Online Now 2889

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 1819
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 2868
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Advocates of Evolution

  • Shane8773 said...

    I believe there are many variations that can occur among species. I refer to it as micro evolution but I know that's not a scientific term. Noah took two of each kind on the arc and from there we now have all of the variations of each

    What would the dimensions of this ark be?

    SCirish843

  • ramssuperbowl99 said...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_vortex

    Taking 2 of each animal would ensure that all species die out. Reading above.

    That honestly just went over my head lol Give me some cliffs

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    That honestly just went over my head lol Give me some cliffs

    The extinction vortex basically means that when species populations get low: fewer animals leads to less genetic variability which leads to weak animals who can't survive which leads to fewer animals...

    In other words, biologically you can't start a population from 2 animals. Any problems with the first 2 animals would be propagated throughout the whole population.

    ramssuperbowl99

  • A great example of this is the panda bear, sadly enough. At this point they are so thoroughly inbred that they simply can't survive in the wild.

    ramssuperbowl99

  • That's based on a whole bunch of problems that wouldn't have been able to happen then. Other animals, disease, etc

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    That's based on a whole bunch of problems that wouldn't have been able to happen then. Other animals, disease, etc

    No the problems are within the species.

    I would actually like to hear your explanation for:
    Why we have fresh and salt water fish given the whole world was flooded

    How Noah acquired animals that are native only to Antarctica, Australia, South America, etc.

    How Noah kept alive parasites which require human hosts

    Why we have plant life given that every plant would have drowned

    How Noah kept animals that can only live in cold climates alive for a year

    How Noah kept animals like the anteater, which eats 30,000/ants per day, fed.

    How Noah shoveled out all the feces/urine the animals produced.

    How Noah kept the lions from eating the zebras on the ark.

    How large this ark was to house literally every specie of every animal.

    How Noah acted as a veterinarian, ensuring none of the animals died during the trip

    ramssuperbowl99

  • Think this answers all of your questions without me having to type it

    The Resource for Answering the Critics of Noah's Ark

    How many animals did the Ark actually carry, and how did Noah get all those animals on the Ark? How could eight people possibly care for so many thousands of animals, and how could such a small crew deal with tons of manure on a daily basis? How could the koala, which only eats fresh Eucalyptus le

    www.icr.org

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    Think this answers all of your questions without me having to type it

    "To start out, I reviewed what Scripture actually teaches about what kinds of creatures were taken on the Ark in order to dispel the oft-repeated charge that the Ark needed to carry perhaps 50 million species of creatures. I then figured out how many animals were on the Ark, arriving at approximately 16,000. Since animals vary so much in size, a numerical figure itself is not too informative. Therefore, the 16,000 animals were assigned into body-weight categories."

    So you don't believe in evolution or speciation, but you think in 6,000 years (actually less than that) 16,000 species became anywhere from 10-100 million?

    By the way, the article actually answers nothing. He just says, "This is the claim, and I did the math and it's wrong!" No data. No nothing. Not to be rude, but you didn't answer any of my questions.

    ramssuperbowl99

  • ramssuperbowl99 said...

    "To start out, I reviewed what Scripture actually teaches about what kinds of creatures were taken on the Ark in order to dispel the oft-repeated charge that the Ark needed to carry perhaps 50 million species of creatures. I then figured out how many animals were on the Ark, arriving at approximately 16,000. Since animals vary so much in size, a numerical figure itself is not too informative. Therefore, the 16,000 animals were assigned into body-weight categories."

    So you don't believe in evolution or speciation, but you think in 6,000 years (actually less than that) 16,000 species became anywhere from 10-100 million?

    By the way, the article actually answers nothing. He just says, "This is the claim, and I did the math and it's wrong!" No data. No nothing. Not to be rude, but you didn't answer any of my questions.

    In church now but ill try to help later

    Shane8773

  • ramssuperbowl99 said...

