Get an answer to ALL your flood questions :)

Jon · Apr 1, 2003

LadyShea · Apr 1, 2003

Jon, we are all very familiar with AiG, ICR, and Dr.Dino and nobody anywhere, with the exception of easily misled and trusting believers, considers them credible sources of anything.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 1, 2003

*sigh*

Jon, people here know of AIG, ICR and "Dr Dino".

I've seen a lot of the flood claims those sites make being utterly refuted (there have been a number of threads dedicated to such claims in this very forum).

Being able to post a bunch of links doesn't help your case for the flood. Chances are, people here have already seen it.

But, if you're so convinced of the flood, then answer me this one question:

After leaving the Ark, what did the predators eat to sustain themselves until the ecosystem became balanced (with respect to predator and prey ratios)?

Jon · Apr 1, 2003

But, if you're so convinced of the flood, then answer me this one question:

After leaving the Ark, what did the predators eat to sustain themselves until the ecosystem became balanced (with respect to predator and prey ratios)?

Fish or other sea creatures

Jon · Apr 1, 2003

Being able to post a bunch of links doesn't help your case for the flood. Chances are, people here have already seen it.

ALL of the flood threads that people have started since I have come here have been answered at one or more of those links.

Jon, we are all very familiar with AiG, ICR, and Dr.Dino and nobody anywhere, with the exception of easily misled and trusting believers, considers them credible sources of anything.

You don't need to trust them, however you should read them and test them

notto · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 10:57 AM Jon said this in Post #5

ALL of the flood threads that people have started since I have come here have been answered at one or more of those links.

You don't need to trust them, however you should read them and test them

Are you sure that the listed sources don't conflict with each other when giving explanations?

Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on the canopy theory?
Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on when the ice age happened?
Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on when and how the continents separated?

No.
No.
No.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 1, 2003

Tell me, Jon. How did these fish and other sea creatures survive a flood event catastrophic enough to form the modern mountain ranges (and in populations large enough to not only sustain themselves, but emerging populations of land predators?). Keep in mind, such a catastrophic event would not only release large quantities of heat into the oceans (I've seen calculations suggest that the oceans would have boiled off by the heat generated by such an event), but caused rapid amount of sediment upheaval in the waters themselves.

Second, can it be reasonably demonstrated that the Earth's major land predators could exist on a diet predominantly consisting of aquatic life? (Keep in mind, they have to be able to catch such food). For some land predators, bears, raccoons, etc, I'd grant that's it's possible (if not necessary). But what about animals like lions? Ever seen them catch a fish?

LadyShea · Apr 1, 2003

You don't need to trust them, however you should read them and test them

 

I have read them, they are not based on science but theology. Their conclusions do not correspond with reality.

Zadok001 · Apr 1, 2003

Pete Harcoff:

Better yet, what about the predatory insects and smaller critters? Spiders come to mind. Can't catch a trout in a web.

Frumious Bandersnatch · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 05:11 PM notto said this in Post #6

Are you sure that the listed sources don't conflict with each other when giving explanations?

Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on the canopy theory?
Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on when the ice age happened?
Do AIG and Hovind and ICR agree on when and how the continents separated?

No.
No.
No.

Sounds like you may have been reading the Debunking Creation Science with Creation Science web page.
http://www.darwin.ws/contradictions/

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Arikay · Apr 1, 2003

Sorry Jon but these pages dont answer some of the even basic questions of the flood.

Arikay · Apr 1, 2003

In addition to not answering some of the most basic questions about the flood, quite a few of these articles make giant leaps of assumptions using bad science, false facts and attacks on modern science in their papers (all the while, trying to use a form of fake science to prove the flood).
Many of these papers are written specifically to people who dont have much scientific knowledge, they are written to dupe people who want to believe the flood happend into believing it did.

Jon · Apr 1, 2003

Better yet, what about the predatory insects and smaller critters? Spiders come to mind. Can't catch a trout in a web.

From
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=faq&specific=25

Did Noah take all the millions of insects on the ark?
Answer:

Noah was commanded to take into the Ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). I do not believe that all the varieties of insects were on the Ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the Ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark; the Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.

From our Debate thread
You never commented on the Kilias et al paper, but there the new species were no longer fruit flies, but "meat" or "bread" flies instead.

