If evolution is true, then obviously "Jesus" is not real.

Any life form on the ark can be of only one species. It may represent a "kind", but it can only be of one species.

So, the problem remains that one must account for all the species - OR, one must account for how new species came into being after the ark.

If you think some could have survived the flood without being on the ark, then find out how many and do the subtraction to defend your religion.

Again, I'll point out that Ham (of "Creation Museum" fame, the one who challenged Bill Nye to debate this topic) did this work and his conclusion is that evolution had to have occurred after the ark. That is, there are today large numbers of species that could not have survived the flood and that could not have fit on the ark even if you consider the various ways that the ark could be larger than others have thought.

Ham, who prides himself on his study of the creationist viewpoint (leading to his museum) ensured that the debate was recorded and you can listen to it on-line.

 

Interesting point. It makes it clearer why the "kind" idea does not, by itself, solve the problem of the number of species on the ark compare to the number of species we see around us today.

There were humans on the ark. But, that representation did NOT solve the problem of there needing to be great apes on the ark - even though they are the same "kind".

Ham (of the creation museum) used the concept of "kind" only to suggest that the ark carried enough life forms that EVOLUTION could have created the diversity we see today in the short time between Noah and today.

That is, he postulates that one or two early reptile species were on the ark, and from those reptiles EVOLUTION produced all the species of reptiles we see today.

 

You've got to understand, NaturalBorn is a Young Earth Creationist, who believes life, the Earth, even the Universe is a mere 6000 years old, because "If" it's not....

then his entire religious faith collapses.

While there are numerous Christians who accept a "modified Creation" (Old Earth or Intelligent Design) or just normal cosmology and evolution....AND can also accept the divinity of Jesus.....NB's faith is based on a fragile, crystalline structure of "The Bible is absolute truth and history and the week of Creation was clearly dated to 4004 BC in it....ergo any flaw in the Bible raises doubts about all of it....including the New Testament"

It fundamentally shows how WEAK his faith is...not how "strong" it is. A strong faith in Christ doesn't need Young Earth Creationism or even Old Earth Creationism......you accept on faith that the New Testament was recounted truthfully by the Apostles.....while admitting that the Old was simply myths and legends of the Hebrew/Israelites.

But a weak faith.....means if even a sliver of the Bible is false or inaccurate.....the whole thing collapses like a house of cards.

 

Do you still claim that Kind is equivalent to Family in Taxonomy? If so,

then,

this is our Kind:

Do you recant this assertion?

 

I've heard that one too. It's "Creationist evolution".....to "explain" how there are 4000 species of beetles, but Noah only took ONE species of beetle onboard the Ark....

they say "Once the original pair of beetle left the Ark....they mutated into numerous different sub-species"......

IOW....they use EVOLUTIONARY principles to explain how we have a huge variety of animal life, that the "pair of each kind"on the Ark....."evolved" from.

 

If you accept micro-evolution, you accept macro-evolution. They are both caused by the same process: evolution. The only difference between them is how much time it takes.

 

Every farmer and rancher knows to get a preferred species of a critter, they can be bred. That is not evolution that is speciation. They can all interbreed. if true Evolution MUST move beyond species, beyond family. You need a better understanding of the evolutionist's terms here.

Biology. the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.

A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producingfertileoffspring

BIOLOGY
a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. The species is the principal natural taxonomic unit, ranking below a genus and denoted by a Latin binomial,


Defining a Species

A species is often defined as a group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed in nature. In this sense, a species is the biggestgene pool possible under natural conditions.



Species

Definition
noun, singular or plural: [COLOR=#2FA2EF !important]species
(taxonomy)
(1) The lowest taxonomic rank, and the most basic unit or category of biological classification.
(2) An individual belonging to a group of organisms (or the entire group itself) having common characteristics and (usually) are capable of mating with one another to produce fertile offspring. Failing that (for example the Liger) It has to be ecologically and recognisably the same

The concept of a species is something that almost everyone understands intuitively. However, within the field of evolutionary biology there are a number of definitions that have fairly subtle differences. The following are some examples of definitions that have been offered recently.

Species: A reproductively isolated aggregate of interbreeding populations. (Mayr. 1970)

Species: The members, in aggregate, of a group of populations that interbreed or potentially interbreed under natural conditions. (Futuyma, 197

Species: In the sense of biological species, the members in aggregate of a group of populations that interbreed or potentially interbreed under natural conditions; a complex concept. Also, a basic taxonomic category to which individual specimens are assigned, which often but not always corresponds to the biological species. (Futuyma, 1986)

Species: A species is a group of populations whose evolutionary pathway is distinct and independent from that of other groups; a distinct and independent path is achieved by the group's reproductive isolation from other groups. (Futuyma & Mayer, 1980)

- - - Updated - - -

More looser whining.

- - - Updated - - -

Which great ape can breed with homo sapiens?

- - - Updated - - -

Wrong. Breeding chickens with larger drumsticks is not evolution.

 

So, there were no insects on board? No, plants?

Not even close, especially when you take into consideration how much food animals eat. One elephant alone consume about 300 lbs of food a day.

How in the world did animals from all over the world make it across seas, mountains, and deserts to get to the Ark?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, it is. If you knew what the definition of evolution was, you'd know that too.

