Tell us about the dinosaurs

[Loki_999]

Wikipedia is so lame. There were vessels the exact same size as the ark built in China that did fine. They actually sailed, which was something the ark didn't even have to do.

Wikipedia is an excellent resource for information. You just need to be careful of accepting everything there without cross checking. This is why they are usually quite tight on demanding citations. Go ahead and try and make some unsubstantiated claims on wikipedia and see how long it is before you entry gets tagged with citation needed. If you want to dismiss wikipedia that is your business, but follow the citations and see whether you choose to dismiss those as well.

Still, you haven't actually stated how big you believe this ark was, so saying China built ships of the same size, well, you have to let us know which Chinese ships these were.

I am sure you are aware that marine animals did not have to be taken onto the ark. Due to drastic plate tectonics a lot of the water that flooded the Earth was already sea water, so your salinity argument doesn't hold much water.

Ho ho ho... doesn't hold much water. Actually, it does. Either the water was saline, therefore killing off all the freshwater marine life, or non-saline killing off all the saltwater marine life. You can't have it both ways. Again, a clear example of God causing death for no clear reason.

P.S. AIG knows that brontosaurus never existed, maybe you guys should read their work more.

Can we drop it already with the Brontosaurus? Or are you now going to prove that the whole diplodicae (sorry, spelling, being lazy to check how to spell it) family of dinosaurs didn't exist as well? If people say Brontosaurus we are referring to big fucking lizards with longs necks.

Can you point me to a resource where all the "kinds" of animals that were on the Ark are listed?

Well the Biblical "kind" does not directly fall into our biological tree. It is most likely between the "family" and "genus" categories depending on the animal. This would have meant (including dinosaurs and other extince animals) that Noah would only have to take about 2000-3000 actual animals on the Ark. Very doable.

Answer the question please. Where can i find a list of the animals?

1) So, if the Dino's were on the Ark, and they also had time to evolve/mutate after the flood - because there are a lot more than 50 types of Dinosaurs cataloged, what happened to them? At what point did they die out?

To your frist point, all those species of Dinosaurs were killed before the flood (or during the flood), so they did not live after the flood. A lot of dinosaurs would have had trouble adapting to the post-flood conditions so they would not have been real numerous, though some did live after the flood.

So god created the dinos and quite a lot of them died out in just a couple of thousand years after creation? That's a pretty bad design on the part of god don't you think? I object to your suggestion that lots died out during the flood. God COMMANDED 2 of every *cough* kind *cough*. And what about the marine dinosaurs? They wouldn't have had any problem with adapting to post flood life.

2) How (and why) the hell did the duck billed platypus migrate from the middle east, all the way to Australia? Not exactly the fastest creature on land, requires freshwater rivers for life, etc. Actually, isn't it just a little strange for you why certain animals are only found in certain parts of the world when according to your beliefs, the ark stopped in the middle east and all the animals disembarked there.

To your second point...pointing to a "problem" that exists for both sides doesn't really get us anywhere. Evolutionists have huge issues with the fact that there are many animals (wolves for example) that are morphologically identical (aside from reproductive systems) but some live in Australia and some live in Europe. The Catestrophic Plate Tectonic model does solve this problem for Creationists though, it would allow for many animals to move to Australia and then be separated by plate tectonics and melting ice bridges.

Don't dodge the question. You can ask me how in my worldview that two similar species of wolves live so far apart, but please answer mine (can't promise an answer at all on that because I have no idea and would have to do quite a bit of research... but I wouldn't insert God just because of ignorance on my part) You raise the catestrophic pate techtonic event (which would then drag this conversation over to geology) but let us for the moment assume there was a land bridge, it still doesn't explain how just 2 platypus formed a breeding pair in the middle of the desert, survived, produced enough offspring to start the next generation (also the next generation would suffer a relatively high rate of non-viables due to the incestuous breeding that would be happening), and then they would have had to thrive, spread out, but for some reason, slowly, oh so very slowly, migrate eastwards, through more deserts, presumably following rivers where they could, mountains, forests, plains, jungles, and finally settle in just East Australia and Tasmania??? If the platypus could travel so far and survive, why don't we find them in West Australia? A platypus must eat 20% of its own body weight every day and therefore spends approximately 12 hours a day seeking food... not very conductive for migration either. They can breed usually once per year and produce two offspring. Again, not very conductive for mass spreading out if you want to take that approach (ie: they didn't migrate, they spread out everywhere and then died off except for in east Australia), plus the young live in the burrow for the first 3-4 months of their lives.

