To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 9340
9339  |  9341
Subject: 
Re: Problems with Creationists' theory
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 9 Feb 2001 23:37:49 GMT
Viewed: 
662 times
  
Tim Culberson wrote:

Certainly you have hit on a point where "practically" speaking a
creationist can't argue against the monstrosity of the event you
describe.  A creationist has to rely on his/her faith in the Bible which
clearly teaches that God "brought" the animals to the ark.  No
creationist will argue that Noah "collected" the animals himself.

Currently there are about 1.800.000.000 different species of living beings described. Do you seriously want to tell me that Noah had
time enough to sample 1.100.000 insect species (wait a minute... wasn't it two of a kind.... so he had to collect 2.200.000 insects,
right? It must have been quite crowded on board of his vessel! )???? How did he get all those endemites aboard... did he travel to
the South American rain forest before? Wow! These were great times when people seemed to have endless time!!!

My lack of scientific knowledge and your lack of source make me question
the number you presented....okay I just saw your "correction" in your
next message.  There's nothing to say that all of the animals taken on
the ark where full-sized fully, matured ones either...but I digress...

Hah!  Like that matters!  Do you want to even TRY to calculate the sheer volume of 2.2MILLION insects, especially since then would have to
be housed separately to avoid some eating others?

Want to try to figure out the food requirements for 2.2MILLION insects, ignoring the point that they'd multiply like crazy, you'd have to
constantly kill off all but one male and one female (do YOU want to try to tell the difference between male and female of 1.1MILLION
species of insect?).

Consider the food requirements of JUST a pair of elephants...

Unless Noah's Ark had cryogenic freeze chambers (that actually DID result in viable organisms after "thaw"), the food requirements would
probably be measured in tonnage that NO ship could carry - not even our largest cargo ships of today.

...or I suppose you'll say that God just made it so that they didn't eat or reproduce.  Yeaaaahhhh, OKkkkkk.  The tonnage of the animals
themselves would still be impossible for the building technology of the time.



...nobody is going to argue that belief in Noah's ark isn't based on
faith.  There are a tonne of questions that you couldn't answer if you
believed in Noah's Ark but not God - like how did Noah know to build an
ark in the first place?

Noah's ark is a cute myth, nothing more - ever read the proof that Santa Claus doesn't exist?  The one running through the physics and
proving he'd basically explode in less than a second from G forces and heat?  The same could be done for Noah's Ark, if some team wanted
to waste several lifetimes weighing one of every species we could find (juvenile or not), and testing the food requirements needed for a
year and ten days.

--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support     Netscape Communications Corp
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/    A division of AOL Time Warner
|      Please do not associate my personal views with my employer



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Problems with Creationists' theory
 
(...) "Riiighht. What's a cubit?" :) James (24 years ago, 9-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
  Re: Problems with Creationists' theory
 
(...) Okay now I'm REALLY questioning the credability of these numbers. Please give me an authoritative source on this. First you (inclusive of "the evolutionists in this discussion") say "1.800.000.000 species", then you correct yourself and say (...) (24 years ago, 10-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Problems with Creationists' theory
 
(...) I'm not quite sure what you mean by this - because this sure does sound like an evolutionist's argument to me. Certainly you have hit on a point where "practically" speaking a creationist can't argue against the monstrosity of the event you (...) (24 years ago, 9-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

95 Messages in This Thread:





































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR