Did a Homo Erectus build an Ocean Liner?

[doubtingmerle]

In the thread that will not die (Where's God? | Christian Forums , AKA "Hitler, gay sex, human evolution, the basis of morality, the Big Bang, and all other questions about Christianity") we have added Noah's flood to the mix. That thread is too big. I am moving the discussion here.

I am debating a man who argues that Noah was a Homo Erectus who lived 2 million years ago, and built a ship that was able to survive a global flood that covered the highest mountains.

as I posted earlier evidence just came out in last few weeks that sapiens and erectus interbred. So that is evidence that they are the same species. They are probably just a different race.

Since you report that you are a biologist, you must surely be aware that the concept of species is not always easy to define. There are many instances of gene transfer between species.

Further, you state that God most likely created at the genus level (over a period of hundreds of millions of years) and left microevolution proceed from there. So surely if a genus is going to evolve into multiple species, there must be a time where species that are near a speciation event have limited fertility with the other branch of the split.

None of this proves that Homo erectus was the same species as Homo sapiens.

The only real difference between erectus and sapiens is their skull. It is similar to comparing a German shepherd skull and a bulldog skull, if you found just the skulls you would think they were two different species, but in fact they are the same species.

I disagree. I understand virtually every bone of the Homo Erectus differs with Homo Sapiens.

I conduct endangered species and wetland studies.

You report elsewhere that you are a biologist. I hope your training as a biologist will help you understand the impossibility of your claim about Noah. (Although, I do understand, cognitive dissonance is a difficult thing to overcome.)

No, that is not what I said. I said there were widespread hydraulically caused fossil graveyards all dated around 2mya and associated with what are called "rubble drift in ossiferous fissures".

Again, what is your evidence that such widespread fossil graveyards existed 2 million years ago? The graveyards you report needs to be substantial enough that they are indicative of a global flood that covered the highest mountains.

The change in climate that started moving toward an ice age began then.

You are replying to this: "the last ice age was about 10,000 years ago, not 2 million years ago."

So your claim is that the earth began moving toward ice ages 2 million years ago, an event you attribute to the flood.

Who said anything about abrupt beginning? But the gradual change in climate began around that time period 2-2.5 mya, just as your figure shows.

You are referring to this chart that I had posted earlier.

I am sorry, but I am seeing no distinct change in climate beginning 2 million years ago. Rather, I see a distinct trend beginning about 3 to 3.5 mya. You bump this to 2 to 2.5 mya, and then use some slight of hand to move that to 2 mya. You move this date because you claim Noah was Homo erectus. So you need to push the flood up to where a Homo Erectus, in your view, could have built an ocean liner.

Anthropologist Stephen Molanar has documented many normal humans with cranial capacities between 700 and 800 cc. So what? 900 is still within the normal human range. And erectus were generally much shorter than modern humans so the brain to body size is not that much different.

My understanding that all Homo Erectus brains 2mya were outside the normal range of human brains.

Actually no, not according to Drs. F. Clark Howell and Bernard Campbell experts on erectus. They said "Below the neck the differences between erectus and modern sapiens can only be detected by an experienced anatomist." So yes there are differences but only very minor, similar to differences between races. Which is probably what erectus was, just a different race of humans.

I am not familiar with these sources. My sources say almost all Homo erectus bones are distinct from Homo sapiens bones

He [Noah] was a member of the erectus race.

How can it be that no humans were members of the Homo sapiens "race" before 300,000 years ago, and now we see Homo sapiens everywhere?

As far as animals traveling God could provide for them as they traveled and protect them.

So the penguins walked all the way from Antarctica?

There is evidence that the Chinese in the Middle ages built wooden seaworthy ships 450 feet long. And Noah's technology would have been far more advanced prior to the scattering to the languages at Babel similar to Middle Age technology.

That's odd, we don't seem to find any Homo erectus tools 2 mya that would be capable of building an ocean liner.

As I stated earlier the global flood was primarily a supernatural event. The flood story does not mention sheres which is the hebrew word for insects, other arthropods, and most aquatic animals to be taken into the ark so they were not included om to the ark.

You would have a hard time just stuffing the land mammals into a ship that would survive a year at sea.

 

[Lost4words]

God works in mysterious ways

 

[pitabread]

Given the sheer energy release that a global flood would have resulted in, the only way for Noah and company to have survived is on a space ship.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Given the sheer energy release that a global flood would have resulted in, the only way for Noah and company to have survived is on a space ship.

Perhaps Ed will argue that Homo erectus not only built ocean liners, but also space ships.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Was the ark made using stone tools?

Like 'unique', I guess there's no sense trying to say something is more impossible.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Given the sheer energy release that a global flood would have resulted in, the only way for Noah and company to have survived is on a space ship.

That's it! a vast wooden spaceship - why didn't we think of this before?

 

[durangodawood]

Given the sheer energy release that a global flood would have resulted in, the only way for Noah and company to have survived is on a space ship.

All problematic natural consequences could be erased because its a miraculous event.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

All problematic natural consequences could be erased because its a miraculous event.

That's the problem - anyone can claim that any amazing supernatural thing happened at any time - and also that all evidence was supernaturally erased... It's a similar premise to 'Last Thursdayism'.

 

[Estrid]

That's it! a vast wooden spaceship - why didn't we think of this before?

Perhaps Ed will argue that Homo erectus not only built ocean liners, but also space ships.

The Japanese have an animated series about raising their giant battleship Yamato and converting it to a spaceship.

 

[Estrid]

All problematic natural consequences could be erased because its a miraculous event.

Aside from inventing behaviour a motives for an undetectable and
quite possibly nonexistent entity, the problem is a lot bigger than
just erasring evidence if one is to have " flood" as an actual event in
a literal reading of scripture.

For one, God would be deceitful which some say is impossible.

 

[durangodawood]

Aside from inventing behaviour a motives for an undetectable and
quite possibly nonexistent entity, the problem is a lot bigger than
just erasring evidence if one is to have " flood" as an actual event in
a literal reading of scripture.

For one, God would be deceitful which some say is impossible.

A miraculous clean up wouldnt be deceit because it looks like a miracle and thats what happened (stipulating).

 

[Estrid]

A miraculous clean up wouldnt be deceit because it looks like a miracle and thats what happened (stipulating).

Meaning that God could have made the universe to look
10 or whatever billion years old but its really 6000?
That all relevant data on earth is contrary to "flood"
but God fixed all of that to make it look as if there was no flood ?

Trying to understand your idea.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

A miraculous clean up wouldnt be deceit because it looks like a miracle and thats what happened (stipulating).

The problem is that it would be a deceitful miracle...

 

[Shemjaza]

A miraculous clean up wouldnt be deceit because it looks like a miracle and thats what happened (stipulating).

Removing all evidence could be a reasonable miraculous event... replacing it with evidence of completely different events would be deceitful.