Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 24, 2025, 5:20 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
#1
A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
Anyone who knows anything about the flood myth in Genesis knows that the story is impossible for a huge number of reasons. One of them being that the story gives us the dimensions of the ark. So, given how many animals Noah was told to gather, we can figure out how much volume on average each creature would have. Not only is there not enough space for them to survive until the water abated, they wouldn't have even fit.

This is where baraminology enters in. Baraminology is basically what you get when you take a sixth-grade understanding of evolution and combine it with a literal reading of Genesis and a very rules-lawyery interpretation of its use of the word "kind". Noah had to get two (or seven) of every kind of animal. So, rather than worrying about getting two lions, tigers, lynxes, pumas, panthers, cheetahs, ocelots, and house cats (and a shit-ton of other cats I'm not thinking about off the top of my head), he'd just get to cats and call it a day. Then, after they all get off the ark, the idea is that these cats would then evolve into every other type of "cat kind" we see in the world today, 5,000 years later. Also, given how old the stories in the Bible are, this evolution would have had to occur in less than a thousand years. Seriously.

So, we start with a bastardized version of evolution that flirts with the contentious boundaries of microevolution and macroevolution (there is no difference, except in creationist's heads) that involves hyper-fast speciation, and run into a problem of "how did everything get from Mount Ararat to where it is today?". Enter in a very weird notion of how fast continental drift happened. Basically, we take a sixth-grade understanding of geology and the notion that we used to have one "super continent" (Pangaea) that eventually spread into the seven continents we have today, and assume it happened really fast. I mean, we obviously have a problem if the ark opens up on Mount Ararat, and the world is void of all animal life other than right there. Sure, they could migrate across Asia to Europe and Africa, but how are they getting to the other four continents? I've been told numerous times that the flood caused the shift in the plate tectonics to cause the continental drift, and that everyone just went for a wild ride.

So, here's my question I promised in my thread title: When did this shift happen? Did it start before or after the waters abated?

If it started before, how did anyone get to those other four continents?

If it started after, how was it "caused" by the flood?

Now, I supposed you could weasel your way into the first answer by saying that it started first, but the plates were still close enough that the water between was really shallow. You could also weasel that it started after, but was caused by the waters receding (where did they go?). Either way, the continents couldn't have gone very far by the time the ark emptied, and they would have had to clear over 99% of the total distance after the fact. Can you imagine the earthquakes the entire planet would have been experiencing during this wild ride? This whole thing is incredibly stupid. The stated belief of baraminologists is that:
  • The flood happened, as stated in Genesis.
  • The animals emptied off and started fucking like rabbits (also, the carnivores weren't eating all the other animals, somehow).
  • The animals spread all over Pangaea during this relatively brief period.
  • The current seven continents flew apart at catastrophic speeds, and no one noticed or recorded these centuries long earthquakes!
  • The animals evolved at a rate no one has ever seen!
  • This evolution suddenly fucking stopped, and has since only been observed in controlled populations of gnats and bacteria, but it otherwise just doesn't happen.
Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?
Reply



Messages In This Thread
A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea - by RobbyPants - February 22, 2016 at 9:23 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Personification in Greek Myth Tea Earl Grey Hot 35 7987 March 30, 2017 at 11:30 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  The Myth of Infallibility Skeptimus Signus 45 6564 April 30, 2016 at 8:54 pm
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  The Evolution of a Myth Mudhammam 10 3218 March 27, 2016 at 1:12 am
Last Post: Mudhammam
  Does myth still have purpose? ComradeMeow 7 2745 August 20, 2014 at 2:38 am
Last Post: ComradeMeow
  A question for those who believe in noahs flood Lemonvariable72 13 4018 July 14, 2014 at 3:47 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Noah's Flood vs Japan? Duke Guilmon 10 7279 June 21, 2014 at 2:39 am
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  Literal belief in the flood story RobbyPants 157 47447 May 22, 2014 at 12:09 pm
Last Post: RobbyPants
  Correct use of the word "Myth" The_Thinking_Theist 13 5396 January 11, 2014 at 5:54 am
Last Post: CYNIC
  I have a question about noah's flood. Lemonvariable72 113 32433 October 2, 2013 at 10:16 pm
Last Post: Bad Writer
  The Noachian Flood Cyberman 78 25659 January 16, 2013 at 10:43 pm
Last Post: jonb



Users browsing this thread: 35 Guest(s)