Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Road_Virus · 12-03-2002, 05:47 AM

I've been reading this thread for awhile (lurking I guess you'd call it), and actually have found it very amusing.

Quote:

Noah's story is what first caused me to doubt the validity of the entire Old Testament, and
Undisputable evidence, not shaky facts and ideas based on assumptions that everything back then is the same as it is now.

Every answer you try to provide is based on SHAKY Ideas and assumptions that things were different back then. The majority of arguments provided by non believers are based on solid scientific facts.

The problem with debating a biblical topic with a believer is that they can easily say that "God" made it work.

You might as well be <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> as you would be able to get better results.

Sandslice · 12-03-2002, 06:06 AM

(Frivolous)

<<How about eggs from different species of birds from different families, all kept in incubation. That would save even more space.>>

Eggs are "right out" unless you can prove that one can distinguish between male and female eggs, using "antediluvian" technology.

And WHAT incubation? The same one that would spoil all the food?

<<No, unless the animals were youngsters when they were taken on board. Or they could have fit into all the extra space not taken up by each beetle.>>

Another logistical impossibility; eight people taking care of all the species of young animals? Zookeepers everywhere are BEGGING you to explain how these ancient peoples did it! Better to suppose that Noah took all the animals on the ark, using only POKEBALLS!

Jack the Bodiless · 12-03-2002, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Since when was a lot of work logistically impossible. The story of the Ark is an amazing story of survival.

"Amazing", yes.

Let me tell you what I did last weekend. My sources revealed that Osama Bin Laden had recruited a thousand former Taliban fighters, armed them with Kalashnikovs, and was about to attack Bagram airbase. I swiftly disguised myself and learned Arabic from a Berlitz holiday guide. Then I went among them and "inspected" their weapons, cunningly sabotaging all 1000 of them so that they would not fire (it was a lot of work, but not logistically impossible). When the attack was launched, all their weapons jammed, and they were rounded up and shipped off to Guantanamo Bay. Of course, you won't read about this in the news, it was classified.

Noah's Ark is only a story. It isn't actually TRUE.

Quote:

I assume the chinese historical accounts are not proven to be more accurate than the biblical one. And so both are equally accurate?

No, the Chinese historical accounts are proven to be far MORE accurate than the Biblical one. There was no Great Flood, remember? No scientific evidence contradicts the Chinese accounts, as the fossil record (for instance) contradicts the Bible.

Quote:

As i was saying before, many different genes in different locations are the result of a single phenotype. Especially with humans. Say Noah had thousands of recessive genes all linked elaborately with each other. Through the generations, these would all be expressed individually. Look at what happened to all the species of domestic dog we have today - all came from a common ancestor.

No, all types of domestic dog came from a population of common ancestors, not a single pair. That's the problem. A single pair cannot carry enough genes. It is not possible for Noah to carry more than TWO genes in each position within the genome. His wife could carry another TWO genes in each position. Noah's sons would only carry genes from their parents, so only their wives could carry another TWO genes in each position. So that's TEN genes available for each position. And the gene pool of modern humans (and dogs) includes MANY MORE genes for many positions.

Quote:

Undisputable evidence, not shaky facts and ideas based on assumptions that everything back then is the same as it is now.

Consider the sequence of the fossil record. Grass evolved relatively recently (since the dinosaurs died) and is found only in the upper layers. Is it a "shaky assumption" that grass couldn't run uphill to escape the Flood?

The fossil record is undisputable evidence that Genesis is false. Genetics produces undisputable evidence that Genesis is false. Archeaeology produces undisputable evidence that Genesis is false. Geology produces undisputable evidence that Genesis is false. Astronomy produces undisputable evidence that Genesis is false.

At least, no sane person would dispute every single shred of evidence that does not contradict the primitive myths and superstitions of one tribe of ignorant Bronze Age goat-herders (who, incidentally thought the Earth was flat: are you a flat-Earther also? If not, why not?)

Kosh · 12-03-2002, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandslice:
[QB
Eggs are "right out" unless you can prove that one can distinguish between male and female eggs, using "antediluvian" technology.

