Marsupial in arctic supports that man was on Pangaea.

[lasthero]

God claimed. Science claimed. I chose sides.

Sure.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Hope you realize that only same state past dating is the issue. You use that for all the dates.

Sounds about right.
As I pointed out, only the same nature in the past belief based radioactive decay 'dates' date that for you. Surely you would not dare try to use the king lists? Ha.

Basically there is NOTHING in the way since I have proven for years that a same natured past cannot be proven.

Allow me to remind you of your past admissions regarding dates up to and beyond Babel:

Dates beyond Babel are actually older than Babel

Civilisations dated older than Babel pre-date Babel

 

[dad]

Allow me to remind you of your past admissions regarding dates up to and beyond Babel:

Dates beyond Babel are actually older than Babel

Civilisations dated older than Babel pre-date Babel

Not sure of your point. Of course there are dates older than the time of the tower of Babel. The problem is that if our present nature started around the time of Babel, that radioactive dates have zero value beyond that point! Hoo ha.

 

[Sparagmos]

"Marsupial lived among Arctic dinosaurs
The thumb-sized animal, named Unnuakomys hutchisoni, lived in the Arctic about 69 million years ago during the late Cretaceous Period. Its discovery, led by scientists from the University of Colorado and University of Alaska Fairbanks, is outlined in an article published in the Journal of Systematic Palaeontology.

The discovery adds to the picture of an environment that scientists say was surprisingly diverse. The tiny animal, which is the northernmost marsupial ever discovered, lived among a unique variety of dinosaurs, plants and other animals..."

Marsupial lived among Arctic dinosaurs


People have asked how marsupials got to Australia and the simple answer is that that ark landed on Pangaea, and it was easy to migrate on the supercontinent. It was easy for man and animals to spread into the areas of Pangaea that later split off into continents. When? At the time of the tower of Babel is my deduction.

If all of the animals landed together on an ark, why did they all end up in different places? So many species are location-specific.

 

[Sparagmos]

Nothing that should one surprise ..


The movement of the continents, as measured today, is about one inch a year, depending which move you take it is more or less than that. The movements is irregular (remember the earthquake when Japan moved almost three yards?), but the average has always be low in the last 3000 years, according to any known historical record.

I don't know how you date the tower of Babel, but unless we are talking about millions of years a movement from pangaea to present positions would be a very fast movement in geological terms. Such a movement would be accompanied with much more geological activities (earthquakes, volcanoes etc.). The heating of the surface from within would be much greater (where that much heat came from, is a question you have to answer), which would result in much warmer oceans, and consequently much more water in the atmosphere. Whether the atmosphere would be much warmer is a difficult question, because some volcanoes predominantly issue greenhouse gases, while other issue gases that reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the earths surface (remember the cooling effect from the el Chichon eruption in the 1980?), and dust also plays a role that should be considered in any calculation.

But it is rather clear that the earth in a time with that much continental moving would be a world hard to live in. I can't remember any record of such hard times, so it is obvious that the continent didn't move that fast.

Stop trying to confuse us with your sciencing!

 

[dad]

If all of the animals landed together on an ark, why did they all end up in different places? So many species are location-specific.

Well, evolving was very rapid in that former nature that was different. So, the animal kinds from the ark..and man..wander out all over the supercontinent. A large group possibly representing folks from far flung areas gathers at the area of the tower of Babel. Meanwhile all the animals have already spread out in the 105 years or whatever since the flood on that big continent. Some areas of that supercontinent had different climates and environments and conditions. So animals adapted locally! Then, after Babel and when the earth was divided, and the Pangaea broke apart...the animals were on those moving continents. So were people! People with religions and languages etc.

 

[Sparagmos]

Well, evolving was very rapid in that former nature that was different. So, the animal kinds from the ark..and man..wander out all over the supercontinent. A large group possibly representing folks from far flung areas gathers at the area of the tower of Babel. Meanwhile all the animals have already spread out in the 105 years or whatever since the flood on that big continent. Some areas of that supercontinent had different climates and environments and conditions. So animals adapted locally! Then, after Babel and when the earth was divided, and the Pangaea broke apart...the animals were on those moving continents. So were people! People with religions and languages etc.

