What About All the Fish?

[LittleNipper]

I feel, just as the deep sea diver, fish were able to adapt to changing environmental conditions over time. The diver must come up slowly or he will likely die. Salmon move from salt to fresh water. Has an experiment ever been done? I hate the heat and yet by August , it isn't so bad. I can't stand the cold, but by February, it isn't so bad...

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I feel, just as the deep sea diver, fish were able to adapt to changing environmental conditions over time. The diver must come up slowly or he will likely die. Salmon move from salt to fresh water. Has an experiment ever been done? I hate the heat and yet by August , it isn't so bad. I can't stand the cold, but by February, it isn't so bad...

Anyone who has ever raised tropical fish knows that they are very sensitive to salt content. The flood would have drastically changed salt content in the short term so gradual adaptation would not have been possible.

 

[dad]

Going with the idea that the fish quickly evolved to their new environment. How would fresh water fish adapt quickly enough to the changing salinity of the water? After the waters went away, how did they then quickly re-adapt to how they are now?

They quickly adapted the same way animals quicky adapted. Say, elephants maybe adapted to colder climes, like the mammoth, etc. This was then possible because it was so different, now it is not possible to happen fast. Just like trees can not grow in a few weeks now.

 

[dad]

What was it that stopped (or eventually slowed down) hyper evolution?

The split. The seperation of the spiritual from the physical. Apparently this affected biological life on earth. So much so, that we now see how differently it operates.

 

[dad]

Anyone who has ever raised tropical fish knows that they are very sensitive to salt content. The flood would have drastically changed salt content in the short term so gradual adaptation would not have been possible.

Thank you! See, folks, it had to be hyper adapting. I thought so.

 

[LittleNipper]

Anyone who has ever raised tropical fish knows that they are very sensitive to salt content. The flood would have drastically changed salt content in the short term so gradual adaptation would not have been possible.

But, we can only view the fish of today. These fish may likely be far and again inferior to their ancestors. This is most likely true of the human species. The Bible clearly shows that man once had the capacity to live hundreds of years (if not over a thousand), and this was in his fallen state. Prior to the Flood, humans and animals were far superior in strength and durability. As time has progressed man is more and more dependent on technology to keep himself alive. The very universe is slowly wearing out. the very same could be said of humans and aminals. They have mutated to become more and more inferior. At the same time GOD has provied species with the ability to compensate and move to or adjust the environment in order to survive....

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

But, we can only view the fish of today. These fish may likely be far and again inferior to their ancestors.

You really think the fish of today are very different from fish 4,500 years ago?

This is most likely true of the human species. The Bible clearly shows that man once had the capacity to live hundreds of years (if not over a thousand), and this was in his fallen state. Prior to the Flood, humans and animals were far superior in strength and durability. As time has progressed man is more and more dependent on technology to keep himself alive. The very universe is slowly wearing out. the very same could be said of humans and aminals. They have mutated to become more and more inferior. At the same time GOD has provied species with the ability to compensate and move to or adjust the environment in order to survive....

You are just one myth, the fall, to try to rationalize away problems with another myth, the flood.

 

[LVdesigns]

They quickly adapted the same way animals quicky adapted. Say, elephants maybe adapted to colder climes, like the mammoth, etc. This was then possible because it was so different, now it is not possible to happen fast. Just like trees can not grow in a few weeks now.

So, they managed to adapt to the changing salinity within 40 days and 40 nights (that's how long the rain fell, right) Then managed to adapt again during the time the flood waters resided. Hmm, interesting idea, but can you back this up with any evidence?

The split. The seperation of the spiritual from the physical. Apparently this affected biological life on earth. So much so, that we now see how differently it operates.

If this is so, why isn't there evidence of "hyper adaptation" among species prior to the flood?

 

[dad]

But, we can only view the fish of today. ...

And that is where your observations are good!

 

[dad]

...
So, they managed to adapt to the changing salinity within 40 days and 40 nights (that's how long the rain fell, right)

They were in the ark over a year!

Then managed to adapt again during the time the flood waters resided.

What do we know about the salt content of the flood waters? For example, if most salt came up from the earth pre flood, then it wasn't a big player in the flood waters!

Hmm, interesting idea, but can you back this up with any evidence?

The bible talks of how fast plants grew. If you want more, stick to the present, where we know how it now works!

If this is so, why isn't there evidence of "hyper adaptation" among species prior to the flood?

All adaption almost would be hyper adaption! If there is any evolving that went on, (except for slow present stuff) that's how it went down!

 

[AirPo]

Thank you! See, folks, it had to be hyper adapting. I thought so.

HI

 

[Nathan Poe]

The split. The seperation of the spiritual from the physical. Apparently this affected biological life on earth. So much so, that we now see how differently it operates.

So you believe that evolution is primarily a spiritual process?

 

[urbanxy]

I feel, just as the deep sea diver, fish were able to adapt to changing environmental conditions over time.

