Insect diversity falsifies the flood myth

3rd April 2003 at 12:42 AM LadyShea said this in Post #27 look, do you have the name or author of the paper?

3rd April 2003 at 03:09 PM look said this in Post #31


Better yet, here's some url addys!

http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/jan252002/126.pdf

http://www.nuclearplanet.com/lamonitor.htm

http://www.discover.com/aug_02/featplanet.html

http://www.nuclearplanet.com/scientific_papers.htm At this one, there are five papers you can see.

http://www.nuclearplanet.com/ This is Herndon's weblog.

Eat and enjoy!

1st April 2003 at 08:49 PM Frumious Bandersnatch said this in Post #1

The subject of insects and the flood has come up on another thread so I thought I would expand on it a bit.  As with so many other falsifications of the flood myth creation "scientists" attempt to explain away a tiny part of the problem and then claim they have solved the entire problem.  As usual the YEC "answers" are far off the mark.

The diversity of insect life on earth is yet another falisification of the myth of a worldwide flood. It is totally absurd to claim that all of the approximately 850,000 species of insects on earth are descended from those who survived the flood either on floating mats of vegetation or on the ark as accidental passengers as creationists claim these days. In fact, the vast majority of insect species. including entire families and perhaps even entire orders could not have survived a year of flood on floating vegetation and many, perhaps the majority of species could not have survived the alleged worldwide flood either on or off the ark.

Consider the 2000+ species of the order Ephemeroptera (Mayflys), which only live in unpolluted fresh water, many only in running water. The adults have very short lives (some only live 90 minutes) during which they must mate and lay eggs. Even if they somehow live in the salty flood water, which most could not, they will be greatly spread out by the flood.  How will they find their mates and where will they lay their eggs? There are many other insect species that only live in fresh water during parts of their life cycle. How will they survive the flood? Did Noah have a fresh running stream on board the ark?

Then there are the social insects such as bees, ants and wasps,that require a queen and a colony. All those yellow jacket wasps that  fly around in the fall will die by winter, they are workers, the queen and colonies only survive in holes in the ground. How will they survive a worldwide flood on floating vegetation? Around here we have insects called sand hornets or more properly cicada killer wasps. They dig their burrows in sand or soft earth and lay their eggs in locusts that they have killed. The adults do not survive over winter. How will their eggs survive a worldwide flood? You can usually wash them out with a garden hose if you want to. How did they survive forty days of global rain and a year of flood that rearranged all the world's geology?

The caterpillar of the Monarch butterfly only lives on living milkweed plants and Monarchs go through more than one life cycle a year. The adults only feed on nectar and will only lay eggs on living milkweed. While many species of lepidoptera eat various plants, many others eat only specific plants, even if the caterpillars survived somehow, how would cocoons survive, and even if they did how would the adults find other adults to mate with and where would they lay their eggs. Generally, all these life cycles are complete in a year or less. Many of these butterflies and moths are quite fragile. Many other insects require specific living plants or animals for parts of their life cycles.  What about all those insects that feed on nectar from living flowers during parts of their life cycles? How would they survive a year on floating vegetation?


How about desert insects and arachnids that are adapted to live in very dry climates? Do you really think they could all survive for a year in water on floating vegetation?

There are also the cicadas, like the so-called 17 year locusts, that live most of their lives in the ground under a tree, then emerge, live for a short while, mate and lay their eggs in the branches of a tree. After a few days or weeks the eggs hatch and the larvae drop to the ground to live under the tree till the next cycle. They need healthy trees that will live until the next cycle. How did they survive on floating vegetation? What about all the other insects that require mature living trees for their life cycles? How could they have survived after the flood? Did Noah have a small forest on the ark?

These are only a few examples. I am sure that anyone with knowledge of entomology can think of many, many more.

BTW before you give me the “Darwin showed that insects could survive on logs and floating vegetation” claim here is my reply in advance. “Darwin speculated that some snail species survived for some time on floating mats of vegetation or logs going between islands and the mainland and he was probably right. This is not nearly the same as requiring all 'kinds' of insects and invertebrates to survive for more than a year on floating vegetation and then survive after landing on a flood devastated landscape.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

3rd April 2003 at 08:27 PM look said this in Post #34



OK, Mr. Frum, I'm going to call it as I see it. I think you are trolling, just waiting to pounce on the poor hapless soul who is taking a stand on his faith in what the Bible plainly states.

Why do I say that? I'll explain that for you and all of the members of the board.

Any person who doesn't know better to dispute your statement without checking all of the references provided, deserves to be made a fool of.

BUT, what you have done is, you made a statement without any references for anybody to check out, thus setting him up for a thrashing. How is he going to even stay on level ground, if he doesn't know what you are talking about? For all he knows, you might have just made all of that up. See my point? We have to know where you are getting your information from. You need to provide references to each point of your statements. That goes for everybody, also. If you want a serious debate, then let's get real! Provide your references! Then, anyone can come into this debate with some idea of what you are talking about.

Until You start doing that, you shouldn't expect any serious debater to come and challenge your threads.

3rd April 2003 at 08:27 PM look said this in Post #34



OK, Mr. Frum, I'm going to call it as I see it. I think you are trolling, just waiting to pounce on the poor hapless soul who is taking a stand on his faith in what the Bible plainly states.

Why do I say that? I'll explain that for you and all of the members of the board.

Any person who doesn't know better to dispute your statement without checking all of the references provided, deserves to be made a fool of.

BUT, what you have done is, you made a statement without any references for anybody to check out, thus setting him up for a thrashing. How is he going to even stay on level ground, if he doesn't know what you are talking about? For all he knows, you might have just made all of that up. See my point? We have to know where you are getting your information from. You need to provide references to each point of your statements. That goes for everybody, also. If you want a serious debate, then let's get real! Provide your references! Then, anyone can come into this debate with some idea of what you are talking about.

Until You start doing that, you shouldn't expect any serious debater to come and challenge your threads.

3rd April 2003 at 11:57 PM look said this in Post #38

Thanks, Frum! I shall begin on these right away!

Euphoric, BUG OFF!!!

3rd April 2003 at 07:54 PM euphoric said this in Post #39



Answer the question.  Stop trying to change the subject and answer the question.

-brett