Hadn’t the animals already “adapted locally” before the flood? If so, how did they all get to the ark?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Not sure of your point. Of course there are dates older than the time of the tower of Babel. The problem is that if our present nature started around the time of Babel, that radioactive dates have zero value beyond that point! Hoo ha.

Your claims include that Egypt post dates Babel, but it has been dated to pre-date Babel and you have accepted that as valid dating. Your inconsistency is really not helping your position. Can you hear the world laughing? Everyone's laughing AT you, not WITH you.

 

[Helmut-WK]

The OP mentioned
"an environment that scientists say was surprisingly diverse.." So apparently it was somewhat surprising.

Surprising was the diversity of the environment the marsupial obviously lived in. Not surprising was, that marsupials lived there.

Limiting what creation is all about to man's senses is patently ridiculous.

You are twisting my words, but even if we (for the sake of argument) assume that early researches limited themselves to what is open to man's senses, it is clear that science does not so today. We have no senses for electricity, atoms etc., yet these are studied by science.

Having an apple drop on your head may be a good way of getting you to think about gravity but that does not excuse origin so called science fables.

I'm not going to defend every scientific theory, but when call anything (what precisely?) a fable you should bring evidence it is a fable.

Did Ussher use that chapter for dates??

Do you consider Ussher as infallible?
He should have taken all of the Bible (i.e. Lk 3 included) into consideration. Not doing so is a failure.

For the purposes they were included, who says they were meant to do that?

What do you want to say? Either Luke made an error in Lk 3:36 or the list in Genesis 10 is incomplete. Now take your choice and draw the consequences ...
I don't think that God is so limited to do everything he does out of a single reason, so I have no problems to see multiple reasons for Bible verses being as they are. And I'm not that self-confident to claim I know every reason.

Peleg was born about 101 years after the flood.

How do you come at this calculation. According to Gen 11:13 Arpachshad begat Shelah when he was 35 years old, but as we know from Luke, Shelah was only the grandson of Arpachshad - so how do we interpret this correctly? And what about other Generations that are not mentioned in that chapter?

example:
"An interesting piece of information comes from Manetho ..."

Is this the Manetho who dated the first Pharaos to about 6000 BC? Why do you believe him in one point and not in the other?

Science says it was a big supercontinent. It did break up. We know that religions and languages and mankind came from Babel according to the bible. It is logical that the division of continents, as many Christians have speculated for many years, was included in all that was divided!

This may seem logical to you, but there is no hint in the Bible that combines these two events. The tower is mentioned in Gen 11, the division of the earth only in Gen 10:25. If the two were the same event, we would expect to mention in 10:25 the dispersion of languages and not an aspect that has to be drawn by speculation from Gen 11.

It is an open question what is meant by "earth was divided". I don't see why I should use the interpretation that is contrary to what is known in almost any aspect of the theory which is built upon that.

There is also the issue of animal migration. Animals had to get around to the various areas that are now continents also.

Name anyone that lived 1000 years because they had a good length of DNA ends!!!?? Ridiculous. We do not even know that modern DNA existed.

Do you mean to say Adam had no human body with human DNA?

What about Is 34:14-15? Do you think all creatures mentioned there are animals?

Not sure what you are referencing here.

Is 34:14 The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.
15 There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay, and hatch, and gather under her shadow: there shall the vultures also be gathered, every one with her mate

Depending on translation, you may find satyrs, ghosts and other spirits, or just animals.

Yes. Noah sent out birds and found that there were trees only weeks after the flood receded!

A Tree that survived the flood.
And look on the time line:
17th of 2nd month: Flood started
150 Days later (i.e. 17th of 7th month): water begins to sink again, the ark grounds on Ararat mountains.
1st of 10th month: the mountain tops become visible.
40 days later (i.e. 10th of 11th month): first raven sent out, apparently the first dove sent out the dame day
7 days later (i.e. 17th of 11th month): dove sent out a second time, with olive twig
7 days later (i.e. 24th of 11th month): dove sent out without returning

I get at up to 47 days for the recovery of the olive tree and the growing of first twigs. No surprising growing detectable.

A garden was planted in Eden and man ate fruit from the trees that week! In the future, during the millennium we see that plants grow fast again.

According to that reasoning, I might claim that men grow faster than today, for Adam seems to have grown adult in one single day ... creation was of course not according to our "natural laws", but this tells nothing about the time after.
As to the millennium: where is there a fast growing?

