• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Marsupial Distribution Refutes YECism

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
One of numerous biblical creationism theories regarding marsupials...
Why Do Kangaroos Live Only in Australia?

Well this is just silly.

"Whatever the answer is, it’s not fossils, which show just the opposite of this evolutionary story. The lowest and oldest marsupial fossils, found in Cretaceous system rocks, “are exclusively from Eurasia and North America.”1If Australian marsupials evolved in Australia, then why were their supposed ancestors buried in the opposite (Northern) hemisphere? "

Seems like a reasonable claim/question doesn't it?

Well the simple answer is, as everyone is well aware, the continents were joined back in the mesozoic.

Which is simple and easy to understand if continents move at the rate at which fingernails grow (which is observable with satellite imaging), its easy to understand how ancestors could have lived in China some 100 million years ago (as presented in older fossils), migrated to north america during the mesozoic (as presented by younger fossils), migrated to south america (as presented by further younger fossils and biological data) and have descendants that currently live in australia (as presented by animals that live today).

They essentially moved from north to south along pangea over 100 million years.

But from a young earth view, even the thought of pangea existing just 6000 years ago, or worse, the thought of rodinia and pangea both existing within the past 6000 years, doesnt really make any sense because you get into this questioning of how entire continents moved hundreds or even thousands of miles in such a short period of time without defying physics.

But this website just makes these statements, like its unheard of that continents were once joined. And that over 100 million years, animals could actually move across this landmass. No way, how could it be? Fossils in china but descendents in australia?

 
Last edited:
Reactions: Kerensa
Upvote 0

NobleMouse

We have nothing, if not belief in the Lord
Sep 19, 2017
662
230
49
Mid West
✟62,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Under the evolutionary paradigm that is a possible scenario...

Under the creationism paradigm another possible scenario is that God created marsupials (just as He created all other complex life from the beginning), that almost all marsupials went extinct during the flood (with fossils to date being found in North America and Eurasia), and migrated from the ark to what is now Australia before the sea levels were too high.

The article does make a good point: Whether operating under the evolutionary or creationism paradigm, neither were there to know for sure. This is another case that will fade like the other attempts to "refute" the possibility of God's word being true.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well, only one of the two options involve ice ages and an 800 degree molten magmatic acid raining/flooding planet to simultaneously exist along with animals breeding and birthing and making nests and living. Oh and this to simultaneously be present along with continents drifting thousands of miles in perhaps just a single year in which the flood allegedly occurred.

This is your world^ Is it not a bizarre place to you?

Or do you just ignore...basic physics?

Only one side of the coin actually makes sense and abides by physics and reality and Gods creation as we know it. The other side, even in our imaginations, seems senseless, bizarre, mysterious, mystical, without clarity.
 
Upvote 0

NobleMouse

We have nothing, if not belief in the Lord
Sep 19, 2017
662
230
49
Mid West
✟62,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, my world is much more bizarre. It involves a grouchy Christian arguing against me that my beliefs in God's word as found in the Genesis account are unfounded and, by extension, that God could not have any supernatural ability because the only explanation to all historical events involving earth and our universe are natural processes. Bizarre indeed.
 
Reactions: Calminian
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Im not upset, im just baffled. Its just that your ideas, dont make any sense. '

How could it be that thousands of feet of rock formed, metamorphosed (which takes extremely high temperatures and pressures), and ice ages occurred, while massive erosion of thousands of feet of highly dense metamorphosed rock was eroded away, all the while, dinosaurs are laying eggs in nests (which involves mating, eating, feeding, living life)?

You seem to believe that all of this happened in...perhaps a single year (that is the timespan that young earthers typically say the flood occurred within).
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Nothing could ever make any sense in this world view. You would be indefinitely lost, with no real understanding of history, just blind. You would forever find opposition to this view due to its mysterious nature. With it, you would never be able to understand the world.

Maybe this is why you accept your world view, even when it doesn't make sense. Because you have accepted a world of nonsense, beyond rationality. Maybe this is why you can speak falsehood but not care. Maybe this is why you do not admit when you are incorrect, because nothing makes any sense anyway, so how could you ever be wrong? How could anyone ever be wrong when we all live in a world without any answers to anything?

Intellectually lost...
 
Upvote 0

NobleMouse

We have nothing, if not belief in the Lord
Sep 19, 2017
662
230
49
Mid West
✟62,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, within around a year is consistent with the creationist view, and recent localized floods as well as recent volcanic eruptions (fountains of the deep) have demonstrated the ability to lay down rock layers rapidly such as to add up to thousands of feet in a year.

