View Single Post
) [ ]
03-20-2006, 09:42 PM
Mad as an adder
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 45.5° North, 73.7° West
Re: Great Flood
Originally Posted by
Actually natural selection can happen quite quickly, just look at all the different types of dog we have now compaired to 200 years ago, or look at corn, or wheat, etc... These all changed quite drasticaly in a reletively short amount of time.
But dogs are still part of the same species. Speciation is full-blown evolution; not natural selection. Very little speciation occurs over 4000 years.
I believe in the flood, but I do not believe that it can be totaly scientificaly explained. But I do believe that two of every animal and more could fit on the ark, I have a belief that their was base animals for todays modern animals, their was a base type of dog with enough genetic variation to make all the breeds of dog we have today, their was a base horse, a base elephant, ect. That would make it way more physicaly possible, after the flood, natural selection just took its course.
Once again, natural selection alone can't turn a dog into a horse, especially in 4000 years.
Perhaps the Pangea can explain. There could have been land bridges, or ice bridges across continents during the "ice age." More explanations are listed here.
Pangea existed 300 million years ago according to the continental drift rates. If all the continents moved to their current positions in just 40 days, as your quote suggests, there is no way a boat could have survived the waves and currents created by it. We're talking 300 million years of continental drift condensed into 40 days. Do you realize how much energy that is? All the water would have evaporated just from the heat. Even if it somehow didn't, even a cruise ship couldn't survive the waves and whirlpools.
That is also true. Despite this being a bit off-topic (though I have addressed what I intended to), I would like to briefly touch on this as well. 200 years did give us more and different types of dogs, corn, wheat, etc. However, the dogs are still dogs. Interbreeding and such does not give us new species. I don't believe I have ever heard anyone say that they mixed a collie and a poodle and got a duck.
First, speciation has been observed. Second, this argument works against the story of the ark. You're basically stating that all the animals would have been stored in their current taxonomic groups, instead of a reduced number of species.
But yes, Noah only took two unclean (or seven clean) of each species onto the Ark. Not a wolf, collie, labrador, pit bull, etc. That frees up a lot of room for other species.
If you look at my previous post, I've explained that there are over 1.5 million land species (probably a lot more than that). So we need space for at least 3 million organisms on a single boat, and all the food for them to survive. Good luck.
No, you are mistaken. An animal can breed many times with the same mate and none of their offspring will be the same. The have enough genetic variation to produce offspring with long ears, short ears, shaggy hair, fine hair, etc. Those genes are just resesive, they are still their even if you do not see a shaggy do, that dog may have shaggy genes. Animals have changed quite a bit in the last thousand years, they just haven't changed species, which is impossible.
Genetic variation only exists in a
. Noah's ark only had two of each organism. That's a pretty small gene pool, and doesn't allow for much diversity. Certainly not enough for major structural changes, and most definitely not enough for speciation.
If everything one believes in must be scientifically explained, there is absolutely zero point in holding an opinion, even an educated one. You have a remarkable misunderstanding of religion, GDwarf, and you continue to amaze me by constantly expressing it.
Useless, unless you explain what he doesn't understand. Is it that religions believe in stuff with no reason to believe in it?
The religious believe that religious lore is fact, and that the sources from which it come, if they have been accepted into doctrine or scripture, are completely valid and credible. Science is irrelevant in the realm of the supernatural. Walking on water is not a scientifically explainable phenomenon. Then again, neither is urinary retention "vanishing without explanation," yet I've had that happen on numerous counts. Usually a catheter or some kind of muscle relaxant is required to fix such problems; prayer and willpower have overcome every instance in which I have experienced it.
Of course, this results in people putting too much faith in faith healing. Most of the time, people are just convinced that they are cured, and the illness persists. There are a lot of televangelist faith healers who should have been locked up a long time ago. James Randi has done some good work exposing a lot of them and gotten them to admit their fraudulent practices. Many of them get information sent to them about the people by radio through a small piece in their ear, and then claim God is telling them what's wrong. Some of them walk without crutches for a while. Of course, the next day, they're falling down. They claim to cure cancer many times, and this is just plain dangerous. These people are not cured, and the faith healer gets their money! Putting too much faith in things like this has dangerous results. Every medical practice MUST be examined critically. We can't put our money in faith healing, homeopathy, herbal remedies with impossible promises, etc.
You're basically constructing a post hoc argument, because you have no way of knowing if the prayer is curing you, or if it is some body function. You have no control group, no clear variable, or anything like that, so it is fallacious to say that prayer has fixed your problem. Perhaps will power has something to do with it. Placebos are very powerful.
Sure it does. Can I assume it's been 5000 years? (Probably more, but I'm being generous.) You don't think that it's possible to get all sorts of dogs in thousands of years?
We're talking species. A lot of people don't even think 4 billion years is enough time for speciation...
The fossil record has nothing to do with it if we're talking about the Bible. The fossils were made as the sediment rapidly covered the living animals and fossilized them. The animals on the Ark would not be fossilized and therefore do not play a part in this equation. I was simply making a point that in 5000 years we can get many different kinds of dogs, cats, birds, etc. I should've been more clear.
I have explained how the geological column can't form by one big flood.
Early Christianity and other religions must have had some pretty compelling firsthand experiences in order to believe what they believe and spread the word of their faith with as much zeal and passion as they did, and to be martyred for those beliefs. In order for them to be going off on a whim, I doubt they'd give up their own lives unless they had pretty compelling evidence. There have been enough martyrs over the years that it's doubtful all of them, or even most, were crazy.
On the other hand, look at some of the tall tales out there that people passed on as an oral tradition. Do you think Greek mythology is based on real experiences and facts?
You're making an appeal to popularity, saying that people wouldn't believe in it if it weren't true. All it takes is charisma. I hate making nazi comparisons, but Hitler was extremely charismatic, and was a great leader, and as a result, people followed him without doubt. Not that hitler and the biblical figures have that much in common, I'm just trying to show how powerful charisma can be.
Martyrs are not evidence. If someone dies for a cause, they're a martyr. It does not support the notion that their cause is valid. We have martyrs for conflicting causes. We have suicide bombers supporting Allah. Allah must exist - otherwise people wouldn't go through so much trouble. That's just not a valid argument.
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Mad Hatter