His actions changed things.

This is no license to ascribe actions to Him which are not told in the Bible.

By noting these changes we can see that the anti creator stories of so called science are false.

Maybe, but if you can't offer a better story, just leave the question open instead of inventing a story hardly credible.

Translators?? Where do you find those for every language on earth when you are half way to the clouds in a tower and suddenly can't understand what people are saying!?

You explain the very reason why the project failed, and the people dispersed themselves, even if we regard "half way to the clouds" as an exaggeration. I noted that this had no link to geology, that was my point.

 

[Helmut-WK]

I fetch only one point:

Not true either! The year used to be 360 days in the former times as it will be again in the future.

There is no hint to a 360-day-year inside or outside the Bible. What we have is a everyday's language simplification of reckoning a month as 30 days (very convenient in a time when the lengths of months were not recorded, the new month proclaimed according to testified sightings of the new moon), and the year as 12 months, and there is an instant in the Bible where such a simplification was (partly) made to a reckoning of days in a time when the Greeks already had determined the average length of a month as 29.53... days (metonic cycle), namely Dan 8:14 (2,300 sacrifices omitted, i.e. 1150 days without daily sacrifice, fulfilled under Antioch Epiphanes: 3 years - obviously with two leap years of 12 months, i.e. 38 months - plus 10 days).
We know that 38 months were about 1122 days (with a uncertainty of about +/-6 days), yet Daniel (or the Spirit) calculates according to everybody's method 1140 days, and other instances that let you arrive at a 360-day-year are to be considered likewise.

It is too exhaustive to explain every such point to a person that does not even know the basic facts about the things he theorizes about. And when he, in addition, resorts to "things have been quite different then", in spite of lack of evidence for it in the Bible or in historical record, I don't see any merit in going on discussing with him.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

They did find a marsupial in the arctic. How and when it got there are the issues. Do you have any scientific evidence to back up the claim that this nature existed in the past? If not, the radioactive decay dates are out the window.

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that 'past nature' was not the same? Why should I accept that incredibly radical and quite frankly asinine idea over what scientists say?

ETA: added the missing 'not'. Question makes more sense now.

 

[Helmut-WK]

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that 'past nature' was the same?

I suppose there is a "not" missing in that sentence, or did I misunderstand your issue?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I suppose there is a "not" missing in that sentence, or did I misunderstand your issue?

No, you are correct in the first. There should be a 'not' in there. Thank you for pointing it out.

 

[dad]

Hadn’t the animals already “adapted locally” before the flood? If so, how did they all get to the ark?

Yes since the Babel incident was something like a century and several years after the flood, the animals had plenty of time to spread out and adapt before the days of Peleg. Not only that, but before the flood, on that same or similar super continent, animals also had more than a thousand and six hundred and fifty years to do the same.

But it seems likely to me that God called just the original created kinds onto the ark. (yes He called them there) So if dinos, for example were evolved and adapted from birds, or reptiles or whatever, then they would not be invited.

 

[dad]

Your claims include that Egypt post dates Babel, but it has been dated to pre-date Babel and you have accepted that as valid dating.

The way it was dated is same state past belief based dating. Correct?
Hahaha

 

[dad]

Surprising was the diversity of the environment the marsupial obviously lived in. Not surprising was, that marsupials lived there.

It does show that that sort of creature was not limited to Australia, but could be found in far flung areas.

You are twisting my words, but even if we (for the sake of argument) assume that early researches limited themselves to what is open to man's senses, it is clear that science does not so today. We have no senses for electricity, atoms etc., yet these are studied by science.

Today, they use the natural world and the physical world and how it works to model the future and past. Same type of thing.

I'm not going to defend every scientific theory, but when call anything (what precisely?) a fable you should bring evidence it is a fable.

You think I am supposed to show that Goldilocks is a fable or fairy tale? No. If you offer science you must show it is more than one!

Do you consider Ussher as infallible?
He should have taken all of the Bible (i.e. Lk 3 included) into consideration. Not doing so is a failure.

Context. Just because something was related in the story of Jesus does not mean we toss out all records of lineage all over the bible. It doesn't matter if Ussher was absolutely correct or not. Who cares if he was a century or two off? The point is that his dates are far different than the dates from science, and never the twain shall meet.

