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.
Do you have any idea how much straw animals go through in a day?
And you can't even use averages here; the biggest animals eat a lot, and you have to account for that.
Joman said:There is recently attained experimentaly achieved hibernation in numerous creatures not suspected to have the ability to hibernate. You can find it for yourself on the net. If you fail I will help you. There is mention of it on some of the posts on this web site.
Joman.
Let's see; 522 rail cars, not at all(see previous post), not at all(young animals often die before reaching full adulthood), and the fewer in number, the faster we need hyper evolution to work. So which is it, ark and hyperevolution or no ark and no evolution?Joman said:Do you comprehend the size of the ark? The usefulness of hibernation? The usefulness of choosing young creatures for their smallness? The limited number of species on board?
what do you mean by hyperevolution?z3ro said:Let's see; 522 rail cars, not at all(see previous post), not at all(young animals often die before reaching full adulthood), and the fewer in number, the faster we need hyper evolution to work. So which is it, ark and hyperevolution or no ark and no evolution?
Timmothy said:what do you mean by hyperevolution?
You keep claiming that these animals hibernated. Either show scientifically, that all animals have the capability to hibernate for up to a year, or withdraw the assertion.Joman said:The usefulness of hibernation?
In the geological record (ice cores, sediments etc) we see environmental conditions changing, usually this is a slow process and animals gradually adapt (evolve) along with the changing conditions, when conditions change too fast animals might be unable to adapt and will go extinct.timm said:what do you mean by hyperevolution?
Thats what I thought it meant. Well my anwser is yes there was evolution. Despite all the threads i made saying i dont believe in it. I think there is some evolution now. But God used this tool for his making. I think God made all speices. And every speices has a main speices if that makes sense. Like lions are cusions of tigers and so on. Or man and other races of man are cousins. And where ever these speices wonder they adapt to and change for that evironment. But iam not saying man has a common background of an ape or a monkey. So please dont throw that back at me. Because i just dont believe that.z3ro said:Well, look at it like this; if all the species currently alive are onboard the ark, then no evolution is neccesary, they all exist. But if we cut that number, then we need at least some evolution. The more we cut, the more evolution we need.
If the number of species alive today is 2,000,000(making numbers up) and Noah took 1,000,000, that is not as much evolution as if he took 10,000. At such a low number of species, we start moving levels up, past genus, maybe as high as families. And anything crossing a line as high up as family is macroevolution wether you like it or not.
It becomes hyperevolution because of the ridiculous short time frame there is between the flood and today(4,000 to 6,000 years). Evolution normally works over extremely long timescales. With such short time, hyperevolution is the appropriate term.
I agree animals do adapt, to the environment they are in. And that would make more sense of Noahs ark. But I dont believe that humans evolved from a different species or share a common ancster of an ape. But yeah I do see what you are saying. also as for biodiversity to recover I dont know that answer, but based on my belief it did recover.Tenka said:In the geological record (ice cores, sediments etc) we see environmental conditions changing, usually this is a slow process and animals gradually adapt (evolve) along with the changing conditions, when conditions change too fast animals might be unable to adapt and will go extinct.
We have biodiversity (all the variations of life) due to all the different conditions that animals have evolved in over long periods. However the ark would never have been able to contain all of these species and for biodiversity to recover post-flood conditions would have had to change at an unimaginable rate (to effect hyper-evolution on the flood survivors) that would certainly cause the mass extinction of all remaining species.
There isn't space to hold all the animals but there isn't time to recover all the lost biodiversity either.
Not without God recreating them all over again, thereby nullifying the whole point of the ark in the first place.timm said:But yeah I do see what you are saying. also as for biodiversity to recover I dont know that answer, but based on my belief it did recover.
He didnt recreated them over again. The animals lived a regular life after the flood and went on there separte ways, and spread out through the world.Tenka said:Not without God recreating them all over again, thereby nullifying the whole point of the ark in the first place.
Joman said:Depends on what you call a miracle. Would you think it miraculous that God talked to a man called Noah audibly? There isn't any scientific fact that makes the flood story unbelievable. If you think so, please state one for debate.
Not true of this creationist as you insinuate.
The problem you state has already been noted and as I already told you the evolutionists are in the very same boat of the untestability of macroevolution.
Untrue.
Untrue. State your favorite scientific objection.
The ark didn't break up. God's a much better designer isn't he? Your analogy is useless due to factors not applicable to the ark. The weight of an oil tanker far exeeds the weight of the ark. And, the facts concerning the break up is unknown to me.
But, miracles do occur. The miraculous occurs mostly for them who believe God and do not depend on seeing a miracle upon which to attempt to establish viable faith in God. There are exceptions however. I have seen miracles occur and I'm aware of the testimony of others.
This response concerning the experimental untestability macroevolution is useless. The "whatever" is proof of your admission. The word "enormous" is supposed to add tremendous weight to your statement I guess.
Everyone is required to use faith. The evolutionist often times denies the use of faith. But, as I have shown...macroevolution requires faith scince no experimental testing is available.
Untrue. The knowledge base concerning DNA is very small and the evolutionists merely jumps to conclusions that support his notions before enough data is collected and openly discussed to insure correctness. This has always been the way of biased men in science.
Depends upon the depth of their hibernation and the amount of fat storage they accumulated before boarding the ark. and, as to whether they woke for short periods of resustenation.
True. But, not specifically applicable to the problem at hand.
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,393746,00.htmlBy a appropriate decrease in metabolism rates.
Your right i dont know much about it. It is my first class in Geology, and it is my only second week in it. But I can name off alot of minerals for you. Or tell you what the rock cycle does. Or I can tell you how to id different minerals and what kind of test you can do to do so. Like what kind of luster do they have or where are they on the hardness scale. Or what kind of streak they leave. Or wait how about if the mineral is matallic or non matallic. Or if they react to acid. Maybe I could tell you what certain minerals have cleavage, or if they have crystal faces. Iam only on minerals if you cant tell lol sorry but I really dont know much past that. But dont judge some body if you dont know them personally, because the way they type or if you dont agree on what they say. I have had a lot of people poke fun on the way I spell an so on. Last time I checked this wasnt school.Opethian said:Well from what you've written it seems you've never read it before...
Timmothy said:You know that is a good question. I cant answer that. I would say lions, goats, rabbits, tigers, rhinos, horses, cows, squirrels, Deer, really any kind of land zoo animal. as for the Fish and stuff or like water animals none of course. They would of been able to surive on there own in the flood. But that is a good question.
PrincetonGuy said:No, the vast majority of the salt water fish would NOT have been able to survive nor would the large majority of fresh water fish. But dont take my word for itbuy a ten gallon aquarium, set up it up with salt water fish, and then drain off half of the water and replace it with rain water and see what happens!
Christians need to tell the truth even if they dont like the truth. The truth has been proven to be that the story of Noahs Ark is NOT an accurate account of an historic event and Christians who falsely claim that it is bring disgrace to their Savior and the Bible and prove to atheist that God and the Bible are nothing but nonsense.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?