Notwithstanding the invalid methphor, I love how evolution suddenly becomes all too plausible when it fits the YEC storyline.

.

 

[urbanxy]

The split. The seperation of the spiritual from the physical. Apparently this affected biological life on earth. So much so, that we now see how differently it operates.

You understand that this explains nothing? I love how you use the word "apparently", as if it's a proven fact.

 

[LittleNipper]

And that is where your observations are good!

Observations, of what we see are of little honest value for what we couldn't. This is where science and mere theory split.... True science is only that which can be demonstrated. If it cannot be domonstrated it is not true science----it is conjecture. Naturalism in regard to theories of origin are pagan at best.

 

[LVdesigns]

They were in the ark over a year!

Ya, but they would have had to adapt to the water well before 40 days an nights, because that's how long it rained. If they weren't adapted before the salinity changed to something much different from what they were use to prior to the flood, they would have been dead. So, basically, they would have needed to adapt within a couple weeks. That is very fast and frankly we have no logical basis to think this is possible for fish to achieve; even 40 days would be amazingly fast for them to evolve.

What do we know about the salt content of the flood waters? For example, if most salt came up from the earth pre flood, then it wasn't a big player in the flood waters!

If you have a cup of water that has 50% salt content then add 10 more cups of water to it then you have a container with 10.5 parts water to .5 parts salt instead of 1 part water to 1 part salt. No matter how you look at it, a major flood would drastically change the salinity of the water.

The bible talks of how fast plants grew. If you want more, stick to the present, where we know how it now works!

Plants grow fast, lots of things grow quickly. We can force plants to "evolve" purposely just as we can create various breeds of dog. But this sort of quick mutation isn't something that occurs naturally. Other than that, I really don't know what you are talking about.

All adaption almost would be hyper adaption! If there is any evolving that went on, (except for slow present stuff) that's how it went down!

I would love do see the evidence you used to form this idea. I would assume you are strict creationist. If that is the case, then I understand how you have formed these conclusions; however, I disagree entirely.

​

​

 

[f0rk3d]

Observations, of what we see are of little honest value for what we couldn't. This is where science and mere theory split.... True science is only that which can be demonstrated. If it cannot be domonstrated it is not true science----it is conjecture. Naturalism in regard to theories of origin are pagan at best.

See folks, naturalism isn't science, IT IS religion! I knew it! What a better religion to have, for it is based on rational thought instead of irrational fear!

Not only that it is pagan - a term that immediately brings up negative connotations for Christians and others intolerant of other 'religions.' This immediately discredits it's validity for such people.

As for the OP: none of the above because the global flood never happened.

 

[dad]

So you believe that evolution is primarily a spiritual process?

Of course not. We know how it works, more or less. In the past, of copurse, with the merged universe many things were different, even light and gravity, etc. Down to the atomic level. Of course everything worked differently then. Why, just look at the bible to see how differently! (Or leave it a dark blur, since science can't help you, if you prefer)

 

[Nathan Poe]

Of course not. We know how it works, more or less. In the past, of copurse, with the merged universe many things were different, even light and gravity, etc. Down to the atomic level. Of course everything worked differently then. Why, just look at the bible to see how differently! (Or leave it a dark blur, since science can't help you, if you prefer)

Except that everything you've said about the Bible is speculation -- how does it help us establish anything, let alone down to an atomic level?

 

[dad]

Ya, but they would have had to adapt to the water well before 40 days an nights, because that's how long it rained.

Assuming what? That it was mostly salt water before the flood? Or fresh, or what?

If they weren't adapted before the salinity changed to something much different from what they were use to prior to the flood, they would have been dead. So, basically, they would have needed to adapt within a couple weeks. That is very fast and frankly we have no logical basis to think this is possible for fish to achieve; even 40 days would be amazingly fast for them to evolve.

You need to remember the difference between is and was.

If you have a cup of water that has 50% salt content then add 10 more cups of water to it then you have a container with 10.5 parts water to .5 parts salt instead of 1 part water to 1 part salt.

But if a lot of the salt came up from below to begin with, it means there was a lot down there, or up there, whichever the case. Now, with more water coming from the same places in the flood, why would we assume a drastic salt difference? The 10 cups coming in may have had some more salt, for example.

Plants grow fast, lots of things grow quickly. We can force plants to "evolve" purposely just as we can create various breeds of dog. But this sort of quick mutation isn't something that occurs naturally. Other than that, I really don't know what you are talking about.

I am talking about a different time, not now, and how it now works. Just like if we look ahead to heaven, we see it will work very differently. It would be silly to suggest it was the same. When the spiritual is added to the physical, it all works very differently. The mistake that has been made has been to assume it will be, and was the same as now!

I would love do see the evidence you used to form this idea. I would assume you are strict creationist. If that is the case, then I understand how you have formed these conclusions; however, I disagree entirely.

Disagree, you may, but you cannot do it on any basis other than your beliefs and assumptions. Can you? Light was different even, and light is very important to life here, like plants. Everything was different almost.​

​

​