And WHAT incubation? The same one that would spoil all the food?[/QB]

Maybe things were different back then. The male eggs were colored blue, and the female were pink. Yeah, that's the ticket. Things were different back then.

Coragyps · 12-03-2002, 08:45 AM

Damn, Jack, I didn't know you were that talented! Being bodiless must help, huh? <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Janaya · 12-03-2002, 09:04 AM

Kosh said...

Quote:

...The male eggs were colored blue, and the female were pink....

And the gay eggs were striped like rainbows.

BornOkTheFirstTime · 12-03-2002, 10:09 AM

Why does everyone find it necessary to talk about whether it would be feasible to load x number of animals on such a vessel which is too large to be seaworthy (the largest wooden boat ever made is less than half that size, and it needed diagonal iron strapping to keep it together) when all you need is to see that if you melted down all the icecaps and condensed all the clouds on the planet, the water level would rise a little more than 200 feet, not quite enough to cover any mountains by far!

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
oh im here im here...

just had a little dilemma to clear up. And now back to this one..

So is my extra space argument holding?

originally posted by me:

They were kept in different areas. The animals must have also been well behaved. But as i said earlier, when animals are under stress they tend to behave uncharacteristically. Being put into an enormous Ark would be quite stressful.

Sojourner553 · 12-04-2002, 03:26 PM

Frivolous:

Obviously you are just playing "cute" games in your book and not even trying to be serious now.

Quote:

: from Frivolous
I assume the chinese historical accounts are not proven to be more accurate than the biblical one. And so both are equally accurate

If we are "assuming", why not make up that they are both equally "inaccurate"?

I notice you picked and chose among the responses--not answering mine for example.

Quote:

Originally posted by BornOkTheFirstTime:
Why does everyone find it necessary to talk about whether it would be feasible to load x number of animals on such a vessel which is too large to be seaworthy (the largest wooden boat ever made is less than half that size, and it needed diagonal iron strapping to keep it together) when all you need is to see that if you melted down all the icecaps and condensed all the clouds on the planet, the water level would rise a little more than 200 feet, not quite enough to cover any mountains by far!

Not to mention that if God had Noah save the animals (ie to save Him work so He wouldn't have to start over from scratch) -- why didn't he just invent a new virus to EFFICIENTLY wipe out only the humans he wanted to kill.

Killing all the other animals is frankly sloppy -- not to mention IMMORAL since they were innocent of doing anything.

It had to be much harder innoculating Noah and his family from ALL the germs on the Ark, than just innoculating Noah from "one" teeny weeny strain that would wipe out all the bad people God didn't like -- like a typhoid or smallpox.

*** Again: This would be MORALLY SUPERIOR as it wouldn't kill off all the INNOCENT LAND ANIMALS***

Indeed, if God caused the flood to save work (from recreating the species again), wouldn't it be really more work to:

**magically transport all the species toJudah/Israel along with their habitat foods; and then magically back to their original habitat after the Flood.

** magically find enough water from another planet, dimension/ heaven, etc and TRANSPORT this to the earth during the flood and then BACK WHERE IT CAME FROM after 40 days.

** magically make the animals have peace with each other so that, say the lions don't eat everyone and thing on board.

**magically have space on board the Ark for all the species needed to populate the earth.

**Give the humans on board amnesia so they forget to record all those nasty Tyrannosaures that perviously tramped and ate people (or at least their livestock) before the flood.

**Change the laws of physics so that rainbows can only appear AFTER the flood.

But, it's really obvious you are not serious anymore-- on this topic, anymore!

Sojourner

[ December 04, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]

thebeave · 12-04-2002, 05:58 PM

Reading about Frivolous trying to defend the ark story as true reminds me of when I was a kid when I wet the bed and then tried to make up a plausible story that it wasn't me that did it. Like, "The cat was playing with me on the bed and then he just all of a sudden peed on the front of my jammies and then peed on my bed and then he ran out the door". Or, "It's not pee, its lemonade that I spilled in bed".

At some point in this debate, we should just let Occam's Razor come into play. The easiest, most simple explanation is (drum roll, please):

THE GREAT FLOOD DID NOT HAPPEN. GET OVER IT.

