Wow. I didn't know anyone did that song and dance anymore. I thought the "pray and row for shore" model had taken over.
― whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:03 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:03 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:06 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:07 (seventeen years ago) link
^^ HOTT
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:12 (seventeen years ago) link
― whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:14 (seventeen years ago) link
― My Life in the Ghosts of Bush (Modal Fugue), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:15 (seventeen years ago) link
― whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:15 (seventeen years ago) link
all this white girls are gunna show up on Burning Angel w/in 3 years, place yer bets
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:16 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:16 (seventeen years ago) link
This is pretty funny. I thought even fundies knew about inbreeding (they hate mormons right?).... but I thought most agreed with scientists about genetics.....
― jw (ex machina), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:17 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:19 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:22 (seventeen years ago) link
― whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:22 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― Kenneth Branagh (gcannon), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:25 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:26 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:27 (seventeen years ago) link
― My Life in the Ghosts of Bush (Modal Fugue), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link
― latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:31 (seventeen years ago) link
― Kenneth Branagh (gcannon), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:31 (seventeen years ago) link
The largest dragon (i.e. dinosaur) eggs that we've found to date are about the size of a football. One could fit, for example, a dozen brachiosaurus eggs in the trunk of a car, with room to spare! This also means that recently hatched dragons were not very large. Noah's mission was to preserve each kind of animal. You don't need to find the biggest of each kind. And you don't need each sub-divided species either. Did you know that most modern dog breeds are less than 100 years old? 2 healthy young mutts could preserve the genome of the entire "dog kind" of animals. The Bible uses the word "kind" for the different types of life forms. Horses and zebras can (and have) physically mated producing viable offspring; so have tigers and lions, indicating that they (according to creation theory) probably respectively diverged from the same original stock. Dogs and wolves (though considered quite different by humans today) probably originated from their same "kind" too. There are a few large animals (when fully grown) of course: giraffes, elephants, and T-rexes among them. But the average animal size is about sheep size, i.e. the 3-story Ark was plenty large enough to handle the variety of animal kinds plus lots of food for them. Speciation could descend again from original healthy "mutt" stock to start with. Thinking scientifically about this, it shows incredible variable design, huh?
jesus, how did i miss this thread?
― latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:32 (seventeen years ago) link
― Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:33 (seventeen years ago) link
http://img.hottopic.com/is/image/HotTopic/143596_hi?$product$ http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2005/12/200HallowedBeThyName.jpg
xp
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:34 (seventeen years ago) link
The use of the word "speciation" there is incredible: this sentence practically is the whole theory of natural selection and evolution!
― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:35 (seventeen years ago) link
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:37 (seventeen years ago) link
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:38 (seventeen years ago) link
i see it on my browser!
― latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:38 (seventeen years ago) link
What is a ‘kind’? God created a number of different types of animals with much capacity for variation within limits.4 The descendants of each of these different kinds, apart from humans, would today mostly be represented by a larger grouping than what is called a species. In most cases, those species descended from a particular original kind would be grouped today within what modern taxonomists (biologists who classify living things) call a genus (plural genera).
One common definition of a species is a group of organisms which can interbreed and produce fertile offspring, and cannot mate with other species. However, most of the so-called species (obviously all the extinct ones) have not been tested to see what they can or cannot mate with. In fact, not only are there known crosses between so-called species, but there are many instances of trans-generic mating, so the ‘kind’ may in some cases be as high as the family. Identifying the ‘kind’ with the genus is also consistent with Scripture, which spoke of kinds in a way that the Israelites could easily recognize without the need for tests of reproductive isolation.
For example, horses, zebras and donkeys are probably descended from an equine (horse-like) kind, since they can interbreed, although the offspring are sterile. Dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals are probably from a canine (dog-like) kind. All different types of domestic cattle (which are clean animals) are descended from the Aurochs, so there were probably at most seven (or fourteen) domestic cattle aboard. The Aurochs itself may have been descended from a cattle kind including bisons and water buffaloes. We know that tigers and lions can produce hybrids called tigons and ligers, so it is likely that they are descended from the same original kind.
Woodmorappe totals about 8000 genera, including extinct genera, thus about 16,000 individual animals which had to be aboard. With extinct genera, there is a tendency among some paleontologists to give each of their new finds a new genus name. But this is arbitrary, so the number of extinct genera is probably highly overstated. Consider the sauropods, which were the largest dinosaurs—the group of huge plant-eaters like Brachiosaurus, Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, etc. There are 87 sauropod genera commonly cited, but only 12 are ‘firmly established’ and another 12 are considered ‘fairly well established’.5
One commonly raised problem is ‘How could you fit all those huge dinosaurs on the Ark?’ First, of the 668 supposed dinosaur genera, only 106 weighed more than ten tons when fully grown. Second, as said above, the number of dinosaur genera is probably greatly exaggerated. But these numbers are granted by Woodmorappe to be generous to skeptics. Third, the Bible does not say that the animals had to be fully grown. The largest animals were probably represented by ‘teenage’ or even younger specimens. The median size of all animals on the ark would actually have been that of a small rat, according to Woodmorappe‘s up-to-date tabulations, while only about 11 % would have been much larger than a sheep.
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:41 (seventeen years ago) link
XTREEM WISEMEN
― latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link
Yeah, that's another fun bit; the deliberate misrepresenting of what folks actually mean when they say "evolution," much like the deliberate misuse of the word "theory" (i.e. instead of "hypothesis"). A lot of it seems like both projection and a cluelessness about how science changes and can disprove itself over time, like all we in the secular world worship upon the altar of Darwin, and we do it in the exact same unquestioning, blindly following way they follow their own leaders.
I think that's why they always call it "Darwinism,"(we only follow the man, who ain't Jesus) and hold up the fact that we've evolved theories that go beyond his as some sorta prove that we're wishy-washy nihilists who don't believe anything strongly(even to refute it).
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link
lol, this is some seriously Star Trek-level biblical retcon!
― latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:46 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eisbär (Eisbär), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:47 (seventeen years ago) link
― kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:49 (seventeen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:50 (seventeen years ago) link
― Allyzay is cool: with Blue n White, with Eli Manning, with NY Giants (Allyzay Ei, Monday, 4 December 2006 19:51 (seventeen years ago) link
xpost im getting quotes from answersingenesis.com & a couple other linked or googled creationist faqs - theres nothing even close to consensus on any of this stuff, it basically amounts to biblical fan fiction
― and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:51 (seventeen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:55 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:55 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:56 (seventeen years ago) link