Noah's Ark and the Cheetah

[KWCrazy]

If scripture doesn't specifically say that God started creating again, any claim you make about his doing so is non scriptural.

It doesn't say He did and doesn't say He didn't. It isn't Scriptural. It's a possibility. It's offered only as that.

 

[JasonClark]

If the event was supernatural in origin, as the flood would have been, then supernatural causation is the right answer. After all, God who created all of life in the first place has no restriction on creating more life tomorrow. It need not conform to expected biological developments.

If you thought about what you are calling the "Supernatural" for a minute you would realise it's all complete rubbish.
You are wasting your time arguing, why not just answer every question with "God did it" and leave it at that? because in reality that's all you're doing.

 

[dad]

Cheetahs. Fastest land animal, symbol of the African Savannah, product of extreme incest.

Let's back up a bit.

Cheetahs have extremely minuscule genetic diversity. You can perform skin grafts between two Cheetahs with virtually no fear of rejection. It's as if they were all very closely related - indeed, there's virtually no difference between an inbred cheetah and a cheetah with unrelated parents. Their genetic variability is almost non-existent. This is not a good thing - it leads to massive infant mortality rates, high morbidity rates from diseases, and many other serious problems.

This genetic diversity was caused by a population bottleneck some 10,000 years ago. The Cheetah species almost went extinct, but bounced back. However, this "bounce back" took a massive toll on the genetic diversity of the species, as the ended up horribly inbred with almost no diversity to speak of.

So here's the problem.

If almost every mammalian species on earth was culled down to 2 members a mere 4000 years ago, why does only the Cheetah (and the southern elephant seal, and a handful of others) show this sort of lack of diversity? Why does one population seem entirely inbred, while another shows the sort of genetic diversity which, according to everything we know about evolution and the conservation rates of certain parts of the genome, should be blatantly impossible from 2 individuals in 4000 years?

Relevant video:

Piece of cake. Rapid adaptation/evolving after the flood likely resulted in Cheetas. They ran into trouble in this nature, so that account for the genetics issue. Ho hum.

 

[Grafted In]

When someone claims that a subject is not Scriptural they are claiming to have understanding equal to God's unless he can prove by Scripture that it is not Scriptural. No one knows or understands very much by themselves and even if you put every believer together and they agree to a man that something is not Scriptural they are assuming something to be false that is yet to be revealed by God. I'm convinced that there are many truths in Scripture that no one has understanding. Prove by Scripture a matter to be false or admit that you don't know.

I want to add unless God Himself reveals something to you.

 

[KWCrazy]

When someone claims that a subject is not Scriptural they are claiming to have understanding equal to God's unless he can prove but Scripture that it is not Scriptural. No one knows or understands very much by themselves and even if you put every believer together and they agree to a man that something is not Scriptural they are assuming something to be false that is yet to be revealed by God. I'm convinced that there are many truths in Scripture that no one has understanding. Prove by Scripture a matter to be false or admit that you don't know.

I read this three times and still don't understand what you're trying to say. If something is not Scriptural then it isn't addressed in the Scriptures. Man walking on the moon is not Scriptural; neither included or precluded by what is written. Of things not mentioned one can have an idea or opinion, but there is no backing for it in the Word. That is not the case when something is precluded in the Scriptures; as evolution is precluded because the Scriptures state God created man from the dust on the sixth day.

 

[justlookinla]

If almost every mammalian species on earth was culled down to 2 members a mere 4000 years ago, why does only the Cheetah (and the southern elephant seal, and a handful of others) show this sort of lack of diversity? Why does one population seem entirely inbred, while another shows the sort of genetic diversity which, according to everything we know about evolution and the conservation rates of certain parts of the genome, should be blatantly impossible from 2 individuals in 4000 years?

Two members? You haven't read the bible have you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Two members? You haven't read the bible have you?

Actually he is quite aware of his Bible. Please note that he said "almost every mammalian species". Almost every mammalian species is unclean. The clean species of which there were either 7 or 14 on the Ark depending upon your interpretation, is a small subset of mammalia.

 

[justlookinla]

Actually he is quite aware of his Bible. Please note that he said "almost every mammalian species". Almost every mammalian species is unclean. The clean species of which there were either 7 or 14 on the Ark depending upon your interpretation, is a small subset of mammalia.

You apparently haven't read the bible either.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You apparently haven't read the bible either.

Please look at only the mammals in your list. Which is rather incomplete to say the least. The unclean mammals listed for exceeds the clean mammals listed. The Cadet was talking specifically about mammals.

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually he is quite aware of his Bible. Please note that he said "almost every mammalian species". Almost every mammalian species is unclean. The clean species of which there were either 7 or 14 on the Ark depending upon your interpretation, is a small subset of mammalia.

I believe God purposely pared the animal kingdom down to a point where it couldn't recover on its own; then blessed them with fertility so as to bring them back online.

I believe He did the same for mankind.

Genesis 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe God purposely pared the animal kingdom down to a point where it couldn't recover on its own; then blessed them with fertility so as to bring them back online.

I believe He did the same for mankind.

Genesis 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

The problem is that fertility alone would not do the trick. It seems that whenever you run into trouble your answer is "magic".

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem is that fertility alone would not do the trick.

In any event, they were blessed with an agenda to replenish the earth.

It seems that whenever you run into trouble ...

Who's the one having trouble with this, you or I?

 

[Subduction Zone]

In any event, they were blessed with an agenda to replenish the earth.


Who's the one having trouble with this, you or I?

You obviously. Once again, if you all you can do is to claim "magic" why do you even bother?

 

[AV1611VET]

You obviously.

No.

Once again, if you all you can do is to claim "magic" why do you even bother?

I all I can do is not to claim "magic," so I guess I can bother with it, can't I?

 

[SteveB28]

You obviously. Once again, if you all you can do is to claim "magic" why do you even bother?

It really is quite tragic, don't you think? Younger people should be turning to men of his age for knowledge and wisdom - and what do they receive instead? A snap of the fingers and a 'Hey Presto!'

 

[Subduction Zone]

No.

I all I can do is not to claim "magic," so I guess I can bother with it, can't I?

Wrong, you just claimed "magic" again. You may try to deny the obvious but by all definitions of the word your claims are of magic.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It really is quite tragic, don't you think? Younger people should be turning to men of his age for knowledge and wisdom - and what do they receive instead? A snap of the fingers and a 'Hey Presto!'

I would not mind so much if he tried to debate honestly. Yes, he would lose. He knows that. But AV might learn something. All that AV has learned in the many years that he has been here is that if he argues honestly he will lose, so he avoids actual debating.

 

[AV1611VET]

All that AV has learned in the many years that he has been here is that if he argues honestly he will lose, so he avoids actual debating.

You lurked here for six years before joining, did you?

Or did you post here under another name?

 

[The Cadet]

Two members? You haven't read the bible have you?

Or 14. It really doesn't matter - 14 is still a ridiculously tight bottleneck.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You lurked here for six years before joining, did you?

Or did you post here under another name?

Nope, to both.