One last thing. The talk about cubic inch volume per beetle, etc. is pretty lame. In addition to cages, you need human sized walkways so you can access all the million little tiny 1 cm cages. You need food storage lockers, living quarters for Noah and family, etc. The list goes on....

lpetrich · 12-04-2002, 08:38 PM

Frivolous, I challenge you to produce ONE piece of physical evidence that indicates that Noah's Flood had happened.

And I challenge you to explain the biogeography that we see at the present day. Explain why:

All the woodchucks and marmots went to the northern-hemisphere temperate zone and why all the wombats went to Australia.

All the kangaroos and wallabies hopped all the way to Australia and New Guinea, leaving none behind, while all the rabbits hopped to much of the rest of the world.

All the rattlesnakes went to North America, even though other poisonous snakes spread over much of the world.

All the sloths went to South America, with none of these slowpoke animals staying behind to munch leaves in trees near Mt. Ararat.

All the armadillos went to the Americas, leaving none behind.

No cactus seeds were washed from the Americas to the deserts of Africa, Asia, and Australia.

None of the horses, donkeys, or zebras went to the Americas and Australia, where feral horses and donkeys have done fine.

And likewise for camels and Australia.

Oceanic islands have the sort of animals and plants that can naturally get there without outside intervention -- why are the big warm-blooded land animals all birds?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-03-2002, 06:06 AM	#82
Sandslice Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: SE Wisconsin Posts: 80	(Frivolous) <<How about eggs from different species of birds from different families, all kept in incubation. That would save even more space.>> Eggs are "right out" unless you can prove that one can distinguish between male and female eggs, using "antediluvian" technology. And WHAT incubation? The same one that would spoil all the food? <<No, unless the animals were youngsters when they were taken on board. Or they could have fit into all the extra space not taken up by each beetle.>> Another logistical impossibility; eight people taking care of all the species of young animals? Zookeepers everywhere are BEGGING you to explain how these ancient peoples did it! Better to suppose that Noah took all the animals on the ark, using only POKEBALLS!

12-03-2002, 08:45 AM	#85
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	Damn, Jack, I didn't know you were that talented! Being bodiless must help, huh? <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

12-04-2002, 05:58 PM	#89
thebeave Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Silicon Valley, CA Posts: 4,183	Reading about Frivolous trying to defend the ark story as true reminds me of when I was a kid when I wet the bed and then tried to make up a plausible story that it wasn't me that did it. Like, "The cat was playing with me on the bed and then he just all of a sudden peed on the front of my jammies and then peed on my bed and then he ran out the door". Or, "It's not pee, its lemonade that I spilled in bed". At some point in this debate, we should just let Occam's Razor come into play. The easiest, most simple explanation is (drum roll, please): THE GREAT FLOOD DID NOT HAPPEN. GET OVER IT. One last thing. The talk about cubic inch volume per beetle, etc. is pretty lame. In addition to cages, you need human sized walkways so you can access all the million little tiny 1 cm cages. You need food storage lockers, living quarters for Noah and family, etc. The list goes on....

12-04-2002, 08:38 PM	#90
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Frivolous, I challenge you to produce ONE piece of physical evidence that indicates that Noah's Flood had happened. And I challenge you to explain the biogeography that we see at the present day. Explain why: All the woodchucks and marmots went to the northern-hemisphere temperate zone and why all the wombats went to Australia. All the kangaroos and wallabies hopped all the way to Australia and New Guinea, leaving none behind, while all the rabbits hopped to much of the rest of the world. All the rattlesnakes went to North America, even though other poisonous snakes spread over much of the world. All the sloths went to South America, with none of these slowpoke animals staying behind to munch leaves in trees near Mt. Ararat. All the armadillos went to the Americas, leaving none behind. No cactus seeds were washed from the Americas to the deserts of Africa, Asia, and Australia. None of the horses, donkeys, or zebras went to the Americas and Australia, where feral horses and donkeys have done fine. And likewise for camels and Australia. Oceanic islands have the sort of animals and plants that can naturally get there without outside intervention -- why are the big warm-blooded land animals all birds?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.