Insect diversity falsifies the flood myth

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
78
Visit site
✟23,431.00
Faith
Unitarian
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: keyarch

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟32,309.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Another nice falsification of the Flood. Also a good way of pointing up the ad hoc hypotheses used by creationists. As you say, they work for the SPECIFIC species mentioned, but not for all.

BTW, remember, the other ad hoc hypotheses of the Flood require the vegetation not to be floating, but to be BURIED in order to form the coal and oil deposits. That ad hoc hypothesis counters the ad hoc hypothesis of floating vegetation to keep insects alive.

But doesn't Genesis 6:7 and 6:17 say the Flood will kill ALL "living thngs"? So, once again, the creationists are not only making ad hoc hypotheses that can be falsified and contradict their other ad hoc hypotheses, they are abandoning what Micaiah calls the "plain teaching" of a literal reading of the Bible.

It's a lose-lose-lose scenario.
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
78
Visit site
✟23,431.00
Faith
Unitarian
2nd April 2003 at 02:40 AM lucaspa said this in Post #4

Another nice falsification of the Flood. Also a good way of pointing up the ad hoc hypotheses used by creationists. As you say, they work for the SPECIFIC species mentioned, but not for all.

BTW, remember, the other ad hoc hypotheses of the Flood require the vegetation not to be floating, but to be BURIED in order to form the coal and oil deposits. That ad hoc hypothesis counters the ad hoc hypothesis of floating vegetation to keep insects alive.

But doesn't Genesis 6:7 and 6:17 say the Flood will kill ALL "living thngs"? So, once again, the creationists are not only making ad hoc hypotheses that can be falsified and contradict their other ad hoc hypotheses, they are abandoning what Micaiah calls the "plain teaching" of a literal reading of the Bible.

It's a lose-lose-lose scenario.

Well the YECs now use the fact that insects breathe through their skin and Genesis 7:22 which says that all who had the breath of life in their nostrils died to ignore those verses that say that every creeping thing died and to ignore that Leviticus defines grasshoppers and locusts as creeping things that ye may eat, so insects were clearly considered creeping things.  It doesn't matter because so many families of insects could not have survived the flood on or off the ark.  The other problem this raises is that whales,  dolphins and manatee clearly have the breath of life in their nostrils. How did Noah save them on the ark?  Maybe the instructions for building the giant aquarium on the ark were just left out of the Bible.  I wonder how whales went on to the ark two by two.  I guess ambulocetus might have crawled on board but modern whales present a real problem.

The logical error of hasty generalization is a cornerstone of YEC.  This is a classic case.  Some insects could survive a while on floating vegetation so all insects kinds could have survived a year of flood on floating vegetation. A little analysis clearly shows that this is false. I have never seen a realistist counter to this flood falsification.  The infamous Karl Crawford said that the flood could have "collected a forest along with its dirt" to save ground dwelling insects. I hope everyone is able to see the absurdity of that.

The Frumious Bandersnatch
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
40
Visit site
✟21,317.00
Faith
Taoist
Its funny how YECs take the bible literally but they seem to "forget" what the bible says when it doesnt fit with their views. :)

One thing for fun, is that if you made a cramped tank on the ark, for two blue whales it would be aprox, 2,203,246.75 Gallons of water. That would equal 9,363.8 Tons of water. It would also take up half of the entire bottom deck of the ark. :)
And thats only for Two animals. Lets hope that the blue whale wasnt a "clean" animal. :D
 
Upvote 0

look

A New Species of Man®
Mar 15, 2003
814
9
68
Daytona Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟8,610.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
2nd April 2003 at 08:24 PM Arikay said this in Post #7

Its funny how YECs take the bible literally but they seem to "forget" what the bible says when it doesnt fit with their views. :)

One thing for fun, is that if you made a cramped tank on the ark, for two blue whales it would be aprox, 2,203,246.75 Gallons of water. That would equal 9,363.8 Tons of water. It would also take up half of the entire bottom deck of the ark. :)
And thats only for Two animals. Lets hope that the blue whale wasnt a "clean" animal. :D
I gotta ask. Why would you put water mammals in the ark?
 