3) Did the Ark have environmental conditioning? Plenty of creatures who require specific environments to survive - freshwater fish vs saltwater fish, polar creatures adapted to the extreme cold, desert creatures adapted to dry conditions.

To the third point, I have no idea. Lots of these environmental needs would have most likely have developed after the flood as the animals re-populated the Earth and moved into many new ecosystems.

Ah, so adaptation. All (land) animals were happy to live in middle easy conditions before the flood and all animals could be found around the middle east? So there were no polar bears or penguins prior to the flood, or you could find penguins in the middle east prior to the flood? Seals lived on the banks of the jordan? Maybe Pharaoh had a pet Walrus? Or did these species *cough* evolve *cough* after the flood? Walruses evolved from what now? In just a couple of thousand years? Really?

4) Plants. 40 days submerged under the oceans is going to kill a lot of plant life I would have thought. Why didn't God think of the plants? Bad enough to kill off the animals who were faultless for man's behavior, but the poor plants were left to die.

Plants would have been destroyed by the flood, but not really as a matter of judgement, the Bible does not look at plant life the same way as animal life. Seeds can survive flooding for a long period of time, so plants re-populating the Earth would not have taken long at all.

Ok, seeds answers that fairly well, although it would depend on the plants and the salinity of the flood waters.

All Humans are guilty. Learn your Theology.

We know the theology thanks. We tend to find it disgusting and immoral.

[orogenicman]

It's ridiculous to continue to play this charade. A global flood didn't happen. There is no geological evidence for it, not to mention that it violates all the laws of physics. The end.

[theophilus]

BTW Waldo, this ark you are so proud of would be impossible to build with the technology of the day.

How do you know what their technology was like? They lived a lot longer that we do so each individual could have acquired a lot more knowledge and done more during his life. Under those conditions their technology could have advanced rapidly and they could have been ahead of where we are now. Thomas Edison lived 84 years and obtained over 1,000 patents for his inventions. Think about how much he could have accomplished if he had lived ten times as long.

P.s where did Noah keep all of the marine species that would have undoubtedly perished with the massive influx of fresh water that the rains would have brought?

Possibly the oceans didn't have as much salt so the addition of fresh water wouldn't have made enough difference to cause a problem.

And it's strange that all of the civilizations around at the time(2500bce) signally failed to notice the flood happen.

All of those civilizations had legends of a world wide flood so it seems to me that they did notice.

[Anomalocaris]

How do you know what their technology was like? They lived a lot longer that we do so each individual could have acquired a lot more knowledge and done more during his life. Under those conditions their technology could have advanced rapidly and they could have been ahead of where we are now. Thomas Edison lived 84 years and obtained over 1,000 patents for his inventions. Think about how much he could have accomplished if he had lived ten times as long.

You are grasping at strews. Where is the evidence people lived longer, and forget using the bible and the pathetic Statlerian tactic of using the bible's self proclaimed authority as "evidence" of its authority. Thomas Edison had 5000 years of human technical and scientific knowledge to draw on. How many generations of studious mariners, shipwrights, carpenters, and scientists did noah have access to based on the biblical "chronology"? As to the ridiculous story of the Chinese ark that supposedly sailed, even if we buy the story at its ridiculous face value, your Noah ark would need to withstand the torrential run off resulting from rain pouring down over the entire land surface of the earth at a rate 360 inches an hour, 180 times the highest rainfall rate ever measured, to make your ridiculous 40 day flood story. So how's that comparable to anything ever seen by any ship? Your ark would be bashed to splinters like a barrel in Niagara falls before the currents to be expected.

P.s where did Noah keep all of the marine species that would have undoubtedly perished with the massive influx of fresh water that the rains would have brought?

Possibly the oceans didn't have as much salt so the addition of fresh water wouldn't have made enough difference to cause a problem..

Possibly? You just pull that out of your ass?

Possibly the marine species are still around because there was never a biblical flood that requires such baseless ad hoc crap to accommodates?

And it's strange that all of the civilizations around at the time(2500bce) signally failed to notice the flood happen.

All of those civilizations had legends of a world wide flood so it seems to me that they did notice...