The creationist view doesn't see the geologic column as progressively evolving life forms over millions of years, but equally complex life all living at the same time in different locations (from deeper in oceans moving inward and upward upon land). This, for example, is why we see life forms in the Cambrian layer that have eyes so complex that camera lenses made by our modern technology today still don't rival in complexity. The creationist view follows that the flood would have brought in life from the deeper parts of the ocean first, then layered on top life from shallow waters, then as the waters moved progressively inward on land we would naturally expect to see life more suited for land getting buried and fossilized in higher sedimentary layers. This model fits the fossil record, though it is worth noting that no model (evolutionary or creationist) that has "all the answers" to questions of the geologic column and the fossils contained therein.

Dr. Marcus Ross, a paleontologist interviewed on the Is Genesis History documentary explains in more scientific terms:

 
Reactions: Calminian
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

I'm kind of stumped as to why this is a difficult issue. Unique animal groups on islands is just not a tough issue. That is, unless you don't believe the flood account and the Noah accounts as your starting premise.

If Noah built a ship to house land animals, it would follow his sons would have that same technology post flood. They could build ships and could build them to house animals. I realize you likely deny the Flood to begin with, but if Genesis is true, there's no issue. Land animal distribution happened 2 ways. Land bridges (from low sea levels due to the ice age), and human transport. And it's entirely plausible the latter was the most prevalent. Many land animals in many places, today, trace their origins back to human transport, and in those cases humans decided which animals they wanted to populate islands. And it's been going on from the beginning.

I believe in the case of islands such as Australia and Hawaii, there are virtually no self migrating animals. All are the result of early post-delivuan maritime peoples transporting animals to the places they wanted to settle, and hand selecting the specific types of animals they wanted to be there.
 
Reactions: NobleMouse
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Anyone can use their imagination to just...propose ideas. Oh thats easy, aliens arrived and just picked koalas up and dropped them off in australia. That and, there was a land bridge, that i guess just isnt there anymore. Yes there was an ice age right after the flood, but also, rocks were metamorphosed at hundreds of degrees celcius during the flood.

You cant just...make stuff up. Especially if you dont have any evidence backing it up. I wonder...how do you even know that an ice age occurred at the end of the flood? I dont think you could possibly know, because if you knew of the evidence for ice ages, you would know that there have been at least 5 major ice ages, with numerous interglacial periods.

And not only do you use your imagination to propose this mysterious ice age and mysterious land bridge, you also propose ideas that arent based in scripture. There is nothing in scripture that says Noahs sons gathered all of the koalas and flightless birds and brought them to australia.

You just made it all up with your imagination. Just because you can imagine something, this doesnt just make reality fit that idea. I can imagine a dragon, living in my garage. But it doesnt make the dragon real, just because i can imagine it being real.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

You never addressed any of my points. And you said the fossil record indicates that life changes from sea based life to land based life as flood waters had risen, however, of course the whale succession demonstrates the exact opposite.

And you cant say...oh well, i accept the fossil succession here, but i actually deny it elsewhere. At least not when you cant read a geologic map and aren't familiar enough with geology to be able to distinguish heads from tails with the fossil succession.

To simplify this, you cant be the judge of the topic, if you aren't familiar with the material. I don't even know why you even bother making claims about geology, when you aren't familiar with it. I don't go around making claims about structural engineering or medical procedures, when im not an engineer or a doctor. But that's exactly what you are doing, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
 
Reactions: NobleMouse
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

You never addressed any of my points. And you said the fossil record indicates that life changes from sea based life to land based life as flood waters had risen, however, of course the whale succession demonstrates the exact opposite.

And you cant say...oh well, i accept the fossil succession here, but i actually deny it elsewhere. At least not when you cant read a geologic map and aren't familiar enough with geology to be able to distinguish heads from tails with the fossil succession.

To simplify this, you cant be the judge of the topic, if you aren't familiar with the material. I don't even know why you even bother making claims about geology, when you aren't familiar with it. I don't go around making claims about structural engineering or medical procedures, when im not an engineer or a doctor. But that's exactly what you are doing, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

You should stick with scripture if that is where your strength is.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Anyone can use their imagination to just...propose ideas. ....

Yes, but I reasoned from the historical account of Genesis. I didn't just come up with a theory, I specifically went to the biblical account and made an obvious inference from it. The account specifically says Noah built an ark to house animals. And the text says Noah's sons of Japheth were maritime peoples. Is it easier to believe Noah's sons had no idea how to build ships and transport animals?

Also, we know for certain many animals in many lands were brought by humans. The Mongoose to Hawaii for instance.