Upvote 0

look

A New Species of Man®
Mar 15, 2003
814
9
68
Daytona Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟8,610.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
2nd April 2003 at 08:24 PM Arikay said this in Post #7

Its funny how YECs take the bible literally but they seem to "forget" what the bible says when it doesnt fit with their views. :)

OK, I'll bite. What do you mean, "They seem to 'forget' what the Bible says when it doesn't fit in with their views"? You wouldn't be 'sniping' at Christians on their own forum, now would you? I'm just wondering if I am guilty of reading a 'tone' in your post, or if you were condescending to the Believers?
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
78
Visit site
✟23,431.00
Faith
Unitarian
3rd April 2003 at 03:32 AM look said this in Post #8

I gotta ask. Why would you put water mammals in the ark?
Because the Bible says that everything with the breath of life its nostrils died in the flood and they have nostrils and breath. It also does say in a following verse that everything on dry land died so maybe YECs could weasel out of it that way. 

However,  as I pointed out many families of insects could not have survived on or off the ark.

The Frumious Bandersnatch
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
1st April 2003 at 09:40 PM lucaspa said this in Post #4 

But doesn't Genesis 6:7 and 6:17 say the Flood will kill ALL "living thngs"? 

We are told that all "flesh" that has the "breath of life" will be destroyed. Also, we are told they will be detroyed out of the land of Eden. The word Adamah is used.

The evidence is overwelming for a local flood. What you need to do is quit screwing around and quit playing games. The area that God flooded is now called Iraq and there is a serious war going on over there.

4300 years ago, there could have been no war, because it all would have been underwater. The first cleansing is with water, but the second cleansing will be with fire.

2 Peter 3:10
    But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

What sort of "fervent heat" does it take for elements to melt?

The day of the Lord is coming and you need to be ready. You need to allow God to prepare you for that day.





 
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
40
Visit site
✟21,317.00
Faith
Taoist
:)

because,

1) They would have died in the flood. As it would have made the water more fresh, injuring or killing the whales. Possibly killing their food. The falling water would have made it hard, if not impossible to breath successfull for 40 days.

2) Gen 7:23 says everything that wasnt on the ark died. So either god lied to us, or the whales needed to be on the ark to survive.

2nd April 2003 at 07:32 PM look said this in Post #8

I gotta ask. Why would you put water mammals in the ark?
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
40
Visit site
✟21,317.00
Faith
Taoist
Nope.

Only a snip at people who pretend to take the entire bible literally, but then ignore and distort the bible to fit their views.

An example is all the theories that the fish survived the flood.
even though Gen 7:23 says "And every living substance was destroyed [that wasnt on the ark]"
So the theory that fish or insects survived off the ark, is Not taking the bible literally.

2nd April 2003 at 07:41 PM look said this in Post #9



OK, I'll bite. What do you mean, "They seem to 'forget' what the Bible says when it doesn't fit in with their views"? You wouldn't be 'sniping' at Christians on their own forum, now would you? I'm just wondering if I am guilty of reading a 'tone' in your post, or if you were condescending to the Believers?
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
2nd April 2003 at 10:42 PM Frumious Bandersnatch said this in Post #10


Because the Bible says that everything with the breath of life its nostrils died in the flood and they have nostrils and breath. It also does say in a following verse that everything on dry land died so maybe YECs could weasel out of it that way. 

Just because they breath does not mean they have the breath (rawach) of life.

Genesis 6:3
    And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Rawach here is refered to as "My" spirit by God. This is a referance to the Holy Spirit of God. The same Holy Spirit that was poured out on the Church on the day of Pentacost.

It is the Holy Spirit of God that does a work in us to save us. If you do not have the Holy Spirit, you will be destroyed. Only those who have the "Rawach" or the Spirit of God, will be saved.
 