So what? Overwhelming physical evidence shows 12,000 years ago, the last episold of the Pleistocene glacial advance in a 3,000,000 year old ice age climaxed and then retreated. Ice melted. Holocene started. The ocean level rose 200 feet. Shorelines moved inland by dozens to hundred of miles. Entire continuent sized land mass drowned and have remained drowned. Rich coastal plains that would have hosted much of humanity, who normally don't move more than a few miles from their camp, would have flooded from horizon to horizon.

When the continuental glaciers advanced on land the ice damed existing rivers to form ice bound lakes, some like Lake Bonniville was larger than any lake that exist in the world today When the glaciers retreated, or when the lakes filled high enough so the ice dams floated, huge lakes the size of the great lakes would burst their ice containment and flood areas the size of oregon, or the entire northsea, in days. Evidence of glacial dams, standing lakes behind them, scour channels, recessionary cataracts, water lain bolders size of buildings along the flood path, are everywhere to be seen in those regions. The glacial lake Missoula that periodically flooded Oregon in apocalyptic diluges powerful enough to empty lake Michigan in a day, did so 50 times at clockwork interval of about 50 years. Ancients witnessing, and luck enough surviving, the spectacle would see flood water hundred of feet deep from horizon to horizon, covering the whole world known to them, and drowning prominances hundreds of feet high, completely eroding down to nothing hills hundred of feet higher still, in just days.

Then 3000 years later, the land bridge between the mediterranean sea and the what was a fresh water lake in the black sea basin breached. The mediterranean water swamped the pontis lake, made it 4 times bigger and turned it into the present day sea in as little as a few month. The people living on the plains around the freshwater lake would see the lake shore advance several miles a day, not much slower than they can carry their belonings and flee. They would flee south into the fertile crescent, where they would found the first civilization, which is not the hebrews, but the Sumarian, 3000 years later.

So there were many more than just one big memorable flood. In at least one, the sea level advance at the beginning of holocene, was indeed global in scale. All of them would have been bigger in scale than the whole world as would be known to a neolothic tribe. But not a single one of those floods came from 40 days of rain. These actual floods are all so recent that while not one of them happened in the last 6000 years assigned as age of universe by fundies, many of them happen within just two or three times that number of years, and are so potentially within living memories of many cultures. So it is no wonder most of humanity had some vague notion of some monsterous flood passed down from some ancester who had directly witness one or more of those memorable floods. It is in all probability from tales passed down through literate predecessors like Sumarians and barbylonians that the self-absorbed illiterate hebrew yokels fashioned the story of Noah another 2000 years later. It's not from the rediculous biblical flood. Get over it.

[Welsh cake]

Not drrailing anything, you didn't use the word "literal" correctly so I pointed it out.

Stop. Do you take your Bible literally or figuratively?

What else would you like me to address?

Addressing your argument would make for a nice fucking change.

All Humans are guilty. Learn your Theology.

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat? The prosecution's burden of proof?

*sigh* You wouldn't last one day in the court of law Statler.

[Minimalist]

All of those civilizations had legends of a world wide flood so it seems to me that they did notice...

But they didn't all drown, dummy. Can't you even see how the fact that they continued doing what they had been doing disproves your bullshit bible tale?


Your pals at answers-in-genesis ( assholes - every last one of them but they're your pals not mine ) claim a date of 2304 BC for this supposed "flood." That's the VIth Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt That is right in the middle of the reign of Pepi I. Here's his pyramid:





Looks as if they finished it in spite of all of them being "drowned" right in the middle of building it!

Now how do you explain that?

[thesummerqueen]

I was told today Min that scientists and archaeologists don't know how to date things and are part of a vast conspiracy to keep us from believing what we should.

[Minimalist]

Naturally.

That's why I chose to use the date from those answers-in-genesis shitheads.

[Loki_999]

I was told today Min that scientists and archaeologists don't know how to date things and are part of a vast conspiracy to keep us from believing what we should.

The funny think with all these conspiracy ideas is they quite often fail to address the fundamental question of why. I mean, they usually have some sort of half-cocked answer, but why would scientists (a lot of them) all agree to falsify the data... unless the reality is scary and they dont want us all to panic

[A Theist]

The dinosaurs went extinct because when they showed up at the ark, Noah objected, telling god that the plumbing simply couldn't handle that much coprolite. I thought everyone knew this.

...no, no, no. That's not how they went extinct. As this actual video footage shows, dinosaurs died in a giant world wide stampede. King Kong killed off the survivors...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4wzykUe5...re=related