Evolution, the flood, and two of every animal

[excreationist]

Originally posted by npetreley
I suppose you think the small population of hunters and gatherers overfarmed the Sahara?

Well now that I've done more reading and it isn't clear how responsible people have been in the growth of the Sahara... but according to rock paintings, there used to be elephants, hippos, rhinos, etc, in the grasslands and somehow they know there were big rivers there too (probably due to geological evidence and inferred from pictures of hippos, etc). Apparently lots of people lived there and raised lots of cattle (shown in their paintings in caves) and then at around 1000 BC, cattle disappeared from their artwork. Horses could still get through the Sahara but by early A.D. camels had to be used instead....

[qb]If the flood and continental drift are related, perhaps the weather patterns changed because Africa was shifted into a different position.[/qb]

You said that a while ago, but anyway, as I've shown, there are cave paintings in the Sahara that give strong evidence that it once was quite fertile rather than being a desert. You said that a reason that this could have happened could have been continental drift... so do you think that Africa experienced a lot of continental drift between 2300 BC (after the flood) when the Sahara was mostly fertile to the early AD's, when you needed camels to go there? If there was continental drift shouldn't there have been earthquakes or mountain ranges coming up at around that time?

 

[lithium.]

The problem with the flood being related to the continental drift is that there is evidence of the continental drift happing when the Dinosours were here. That would put it about 100million years ago or so. So they flood didn't have anything to do with it you crazy people.

I swear alot of people seem to know alot about science, but i don't know what science they know. I think that only the people that know science and physics and evolution should post in the Science, Creation & Evolution forums. But thats just (MO).

 

[gladiatrix]

Originally posted by Project 86
"then why is he so sure it wasn't an act of G~d"

To be honest it shows why he's not a Christian. Like I use to be he has a hate for Christianity and God. Wether it was bad experiences, pride issues or what not this statement reflects this very well. It's people like this we should never forget to pray for even if we ever have a formal debate against them always pray for them before and after.

Typical response from a Christian losing the evidence war.  You equate disagreement with your dogoma with hatred of Christians.  Not content with this "red herring" of an argument, you now PRESUME to KNOW the "reasons" we "hate" Christians is that we are bitter (bad experiences) and "prideful."  I would appreciate it if you would keep your PRESUMPTIONS about my past experiences and character to yourself and present a REAL argument in response to Pete's question.  Ad hominem attacks on your opponent's character(alleging hatred, bitterness, pridefulness) are not arguments.
-----------

Originally posted by Project 86
It's people like this we should never forget to pray for even if we ever have a formal debate against them always pray for them before and after.

Originally posted by npetreley who responses to Project86's comment above
That's the spirit. And the Spirit. Thanks for the reality check!

Spare us your sanctimonious self-righteousness as well, in yet another example of Christian "humility" (NOT!).  You may as well pray to the Invisible Pink Unicorn (there is just as much "proof" for IPU as there is for God) for all I care.  

 INSTITUTE FOR UNICORN RESEARCH

But if you want to waste your time, by all means, knock yourselves out. [sarcasm off]