Would you like some insight into how the mind of a "believer" works when it comes to science? Read below?
-
Recently a fellow posted a question on here in which he challenged us to present him questions that need a biblical response. I asked him about "flood" and how the animals became distributed around the world afterwards. If you would like a few laughs, read on. Please remember, these are his words, not mine! ------------------------------------ Some have contended that the presence of animals on isolated islands like Australia and New Zealand is an indication that not all land animals outside the ark perished in the Deluge. However, the findings of oceanographers indicate that at one time land ridges connected what are now isolated land areas. For example, oceanographic studies indicate that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may have crossed that ocean above the surface. Possibly there were also other ridges, and animals could have migrated by means of these before such ridges sank below the surface of the ocean. Other oceanographic studies have turned up evidence that once there existed a huge South Pacific continent that took in Australia and many of the South Sea isles. If such was the case, then, of course, the animals had no difficulty in migrating to these lands. Also keep in mind that we are not talking about every single animal but "according to their kinds." The “kinds” of animals selected had reference to the clear-cut and unalterable boundaries or limits set by the Creator, within which boundaries creatures are capable of breeding “according to their kinds.” It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family “kinds”—the horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to “kind” established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 “kinds” of mammals, 74 “kinds” of birds, and 10 “kinds” of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 “kinds” of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird “kinds” were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few “kinds” following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankind—short, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skin—all of whom sprang from the one family of Noah. These estimates may seem too restrictive to some, especially since such sources as The Encyclopedia Americana indicate that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals. (1977, Vol. 1, pp. 859-873) However, over 60 percent of these are insects. Breaking these figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside the ark, and only 5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises, which would have also remained outside the ark. Other researchers estimate that there are only about 290 species of land mammals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats. (The Deluge Story in Stone, by B. C. Nelson, 1949, p. 156; The Flood in the Light of the Bible, Geology, and Archaeology, by A. M. Rehwinkel, 1957, p. 69) So, even if estimates are based on these expanded figures, the ark could easily have accommodated a pair of all these animals. Let me know if this has helped.
-
Answer:
Read any creationist site and you'll see similar parodies of science. It's pitiful. They wouldn't know genuine science if it bit them. All they know is that fact-free, apologetic version.
Ozzie Klunk at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source
Other answers
Lol. Religious people will defend their beliefs because if they don't have them, they've got nothing. At least atheists are honest to themselves.
Atheism's Advocate
Don't look to the Bible to give you answers to science questions. It can help you with answers to ethical questions.
Hope is certainty
You post a serious question, he posts a serious response respectfully articulating his beliefs, you copy it and then publicly ridicule him.....what does that say about you as a person?
David
@Nolan It says he is a person who ridicules people for believing in things without supporting evidence. This is as it should be. Grow up and think for yourself.
Related Q & A:
- How do you find a Yahoo group when you know the exact name of the group?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How do I get a read receipt?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How do you delete a 360 page when the yahoo account has already been deleted?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How do i make a signature for when i send an email?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How can I get a text alert when I get an email?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
Just Added Q & A:
- How many active mobile subscribers are there in China?Best solution by Quora
- How to find the right vacation?Best solution by bookit.com
- How To Make Your Own Primer?Best solution by thekrazycouponlady.com
- How do you get the domain & range?Best solution by ChaCha
- How do you open pop up blockers?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.
-
Got an issue and looking for advice?
-
Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.
-
Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.
Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.