 

You are adding some name-calling to the flame-baiting cocktail I see!
Congratulations on your great accomplishment.

 

Horses were domesticated before Adam and Eve.

http://www.politicalforum.com/histo...4561-horses-domesticated-9-000-years-ago.html

 

Genesis 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.

12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.

15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.

16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.

17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

Genesis 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.

5 And Noah did according unto all that the LORD commanded him.

6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.

7 And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood.

8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.

16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in.

 

There's another basic stumper for the believers in Noah's Flood.....

according to the Bible, the Flood and its effects lasted a YEAR.....what would happen to most plant life on Earth if it was plunged FOR A YEAR to a depth of 29,000 feet (enough to cover Mt. Everest, remember?)

First....most plants can't survive without air. Many die if "over-watered".....and plus at a depth of 29,000 feet below sea level....it's DARK....pitch black.

None of which is very conducive for plant life, is it?

 

This is total nonsense, starting with your lack of understanding about the meaning of the word "species".

The very definition of species includes that breeding between species fails. Farmers and ranchers are not creating new species - they are for the most part creating new hybrids. And, farmers do that through breeding programs - which is just a controlled form of evolution.

I've given you examples of closely observed speciation. You can find more by searching on "speciation examples observed".

Evolution includes changes within species as well as the creation of new species.

 

That's because your definition isn't what he wanted to hear. He's the one that told me Clause 17 of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution which is a direct reference to Washington D.C. and the power of Congress to regulate what goes on there, meant the federal government had the authority to regulate education on the national level.

 

As an allegory, sure. God got MAJORLY POed and decided to kill pretty much everything, deciding to save mankind (along with enough life to support us - thanks, God!). Having done that, he regretted it to the extent that he promised not to do THAT again!

However, as fact:
- There are about 9,000,000 species of "living substance" today. God said he would destroy it all, except the life on the ark. Where did all our species come from? I've asked numerous times now, and you have no answer. I've given you the creationist answer (evolution after leaving the ark), but you refuse to accept evolution.

- 40 days and 40 nights of rain at 2"/hour is 160 feet of water. BFD. TWENTY inches per hour would NOT be enough! How would a loaded ark do in a 20"/hour rainstorm? You creationists simply refuse to do the math! And, I can see why. "40 days and 40 nights" sounds so cool if you don't do the math.

- if enough water were to condense (rain) to cover the earth, heat equations show a huge problem - Noah would be poached. Plus, where did that amount of atmospheric water vapor come from and where did it go?

- The deep? We explore what's below the surface of the earth. It is NOT water down there. And, if it were, it would be super heated from the extreme pressure. And, it isn't hollow down there either - so water didn't come from there and then go somewhere else. Besides, there is no mechanism for water to inject itself into the earth. And, (again) that amount of water is NOT in our atmosphere. So, where did it go and how did it get there? I you think it left the planet, then HOW? And, why didn't ALL our water leave the planet if the amount of the flood left?


Beyond that, there are LARGE NUMBERS of other reasons the ark story just doesn't work.
- problems gathering the animals (some of which travel very slowly, require specific diets, have temperature requirements, lived only on remote islands, require specific ranges of humidity (like 100% humidity for some), problems loading tens of thousands (or millions??) of species onto the ark in only 7 days, etc.
- creationists claim all fossils were laid down at the time of the flood, so dinosaurs were alive then. And, Noah claims that he took a pair of every living kind. So, he had dinosaurs on board the ark!
- How could Noah's family get rid of the tons of manure per day, or carry and feed the animals the food that would result in tons of manure per day?
- how come we have polar ice such as in Greenland? That ice wouldn't reaccumulate in the climate we've had for the last 10,000 years.

The list goes on and on and on and on!.

 

Great post.. They will stick their fingers in their ears and say Nananananana...

 

Your definition and evolutionists scientists definition are not the same then.

How do YOU define a Tiger vs. a Lion? or a Wolf vs. a German Shepherd? Zoologists call them different species.

 

Still NO evidence FOR evolution. No one can reference one, just one evidence for their faith in Big Bang and Darwinism.

Nothing, nada, nichs, nothing.

You ask for ME to provide evidence, but you supply not an iota of evidence.

I'm still waiting for evidence...................... .................

 

Yes! We can see that you have numerous questions that need answers. Answers that are not readily available in that box called science. The one problem that science and mathematics has is the fact that God is Omnipotent. He created the universe and provided water where He wanted water to be. By the same token of His magnificence, He also manipulated the environment in the same manner in which he used in creating the Earth. You don't want to accept that, that is OK with me. Nothing lost on my account.

 

You are the one claiming Kind and Family (in Taxonomy) are analogous. Thus, why your non sequitur?

You may be referring to Genus. Homo sapiens sapiens is the only species left in that genus.

 

Dogs and wolves are of different species. They are close enough to have offspring, but their offspring are sterile, demonstrating that the parents are of different species.

I think the same goes for tigers and lions. That is, they are close enough that they can have sterile offspring.

You were responding to a post of mine having to do with what farmers and ranchers are doing. So, I don't know how wolves and tigers fits into that!

 

This thread has exceeded post limits and is now closed.

Shangrila
Moderator