RE: Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite
October 25, 2017 at 7:53 am
(This post was last modified: October 25, 2017 at 7:56 am by Huggy Bear.)
(October 25, 2017 at 1:58 am)Mathilda Wrote:(October 24, 2017 at 9:27 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: That would seem to agree with the point I was making does it not?
It's now clear that you're deliberately ignoring answers. Twice I have told you why your hypothesis is based on flawed understanding and twice you have ignored it. There is no clearer evidence that you are losing an argument when you deliberately ignore a point and continue repeating the same argument. It's not debating but spamming.
Let's make it three times shall we.
(October 24, 2017 at 2:57 pm)Mathilda Wrote: Already answered but conveniently ignored by you:
https://atheistforums.org/thread-51134-p...pid1644141
What you're not getting is HABITAT is a major factor in calculating MVP, so you suggesting that these same numbers apply post flood is just not true.
From your own link.
DETERMINING MINIMUM VIABLE POPULATION SIZES FOR THE GRIZZLY BEAR
http://www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl..._Vol_5.pdf
Quote:To preserve the grizzly bear in the northern Rockies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed designation of over 5,000,000 ha of public domain in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, and Washington as "critical habitat" for the species. This has triggered opposition from various interest groups and focused attention on the question of how much habitat the grizzly bear needs to survive (Fischer 1977).
This is one example of an increasingly frequent scenario - a widely distributed species becoming confined to small fragments of its former range. Aside from any systematic deterioration in the quality of remaining habitat, such fragmentation exposes remnant populations to higher extinction rates.