So I'll ask you. If the mongoose and other animals on remote islands didn't get there by human transport, how did they get there? In fact, how did the original Hawaiian natives get there?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Wondering also if marsupials were a bit too vulnerable after the flood. Their young have a tougher path than other mammals. Could it be humans hunted them early after the flood and their vulnerabilities caused them to go extinct on most of the mainlands? Perhaps Australia was an exception because their early settlers took better care of their ecosystem?
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

But scripture doesnt say anything about Noahs sons gathering thousands of marsupials and flightless birds, and building another super boat to house them all, then taking them all to a foreign continent. And this still further doesnt explain the succession of marsupials and flightless birds in the fossil record, in localities indicating that marsupials and flightless birds evolved over time. And theres nothing indicating that an ice age happened 4000 years ago, nothing in scripture says anything about half the world freezing over or anything like that at all.

Theres just nothing there, its just in your mind.

And yes, I understand that there are invasive species that we have observed past and present. But what you are doing is you're just making stuff up. There is nothing in scripture about Noahs sons building more giant boats and carrying thousands of wingless birds and marsupials to australia. I'm just repeating myself, there is nothing about an ice age happening in the last 3000 years, there is no evidence for this at all. You've just imagined it.

Now, you brought up hawaiian natives. There are artifacts showing us when natives arrived at hawaii, so we know they took boats and just landed there, and we can see what they brought with them. So what we know what happened there. But what you are proposing are ideas that are purely in your mind.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But scripture doesnt say anything about Noahs sons gathering thousands of marsupials and flightless birds, and building another super boat to house them all.....

Nor did I ever imply that. Why would they build a super boat for traveling? The Ark, if you think about it, wasn't for travel at all, just survival. Why would you assuming I was implying they built another Ark after the flood?

You're reasoning is off, and I think it's because you're so biased, you want to win the argument at all costs. You're thinking before you type. Read my post, if you're interested, and try to make a reasoned response. Think! then type.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Wondering also if marsupials were a bit too vulnerable after the flood. Their young have a tougher path than other mammals. Could it be humans hunted them early after the flood and their vulnerabilities caused them to go extinct on most of the mainlands? Perhaps Australia was an exception because their early settlers took better care of their ecosystem?
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

But scripture doesnt say anything about Noahs sons gathering thousands of marsupials and flightless birds, and building another super boat to house them all, then taking them all to a foreign continent. And this still further doesnt explain the succession of marsupials and flightless birds in the fossil record, in localities indicating that marsupials and flightless birds evolved over time. And theres nothing indicating that an ice age happened 4000 years ago, nothing in scripture says anything about half the world freezing over or anything like that at all.

Theres just nothing there, its just in your mind.

And yes, I understand that there are invasive species that we have observed past and present. But what you are doing is you're just making stuff up. There is nothing in scripture about Noahs sons building more giant boats and carrying thousands of wingless birds and marsupials to australia. I'm just repeating myself, there is nothing about an ice age happening in the last 3000 years, there is no evidence for this at all. You've just imagined it.

Now, you brought up hawaiian natives. There are artifacts showing us when natives arrived at hawaii, so we know they took boats and just landed there, and we can see what they brought with them. So what we know what happened there. But what you are proposing are ideas that are purely in your mind.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

They would need another ark because there are thousands of marsupials and flightless birds that they would have to transport to australia, as per your suggestion. No regular everyday boat could do this, only a super boat, perhaps one with divine support.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,456
3,209
Hartford, Connecticut
✟361,260.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

These are good question. They are questions that should be asked, prior to...suggesting that the answer is simple and already explained via Noahs sons picking them up and carrying them.

Sorry if i came off as rash in my earlier posts. Im just trying to point out that, ya know, we cant just make stuff up off the top of our heads. Otherwise, we wouldn't get anywhere because there are no limits to the imagination and theres nothing tangible to work with.
 
Upvote 0

NobleMouse

We have nothing, if not belief in the Lord
Sep 19, 2017
662
230
49
Mid West
✟62,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think you meant all of this 2+ weeks ago when I posted, and I think you meant it towards Dr. Marcus Ross as everything I stated was based on what he has researched. Throw your rocks (pun intended) elsewhere brother. I believe what I believe because it is positively affirmed in scripture (that is, this is written in scripture, this is what the text says). That aside, there is evidence that supports this view as well... as Dr. Marcus Ross demonstrates, and more evidence continues to build in favor of this view. It's fine that we don't agree on this topic and I respect your position on the matter. God bless brother K-BIF and good evening.
 
Upvote 0