    "To start out, I reviewed what Scripture actually teaches about what kinds of creatures were taken on the Ark in order to dispel the oft-repeated charge that the Ark needed to carry perhaps 50 million species of creatures. I then figured out how many animals were on the Ark, arriving at approximately 16,000. Since animals vary so much in size, a numerical figure itself is not too informative. Therefore, the 16,000 animals were assigned into body-weight categories."

    So you don't believe in evolution or speciation, but you think in 6,000 years (actually less than that) 16,000 species became anywhere from 10-100 million?

    By the way, the article actually answers nothing. He just says, "This is the claim, and I did the math and it's wrong!" No data. No nothing. Not to be rude, but you didn't answer any of my questions.

    "I proved all of this...BUY MY BOOK!!"

    SCirish843

  • Here is precisely what I believe. I know most of the non-believers will come back with tons and tons of questions. Honestly, I'm no expert on science so i probably won't have an answer.

    Was There Really a Noah’s Ark & Flood? - Answers in Genesis

    Noah’s Ark and the great Flood are taken as “fairy tales” by most Christians today. Ken Ham and Tim Lovett defend the scriptural account of God''s judgment upon the antediluvian world.

    www.answersingenesis.org

    Shane8773

  • What on earth did they feed the animals on the ark? And how big was it?

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • Did you read it? That's all in there

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    Here is precisely what I believe. I know most of the non-believers will come back with tons and tons of questions. Honestly, I'm no expert on science so i probably won't have an answer.

    According to this, there were dinosaurs on board the Arc.

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • Shane8773 said...

    Here is precisely what I believe. I know most of the non-believers will come back with tons and tons of questions. Honestly, I'm no expert on science so i probably won't have an answer.

    For only $11.99 you too can buy this book.

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    According to this, there were dinosaurs on board the Arc.

    I tilted my head in curiosity when I read that.

    SCirish843

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    According to this, there were dinosaurs on board the Arc.

    That's correct...

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    That's correct...

    Um.....fossils? Carbon dating?

    Macks

  • amrollZ71 said...

    First I will state the following: I have never looked more into it than what I was forced to from a science book so I am not up to date or even close, so feel free to provide refutable evidence. Nonetheless, it is indeed a scientific theory whether I believe it or not, and like all scientific theories it must be tested over and over again to be proven true. It must agree with all other proven facts, if it disagrees with one then it is certainly false.

    I have found a site(From a Christian, so I know you will probably not even read it, but try to) that makes 50 arguements against evolition.I figure that as often as possible we could dissect each of these arguments(One a day) to see our own conclusions based of the writers work, and other evidence each of you bring on. What say you?

    Exhibit 1

    Read and get back

    http://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/pdf/Origin_of_Species.pdf

    otherwise troll elsewhere

    Road Runner1

  • Macks said...

    Um.....fossils? Carbon dating?

    Carbon dating isn't accurate

    Doesn’t Carbon-14 Dating Disprove the Bible? - Answers in Genesis

    Unaware of the many fallacious assumptions used in the dating process, many people believe Carbon-14 dating disproves the biblical timeline. Mike Riddle demonstrates otherwise.

    www.answersingenesis.org

    Shane8773

  • NY times

    ERRORS ARE FEARED IN CARBON DATING - New York Times

    Since 1947, scientists have reckoned the ages of many old objects by measuring the amounts of radioactive carbon they contain. New research shows, however, that some estimates based on carbon may

    www.nytimes.com

    Shane8773

  • More... I can keep going

    Dinosaur fossil dating methods highly inaccurate | Auburn Journal

    http://www.auburnjournal.com/article/dinosaur-fossil-dating-methods-highly-inaccurate

    www.auburnjournal.com

    Shane8773

  • Shane8773 said...

    NY times

    facepalm_msu

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba

  • Shane8773 said...

    Carbon dating isn't accurate

    This would be marginally damning if biologists actually used carbon dating.

    ramssuperbowl99

  • Shane8773 said...

    More... I can keep going

    You certainly have me convinced.

    However, you might want to post lots more like these, just in case there are still doubters.

    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

    Where do I get my hand stamped for Heaven? Can you post that link please. TIA

    Road Runner1

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports