Tell us about the dinosaurs

[Linkacious]

I have some questions if I may, in reference to the flood, dinosaurs and other animals.

Is there a list anywhere of the animals that were taken on board the ark? Its just with all the species that have lived on earth I don't get how Noah would have only needed to take between 2-3000. Even with mammals there are various subclasses like placental mammals, marsupials and monotremes. Which type were taken onto the ark? If it was placental mammals then how do we have marsupials and monotremes today.

I read earlier that no sea or freshwater creatures were taken on board the ark. How do you explain the amount of sealife and freshwater animals that we have today? There are more than 30,000 species of fish alone. The specific gravity change of saltwater and the temperature drop would have wiped out pretty much everything. And if the food chain was affected too much by plankton and zooplankton die off then that would have been catastrophic. Yet we have all these species today.

And onto the dinosaurs. When you say 'types' of dinosaurs what do you mean by type? Genera? Order? Class? Species? And the ones that survived or didn't survive would have an effect on the animals today. Without Sarchosuchus or Megalodon we wouldn't have the types of sharks or crocs that we have today.

[orogenicman]

It's a pointless question, if I may say so, since it never happened.

[Minimalist]

Is there a list anywhere of the animals that were taken on board the ark?

Not only is there no such list but their fucking bible cannot even agree on the numbers of each animals taken aboard. It's another one of those damned contradictions that they swear do not exist.

You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.
Gen. 6:19

2 Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.

Gen 7 2-3

They can twist their scrotums into knots trying to explain how this contradiction is NOT a contradiction. Perhaps one of them will try for our amusement?

[Loki_999]

Is there a list anywhere of the animals that were taken on board the ark?

Already asked Statler for this list but he didn't produce it. Just kept spouting that there were not as many as there are today and simply avoided the question.

Here is a more rational explanation of what animals may have been on the ark (presuming it existed at all).
http://www.noahs-ark-flood.com/animals.htm
Its a nice take which could be believable in that its a real story that got inflated beyond all proportion by the time it was added to the bible.

However, this description is an epic fail in terms of obeying gods command for two of every animal.

Here is some waffle on kinds vs species. Amazing how they propose that some desert tribesman could have built something so big, something that big wasn't built by us until the last century or so....
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/was-n...imals.html

Its really funny how they talk about there being limited "kinds" when referring to land creatures, but then are happy to talk about there being thousands of species when talking about aquatic animals.

And can you imagine how he could have employed all the people necessary to build such a big ship?

Worker: So, you want us build a big ship for you Mr. Noah?
Noah: Yes, that's right. God gave me the specifications.
Worker: Yeah, right, whatever you say sir. As long as you have the money. I presume you have enough money for this project, i mean, you don't seem to be overloaded with Gold or precious gems... And anyway why do you need this ship?
Noah: Because God is going to send a big flood that will kill everything on this planet except for me, a few friends, and a whole bunch of animals i will put on board.
Worker: What? So you want us to build you this ship, then God is going to kill us all?
Noah: No, not all, me and my family and close friends get to live.
Worker: Screw you mister, build your own damn ship then. I'm off to build one for myself and my family. I'm also changing religion to worship Baal, Yahweh can go f**k himself.

Highly amusing pic here linked to from the previous link:
http://www.biblestudy.org/biblepic/pictu...h-ark.html

Highly amusing take on the ark story... it should be added to the bible...
http://www.classicreader.com/book/1930/6/

Some Jewish take on it (scroll down to the inmates of the ark).
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/loj/loj106.htm
According to this it was the animals who built the ark! You see, Christianity isn't the most insane religion in the world!!!

And here is a completely terrible analysis.
http://carm.org/could-noahs-ark-hold-all-animals

Still, at the end of the day, no list to be found anywhere.

[Anomalocaris]

How many pairs of each of over one million species of described insects?

[Minimalist]

Noah probably had plenty of fleas in his crotch. Scratch them off the list!

[Anomalocaris]

You just confused him half way into his million species Insect count. Now He has to start all over again.

[Statler Waldorf]

[orogenicman]

Getting published in a journal that is reviewed by a bunch of like minded reviewers really is not all that impressive. You should try and get published in one where not everyone is pulling for your side sometime. Anyways, since you have been published I am surprised you are not aware that there are 59 families of Dinosaurs. So my statement that there are around 50 different kinds of dinosaurs is completely accurate, inspite of your claims to the contrary.

Certainly being published in the mostly widely respected journal on invertebrate paleontolotgy lends more weight to my arguments (and is far more impressive) than does the fact that you obviously have little, if any science training whatsoever. I might add that if you knew anything about publishing in such journals, then you would know how difficult it is to acheive publication regardless of your background. Even the most respected paleontologists have to wade through the backlog, and convince the peer reviewers of the validity of their arguments. Secondly, your argument that the biblical "kinds" of animals included on Noah's ark refer to the Linean "family" classification is simply ludicrous since it assumes that tribal peoples of the Middle East some 4,000 years ago had any concept of such a classification, when the fact of the matter is that there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support such an assumption. Third, you originally said there were only 50 kinds of dinosaurs, and now you are saying that there are 59. The problem, sir, is that it is arrogant of you to propose an ad hoc nomenclature scheme that no one in the scientific community accepts as valid, particularly since it is by and large meaningless for the purposes of biological classification. And finally, your argument is nothing but a diversion from the fact that there is simply no scientific evidence whatsoever that a global flood ever occurred, not in Noah's time or any other.