Upvote 0

look

A New Species of Man®
Mar 15, 2003
814
9
68
Daytona Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟8,610.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
I wonder, has anyone talked about the earth's magnetic field? Also, can anyone please explain why there are trees standing up through different strata, instead of remaining in their respective strata?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mechanical Bliss

Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
Nov 3, 2002
4,897
241
43
A^2
Visit site
✟21,365.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Democrat
2nd April 2003 at 11:16 PM look said this in Post #15

I wonder, has anyone talked about the earth's magnetic field?

This has been discussed many times on this very forum.

The Earth's magnetic field fluctuates in both magnitude and polarity over time. This is something well documented in not only magnetized minerals on continental rocks but magnetic signatures on the seafloor.

Also, can anyone please explain why there are trees standing up through different strata, instead of remaining in their respective strata?

Trees are rooted in lower strata, and occasional flooding can cause additional sedimentary deposits to form on top. This has never been a problem for geology.

 

Furthermore, this isn't related to the topic (and neither was your post), but here is a list of threads refuting YECism and flood geology that are conveniently ignored or plagued with already-refuted evidence every time they are mentioned (though usually ignored...):

My thread on 12 features in the Grand Canyon that cannot exist under a global flood/young earth 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

The notion of a worldwide flooding mechanism has been long falsified as has a young earth.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
40
Visit site
✟21,317.00
Faith
Taoist
Im not sure I understand what you mean about the trees.

However, some talk has been done about the earths magnetic field.

The earths magnetic field flip flops ever so often (we havent found a good way to predict when yet). But we know it does because of the Mid ocean ridge. The mid ocean ridge is a ridge at the middle of the ocean where Lava flows out, cools and then slowly spreads apart on the ocean floor. It keeps spreading till it reaches the edge and it folds under another crust. As the lava flows out, the minerals magnetic field get oriented in a certain way, when they cool, the orientation sticks. So the ocean floor has a record of magnetic field flips going back many thousands (maybe millions, I would need to actually look that up) years. :)

2nd April 2003 at 08:16 PM look said this in Post #15

I wonder, has anyone talked about the earth's magnetic field? Also, can anyone please explain why there are trees standing up through different strata, instead of remaining in their respective strata?
 
Upvote 0

Mechanical Bliss

Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
Nov 3, 2002
4,897
241
43
A^2
Visit site
✟21,365.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Democrat
2nd April 2003 at 11:34 PM Arikay said this in Post #17

So the ocean floor has a record of magnetic field flips going back many thousands (maybe millions, I would need to actually look that up) years. :)



The oldest oceanic lithosphere is somewhere in the ballpark of 180 million years old.

We not only have the oceanic lithosphere record, but we can also look at magnetized basalts (or other rocks with magnetic minerals) on continents which can be even older--that's where paleomagnetism comes from and we can figure out the movement of the plates over time.

There's a great paleomap site out there that has animations of the data over long periods of time...I'm not sure if I can find it at the moment...
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
78
Visit site
✟23,431.00
Faith
Unitarian
I am not surprised to see a desire on the part of the YECs to change the subject to some topic from the PRATT list of long refuted young earth pseudo evidences.

How about trying to deal with insect diversity? How do you think ground dwelling insects survived a flood that lasted a year and rearranged all the world geology? How about Mayflies? How about Monarch Butterflies? How about all those other insects I discussed? Do you think Noah had a forest on board complete with a stream that ran through it?

How many flood falsifications must you see before you realize that the flood of Noah was not a global flood? We have run through quite a list here but I still have some more.

The Frumious Bandersnatch
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

look

A New Species of Man®
Mar 15, 2003
814
9
68
Daytona Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟8,610.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Perhaps I should have clarified my magnetic field question. I'll try again.

The earth's magnetic field has been measured for the past 150 years. The records indicate that the field has been decaying much like the half-life spans of radioactive materials. The decay rate show that the field will not be capable of supporting life in approximately 2,000 years. Furthermore, reverse extrapolation reveals that only 20,000 years ago, the field would have been as strong as a magnetic star. Life would not even be capable of going through mitosis. The field would have been way too strong for even amoebas to live. The findings indicate that life was only possible for the past 6,000 to 10,000 years. Any information on that?
 
Upvote 0