies), the entropy problem (the initial "cosmic egg" would have had to start with a high degree of order), the ignition problem (no cause for the expansion), and other more recent difficulties, like the amazingly precise balance between the acceleration rate and density.
Critics of Biblical cosmology, in other words, have their own bundle of problems. Any serious discussion of the light-distance problem should begin with the recognition that it is an issue for all sides. Science is limited in fathoming such a complex subject as how the universe came to be. We have an Eyewitness that gave us enough information, corroborated by numerous other avenues of study, to justify putting our trust in His Word.
I can think of 3 logical fallacies you just committed here. Poisoning the well, red herring, and ad hominem. Notice how you didn't address the light problem I presented at all. You just presented a strawman argument against BB.
So, let me ask again. If the universe is only 6,000 years old, how come we can see stars tens of thousands of light years away?
Third, reguarding points 3,4,and 6 - I think you need to pratice your literary skills a bit. Those are not ment to be scientific statements. For number six have you ever heard of hyperbole. My goodness is this it. Circle is quite sufficent for a sphere in ancient Hebrew. Also "He spreads out the northern [skies] over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing" (Job 26:7).
Would you then agree that the Bible is not a science text book? Why then do we have to treat biblical creationism as literal?
Fourth, for number 5 - are you saying no wind direction N to S or S to N occurs.
Funny how you just told me to practice my literary skills and then turned around and misread what I said. Permit me to quote myself.
quote:
Just so you know, the wind direction is predominantly east and west, not north and south.
I said predominantly east and west, I didn't say only east and west. Why? Surprise surprise, because of the rotation of the Earth.
Edited by Tazmanian Devil, : No reason given.
Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!
™ Version 4.2