Wow Scientists have been classifying dinosaurs for the last 400 years? So they were classifying animals that would not be discovered for another 250 years? I take it all back, you guys really are good at what you do! :-P

That is not what I said. If you are having a problem reading the English language may I suggest the Harbrace Handbook?

Don't pretned for a second that you have any idea how the dinosaurs went extinct. Nobody on your side of the aisle can even remotely agree on that issue. It's a pretty simple question to answer on my side of the aisle. There was a great bottleneck at the flood. Dinosaurs were very rare after the flood due to a scarcity of their primary food.

Yes, I'm certain that it is quite easy for the rather simple minds in your camp to answer such a question when all you have to do is to pull one out of your ass. Unfortunately for you simpletons, science requires considerably more evidence than the circular argument that "god did it".

---

Seriously?

Yes, seriously.

So since all software uses binary code then all computers must have evolved from a common ancestor? That's a ridiculous argument and quite frankly is kind of sad you would even try and use it.

As a matter of fact, all microcomputers do have a common ancestry in that they are all descended from the IBM x86 format. That you haven't a clue in this regard comes as no surprise whatsoever. Do you deny that all life on Earth is DNA-based?

A common designer would use common building blocks, pretty simple. DNA has essentially killed your theory, until you can show us a beneficial mutation that increases information and effects morphology you have no leg to stand on and your beloved theory becomes just a faith based system. I already have a faith, why would I ever need your's?

First of all, I didn't originate the theory of evolution. Sorry to disappoint you. Secondly, DNA is the very pinnacle of evolutionary theory. If you don't believe that DNA affects morphology, I suggest you pick up a book on genetics and read it, because, damn, that is just about the dumbest statement I've ever heard a creationist make. And that's saying a lot. Faith is a belief in something for which there is no proof. Religion is faith-based. Science is not, unless you are truly stupid enough to suggest that it takes an act of faith to understand the laws of physics. And finally, if you are so anti-science, why are you using it to post these absurd messages? If you truly want to portray yourself as a purist, why not sell everything you own that owes its existence to science (that'd be pretty much everything you own), and become truly pure (and leave the science to those of us who actually understand it)?

Crackpot huh?

I was being kind.

I like to look at the words of Gandhi when personal attacks are used, "First they will ignore you, then they will laugh at you, then they will fight you, then you win." Looks like I am well on my way to winning this discussion.

Tell me more about these delusions you've been having. I do enjoy fiction.

---

Archosaurs huh?

Yes. Do you want me to repeat it?

What did they evolve from?

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/archofr.html

How do you know dinosaurs evolved from them?

Morphology. If this word is too big for you, buy a dictionary.

Where are the intermidate fossils that are never in textbooks?

They are in the textbooks. Clue- the Bible is not a science textbooks, so obviously you won't find them there.

Dufus huh?

Again, I was being kind.

---

Then why would you make the mistake of assuming that the layers of strata were layed down over long periods of time rather than very quickly like we observed with Mt. St. Helens?

It is not an assumption. All you have to do is meet me at the Creation museum for an afternoon geology field trip and all your questions can be answered. It is not an assumption. Not all layers of strata were laid down "like we observed with Mt. Sty. Helens". In fact, most were not laid down in such a fashion. Sedimentary rocks and volcanic rocks are easily distinguichable and have unrelated origins. Secondly, we can measure the rate and modality of deposition in modern sediments and compare them to ancient sediments. This is called science, a notion that apparently escaped you.

The evidence clearly points to catestrophic events rather than long gradual accumulation.

What evidence, where? Are you saying that all lake sediments are deposited in catastrophic events? All ocean sediments are deposited in catastrophic events? If they were, we wouldn't see tens of thousands of feet of undisturbed sediments in nearly every corner of the globe. We would see highly disturbed strata. You do realize that the strata that Mt. St. Helens produced is chaotic and highly disturbed, right? of course you don't because you don't have a clue.



Undisturbed horizontal outcrop of sediments



Highly disturbed volcanic deposits

[orogenicman]

Actually we have eye wittness acounts that the flood did occur.

You might be able to push that lie on people in your camp. It isn't going to pass the smell test here, I'm afraid.

That alone is infinitely more evidence than you have since you have no direct obsrvation of your claims.

This is what passes for evidence in creationist circles? I've drill thousands of wells, logged thousands of feet of rock cores, and described hundreds of miles of rock outcrops in thirteen states. And I'm just one of thousands of geologists who have done the same. Got anything like that?

To go along with the eye wittness account we actually have mountains of evidence that supports a global flood event. It just happens to be the same evidence you try to use to support your claims. Kind of funny how evidence requires interpretation huh? Figured you would have known this by now. We have observation, you don't.

You have observation? Ha! You have about three pages of text from one ancient book of questionable provenence that was not written by any of your so-called eye witnesses, who, in fact, we don't know even existed. If you want to see all the evidence against your claims, I suggest you visit the geology section of the Library of Congress. Their collection is the largest on the planet, and were written by real people, many of whom are still alive. Or you could meet me at the Creation Museum and I can provide you with an entire afternoon of direct observation in the field.