What do you want to say? Either Luke made an error in Lk 3:36 or the list in Genesis 10 is incomplete. Now take your choice and draw the consequences ...

Or there are other reasons someone was or was not included.

How do you come at this calculation. According to Gen 11:13 Arpachshad begat Shelah when he was 35 years old, but as we know from Luke, Shelah was only the grandson of Arpachshad - so how do we interpret this correctly? And what about other Generations that are not mentioned in that chapter?

No one had the same name? I know some Greek friends who have similar names, that doesn't mean they were born the same time.

Is this the Manetho who dated the first Pharaos to about 6000 BC? Why do you believe him in one point and not in the other?

The dates are not important. What is interesting there is that he placed Peleg at the time of Babel! In Jewish tradition I think they place Babel near the end of Peleg's life.

"It was towards the end of Peleg’s life that something happened which changed the social life of all men on earth..."

The Tower Of Babel

The exact time really doesn't affect the OP much. It was in the days of Peleg that the earth was divided!

This may seem logical to you, but there is no hint in the Bible that combines these two events. The tower is mentioned in Gen 11, the division of the earth only in Gen 10:25. If the two were the same event, we would expect to mention in 10:25 the dispersion of languages and not an aspect that has to be drawn by speculation from Gen 11.

The bible does have a tendency to recap things. In Gen 2 we recap Gen 1 and flesh out some events in it for example. If you think you can interpret chapter 10 as some separate event, that might be a separate thread. I suspect you would not have a great case.

It is an open question what is meant by "earth was divided". I don't see why I should use the interpretation that is contrary to what is known in almost any aspect of the theory which is built upon that.

You only think things are 'known'. I assume you are talking about science, and basically mainly it's dating system. That dating system goes against God! It dates the stars before earth. It dates man as being created at some other millions of years period than other creatures. It dates the time when the world was together as millions of years before Adam or Noah or Peleg lived..etc etc.

There is also the issue of animal migration. Animals had to get around to the various areas that are now continents also.

On one big super continent world, how hard is that??

Do you mean to say Adam had no human body with human DNA?

I mean that the forces that govern how atoms behave are part of nature. I mean that atoms determine how cells and molecules work. I mean that all that makes up modern DNA involves our present nature! If nature was different DNA could be different also! We could adapt faster, live longer, be more resistant to disease..etc etc. The way cells replicate/reproduce/behave would be affected by a different nature.

Is 34:14 The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.
15 There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay, and hatch, and gather under her shadow: there shall the vultures also be gathered, every one with her mate

Depending on translation, you may find satyrs, ghosts and other spirits, or just animals.

That chapter, right from the start and all the way through is about the day of vengeance, the end time. Not sure what point you think you are making with this?

A Tree that survived the flood.
And look on the time line:
17th of 2nd month: Flood started
150 Days later (i.e. 17th of 7th month): water begins to sink again, the ark grounds on Ararat mountains.
1st of 10th month: the mountain tops become visible.
40 days later (i.e. 10th of 11th month): first raven sent out, apparently the first dove sent out the dame day
7 days later (i.e. 17th of 11th month): dove sent out a second time, with olive twig
7 days later (i.e. 24th of 11th month): dove sent out without returning

I get at up to 47 days for the recovery of the olive tree and the growing of first twigs. No surprising growing detectable.

Your problem is that doves went out a week before and there was no tree.

According to that reasoning, I might claim that men grow faster than today, for Adam seems to have grown adult in one single day ... creation was of course not according to our "natural laws", but this tells nothing about the time after.
As to the millennium: where is there a fast growing?

He was created the way he was actually, nothing about growing. Adam was not planted! Adam was formed like we might form a clay vessel. Adam also lived 930 years.

You explain the very reason why the project failed, and the people dispersed themselves, even if we regard "half way to the clouds" as an exaggeration. I noted that this had no link to geology, that was my point.