Dr. Dino sugests that all animals before the flood lived off of vegtibals or fruit.
In our debate thread someone said that there was a fly that was no longer a fruit fly but a meat or bread fly. This would indicate that animals can change from fruit eating animals to meat eating anmials.
So the animals could have been herbivores before the flood and then changed to carnivores after the flood.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 02:55 PM Jon said this in Post #13

Dr. Dino sugests that all animals before the flood lived off of vegtibals or fruit.
In our debate thread someone said that there was a fly that was no longer a fruit fly but a meat or bread fly. This would indicate that animals can change from fruit eating animals to meat eating anmials.
So the animals could have been herbivores before the flood and then changed to carnivores after the flood.

So... what you are postulating is extremely rapid evolution of herbivores to predators. Never mind that the sheer rate of evolution for this to happen is unheard of, but the amount of evolutionary change in itself goes way beyond "variation within a kind".

Arikay · Apr 1, 2003

Yeah. Jon, Notice how Dr Dino makes all sorts of assumptions.

Also, just to point out, Dr. Dino has admited evolution is true in his FAQ, so, um, yeah.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 02:55 PM Jon said this in Post #13

Noah was commanded to take into the Ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). I do not believe that all the varieties of insects were on the Ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the Ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark; the Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.

The problem with this assumption is that many insects (like most animals) require specific environmental conditions tailored for their survival. I'd be interested to see how spiders could survive by "burrowing in the mud" or bee colonies by living on "floating matter".

And then there's still the issue that this flood is an extremely catastrophic event, rapidly causing all sorts of environmental upheaval (as proposed by you). This would also factor into the survivability of insects.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 03:08 PM Arikay said this in Post #15

Yeah. Jon, Notice how Dr Dino makes all sorts of assumptions.

And notice how "Dr Dino's" assumptions are based on not even a grade school level of biology. Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.

Arikay · Apr 1, 2003

I agree Pete. Unfortunatly some people believe him over their grade school science book.

Mechanical Bliss · Apr 1, 2003

Alright, here we go one more time. Here are points raised on the forum that have not been refuted by YECists because they are poitns that clearly falsify YECism and flood geology:

My thread on 12 features in the Grand Canyon that cannot exist with your model

Frumious' thread on biogeography

notto's thread on the Hawaiian Island Chain

ardipithecus' thread on angular unconformities

my thread on varves

and arikay's thread on the mathematical analysis of implications of a global flooding event

 

Considering the YEC response at these has been either silence or arguments already refuted within the threads, I'm still waiting for some sign of a concession.

A global flood never happened, nor could one account for Earth's geologic features.

The Earth cannot be 6,000 years old.

Zadok001 · Apr 1, 2003

1st April 2003 at 07:55 PM Jon said this in Post #13

From
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=faq&specific=25

Did Noah take all the millions of insects on the ark?
Answer:

Noah was commanded to take into the Ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). I do not believe that all the varieties of insects were on the Ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the Ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark; the Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.

You know what?  Out of the goodness of my heart, I'm gonna give you that.  Granted!  Spiders survived by floating on pieces of wood that stayed at the surface.  We'll ignore how they ate during that year, we'll ignore the change in atmosphere.  We'll ignore the volume of rain that would have crushed our tiny buggy friends into the dirt.  We'll forget that Noah was supposed to take "everything that creeps on the ground." We'll even ignore all the difficulties inherent in catching food for a YEAR.

What we will NOT ignore is the fact that you didn't answer my question.  Whence cometh food?  Spider boy lands after the the flood water clear away.  Now, answer the question: What did he eat?  Not fish.  Not larger animals.  Other insects?  What percentage of insects do you presume to say survived the flood?

Actually, it's worse than that.  Go, fetch your Bible.  Read Genesis 7.  In that chapter, we find the quote Hovind refers to - Genesis 7:22.  We find that it's NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT ANIMALS NOAH TOOK ON THE ARK.  Hovind has BLATENTLY quoted this out-of-context.  And even you can't deny that.  Now, why would he do this, but to decieve?

Get an answer to ALL your flood questions :)

<marquee behavior=scroll direction=left scrollamou

Humanist

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

<marquee behavior=scroll direction=left scrollamou

<marquee behavior=scroll direction=left scrollamou

Legend

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

Humanist

Gli alberi hanno orecchie, occhi e denti.

Contributor

HI

HI

<marquee behavior=scroll direction=left scrollamou

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

HI

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

HI

Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.

Gli alberi hanno orecchie, occhi e denti.

Similar threads