Noah's Flood (response to "Noah's Ark")

All I can say is that if the author knew the actual size of the Earth, he would make the Ark much larger to make it more believable. ;)
 
If fossils were created in the flood, they would all be mixed randomly. In fact, they exist in different strata. How do you explain that?
Click to expand...

Or you might get certain hydrodynamic sorting effects based on shape and mass. Which is equally fucked because you's expect things like mid-sized dinosaurs and rhinos, hippos to end up in the same region.

Interestingly, the flood sorted ant hills in to various strata based on the complexity of their design. And they arranged the burrows of crayfish(which relate to the morphology of the cray) so they are in concordance with the evolution of this delicious crustacean.
 
Here's my one question for you JC, where did all the rain come from and where did all the water go afterwards?
 
____________________________________________________
But hang on, the penguin is a type of bird, so perhaps they
weren't needed. Instead, one species of bird took 4000 years to
evolve into the thousands of species of bird today: your finches,
Aegean Condor, Moa(4m tall) etc. Forget that 2(or 7) of any
creature can not sustain a viable population(due to genetics).
____________________________________________________

Let me clarify one of my previous statements. When I said the
Bible didn't mention Penguins, it was to indicate that it doesn't
specifically mention many animals. Penguins can survive on
icebergs, which provides one explanation as to how they could
have migrated. I do believe penguins would have been on the
ark.

When I mentioned "kinds" of animals, I was not speaking of
evolutionary kinds, but what the author would have meant. I
believe there would have been enough variety in animals as to
allow for the divisions in taxonomic groups we see today.

As for population growth, here's one explanation:
This corresponds with rates of human population growth.
(the same kind of math can be done for that of animals, though
numbers and variables would be different)

It's easier to quote the source than to explain the math so:
(NOTE: an asterisk "*" before a letter/number indicates an exponent )

"...assume an initial population of two people, the first parents.
Assume they produce a total of 2c offspring, c boys and c girls,
who then unite to form c families. Each of these families also has
2c children, meaning there will be 2c*2 children in the second
generation. These form c2 families, and then 2c*3 children in the
third generation, and so on. In the nth generation, there will be
2c*n individuals. If we assume, for simplicity, that only one
generation is alive at one time, then the world population at the
nth generation will also be 2c*n people.
Now let us equate this figure to the actual present
world population.
2c*n = 3.5 x 10*9 (3.5 billion)

If we assume there have been 100 generations since the first
pair (corresponding to about 4000 years, with 40 years per
generation), then the average family size must have been

2c = 2(3.5 x 10*9/2)*1/100 = 2.46

In other words, an average family size of less than 1-1/4 boys
and 1-1/4 girls will produce a population of 3.5 Billion people in
only 4000 years.
On a percentage basis, if the average annual
population growth rate is G percent, then the population after Y
years becomes
Py = 2(1+G/100)*Y

The average annual percentage growth to produce the present
world population in 4000 years can be calculated by

G = 100[(Py/2)*1/Y -1]
= 100[(3.5x 10*9/2)*1/4000 -1] = 1/2

In other words, an average population growth of 1/2 percent per
year would give the present population in just 4000 years. This is
only one-fourth the present rate."

(source Variuos Authors, Scientific Creationism)

Allow for the amount of children not born, families not
formed, death rates, catastrophes, male/female ratio, variations in
lifespan etc (there are too many variables which cannot be
accounted for, so assumptions must be made no matter
how you do the math. This includes evolutionary/uniformitarian
assumptions) . Also provide that Noah's family totaled 8
(Noah, his wife, 3 sons, and their wives). This allows for
variations in equations due to the factors above.

Because this is a long post in itself, and I'm busy with other
things, I'll address what I can as I have time. What I'm passing
on here is my own perspective based on information I've
gathered.

I'll try to give a perspective regarding evolutionary implications as well
 
yeah, and maybe you could be so kind to try to make your evolutionary implications fit with current scientific data. That would save us the trouble of refuting nonsense
 
Previously posted by SVRP

What was interesting to note was they spoke to a genetic scientist who measured the mitochondrial DNA in humans, which is passed on only from the mother, and mutates at a known rate. The bio-diversity of the human gene pool was calculated. The scientist explained the origin of present human genes began with a small group of people 6,000 years ago.
Click to expand...
Currently posted by SVRP

Maybe you should watch the program, ConsequentAtheist, and judge for yourself.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should substantiate the silly garbage you claim as fact or, if unable to do so, have the good manners to keep silent.
 
Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Maybe you should substantiate the silly garbage you claim as fact or, if unable to do so, have the good manners to keep silent.
Click to expand...

Only 6000 years old huh? Pray tell, who built all the cities, left all the writing, moved the earth, etc....Who did this prior to 6000 years ago? You are mentally unhinged.
 
Originally posted by williamwbishop
Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Maybe you should substantiate the silly garbage you claim as fact or, if unable to do so, have the good manners to keep silent.
Click to expand...
Only 6000 years old huh? Pray tell, who built all the cities, left all the writing, moved the earth, etc....Who did this prior to 6000 years ago? You are mentally unhinged.
Click to expand...
If your comments were, in fact, directed to me, I fail to understand the intent. Just curious ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top