If this was the time that Pangaea broke apart, that is a big link to geology. What is has no link to is the religious dates of so called science. Also it was GOD that scattered them. In case any lurkers doubt this see the verse below where it is mentioned twice

Gen 11:. 8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

 

[dad]

I fetch only one point:

There is no hint to a 360-day-year inside or outside the Bible. What we have is a everyday's language simplification of reckoning a month as 30 days (very convenient in a time when the lengths of months were not recorded, the new month proclaimed according to testified sightings of the new moon), and the year as 12 months, and there is an instant in the Bible where such a simplification was (partly) made to a reckoning of days in a time when the Greeks already had determined the average length of a month as 29.53... days (metonic cycle), namely Dan 8:14 (2,300 sacrifices omitted, i.e. 1150 days without daily sacrifice, fulfilled under Antioch Epiphanes: 3 years - obviously with two leap years of 12 months, i.e. 38 months - plus 10 days).
We know that 38 months were about 1122 days (with a uncertainty of about +/-6 days), yet Daniel (or the Spirit) calculates according to everybody's method 1140 days, and other instances that let you arrive at a 360-day-year are to be considered likewise.

Your opinion is noted. However there are far stronger opinions in my opinion.

"Based on the book of Genesis, the calendar at the time of Noah consisted of 12 months of 30 days. At the beginning of the flood, the water came forth on the 17th of the month. Five months later on the 17th day of the month, the book of Genesis reveals that 150 days had passed. Dividing 150 days by 5 months supports that the early calendar contained 12 months of 30 days length. Therefore, the book of Genesis supports the 360 days per year calculation.

In both Daniel 7:25 and Daniel 12:7, the time given is described as "a time, times and half a time." This is most often interpreted as 3 and one-half years or 42 months. When the prophecy of the 70-weeks is interpreted using the 360-day prophetic year, divine guidance appears to be revealed in human events from ancient history into the 21st century. In each 42-month period foretold, the earth is to be directed by unrestrained evil. The 360-day year makes for a good relationship between the books of Daniel and Revelation.

Divide 1,260 days by 42 months and you will get a 30-day month. Twelve months of 30 days equals 360-days in a year. What is the meaning of this divine number in contrast with the fact that we know the time required for the earth to circle the sun is approximately 365.25 days?"
The 360-Day Prophetic Year

Also in the Millennium I notice that people will come to pay homage every new moon.


Isa 66:23 - And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

It is too exhaustive to explain every such point to a person that does not even know the basic facts about the things he theorizes about. And when he, in addition, resorts to "things have been quite different then", in spite of lack of evidence for it in the Bible or in historical record, I don't see any merit in going on discussing with him.

Clearly both the future and past were quite different than today in the bible. Whatever evidence you think exists probably boils down to same state past belief based dating.

 

[dad]

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that 'past nature' was not the same? Why should I accept that incredibly radical and quite frankly asinine idea over what scientists say?

ETA: added the missing 'not'. Question makes more sense now.

Why should anyone believe..whatever they feel like believing? You can believe the same nature existed in the face of all the evidences to the contrary if you like!

Meanwhile, others will believe that God's created world was together, and man was on it. Your dates are dream dates.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Why should anyone believe..whatever they feel like believing? You can believe the same nature existed in the face of all the evidences to the contrary if you like!

Meanwhile, others will believe that God's created world was together, and man was on it. Your dates are dream dates.

So why should I accept your reasoning over the reasoning of scientists? What makes your claims the more believable ones? What actual evidence do you have?
And don't say they aren't the Bible's claims, because they sure as heck are not the Bible's claims. They're just your claims.

 

[dad]

So why should I accept your reasoning over the reasoning of scientists? What makes your claims the more believable ones? What actual evidence do you have?
And don't say they aren't the Bible's claims, because they sure as heck are not the Bible's claims. They're just your claims.

If you want to claim the future and past in the bible has a nature the same as ours, go ahead and make a case. Good luck with that.

I see hundreds of science articles all the time. They all confirm God's word and my ideas. Here is a fresh one from today.

"
Do volcanoes or an asteroid deserve blame for dinosaur extinction?
Asteroid/comet likely reignited Indian volcanoes 66 million years ago, but their role in extinction unclear"
Do volcanoes or an asteroid deserve blame for dinosaur extinction? Asteroid/comet likely reignited Indian volcanoes 66 million years ago, but their role in extinction unclear

Bottom line is science does not know what really caused the extinction around the time of the KT layer. Their belief based guesses have become comical. Since I place the flood around that time, I have no sleepless nights wondering what caused a great extinction!