Noah And His Ark!
Eviscerator
Join Date: 2003-02-24 Member: 13946Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2003-02-24 Member: 13946Members, Constellation
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">How'd he do it?</div> This is a tangent to some existing threads... mainly those surrounding evolution, creationism, accuracy of the bible, et al. Here's my supposition. Creationists believe that the theory of evolution-- in regards to generational mutation that results in larger DNA sequences and thus higher, more complex lifeforms-- is simply not possible. Evolutionists of course argue that all lifeforms are descendants from a common ancestor, possibly the most simple kind of organism or even collection of molecules you could possibly imagine. The Creation story holds that all complex lifeforms were designed from the ground-up by a supreme being. In addition, the bible tells of the story of Noah, and his ark. That is where I shall make my case (for evolution.)
Let's talk logistically about this story about Noah. We all know it... god was upset at man for all his evil ways. He decided a little ethnic cleansing was in order. He didn't want to start over, however... he wanted Noah, his wife, and his sons to start a new family tree. So he tells Noah to build an ark. One capable of holding two copies of every species of animal on this planet. Noah must build this ark, collect food for he and all of the creatures, load them up onto the ark, then wait for the oncoming rain and deep fountains that will completely inundate the planet, to the highest mountain peak. 40 days and 40 nights of rain come, the planet is completely under water, and all of the bad dudes die. Noah sends out a dove to find some land, it comes back with an olive branch, the doors to the ark open, and they all begin to procreate like rabbits. I'm no biblical scholar, but that's what I was told it says in the Christian bible when I was a child. I just read the <a href='http://www.dltk-bible.com/genesis/chapter6-kjv.htm' target='_blank'>actual chapters from an online version</a>, and that pretty much sums it up.
Okay. By rough estimates, there are about 1.5 million documented species on this planet. For argument's sake, let's assume that those that live in water were unaffected by the flood, thus they did not need to go onto the ark. No idea what the breakup of these species are, but let's say that a million of them were aquatic. Considering there are over 300,000 species of beetle alone, the 500,000 figure of air-breathing animals doesn't seem too far off. Since there are two of each... one male, one female... that is one million animals on the ark. Let's also assume that all species we now deem extinct... dinosaurs and all other creatures that have died off... either died off prior to Noah's life or were not deemed worth saving by god. We have nothing but guesses to go on so far as what they ate and how much, so we can't really use them, anyways.
Next, it says that the water came in the 600th year, in the 2nd month, and the 17th day of Noah's life. The Earth was dry again in the 601st year, the 1st month, and the 1st day of Noah's life. Assuming the Earth rotated around the Sun at the same rate in Noah's time as it does today, let's assume that Noah and all the animals were in the ark for roughly 300 days, rounding down from 318.
Next, Noah needs to collect enough food for a million animals for 300 days. He doesn't need to collect the animals, as they will "come unto thee." But he does need to "gather it to thee" all the food for all those animals, along with food for himself and his family. For argument's sake, let's rule out all of the insects. Let's just talk about the really big animals, and their dietary requirements for 300 days on a big-**** boat. The bible doesn't talk about water. Let's assume that the rain was sufficient and ignore it completely.
Elephant: 300 pounds per day. 2 species of elephant, 4 total animals, that's 1200 pounds per day.
Rhinoceros: 40lb, 5 species, 10 * 40 = 400
Giraffe: 75lb, 3 species, 6 * 75 = 450
Tigers: 30lb, 8 species, 16 * 30 = 480
Buffalo: 60lb, 7 species, 14 * 60 = 840
Giant Panda: 25lb, 1, 2 * 25 = 50
Bears: 80lb, 8, 16 * 80 = 1280
I've still got close to 500,000 left to go. But considering those large ones, let's take averages for the rest of the animals. For this I'll use figures from zoos. One zoo says they purchase 180 tons of food every year for their 3600 animals. That comes down to an average of .28 pounds per animal per day. Let's assume these animals were on a diet, and only ate every other day. So 150 days. Ruling out all of the insects, since they can't eat very much, let's only count the bigger animals. Let's say there are 20,000 species of animals capable of eating .28 pounds per day... the kind that would be in a zoo. .28 times 40,000 animals, times 150 days... that's 1.7 million pounds, or 840 tons. Looking at just the really large animals mentioned above, they alone would take 350 tons of it.
Let's also assume that all of the carnivores decided to be vegetarians for the little boat ride. And all of the vegetarians decided to eat exactly the same thing, to make it easy on poor old Noah so he didn't have to gather so many different types of food. Noah had to collect 840 tons of food to bring aboard his boat. Let's assume that Noah lived really close to a farmer, and that all of the food was readily available to him and his three sons, and all their wives. 1.7 million pounds, 8 people to help... that's 210 thousand pounds per person. The bible says that god gave Noah a week... seven days... with which to prepare. 7 days, that's 30 thousand pounds per day. If each of them worked around the clock, non-stop, every second of every day for the entire week, they would have to harvest, transport, and store on average 20 pounds of food every minute. This, of course, does not give them much time to actually build the tremendously huge ark in the same seven days, or to actually sleep.
Next, the logistics of feeding the animals. At least a million of them. Assuming they were all kept in separate cages, and they were not each given their entire allotment of food right off the bat, Noah and his helpers must have made the rounds to visit every animal at least once every two days. A million animals, two days, 8 people. Assuming all 8 humans worked around the clock, every second of every day, they had exactly 6 seconds to get the food, visit the animal, feed it, and move to the next. Hopefully the food was well positioned inside the ark so that they didn't have to run very far. Otherwise they may have gotten very tired with the non-stop feeding. I can only imagine the checklist they must have had to make sure they fed all 500,000 species.
Nothing is mentioned about what happened to all the plants that were on the Earth prior to the flood. So I have to assume that some survived the drowning and lack of sunlight over 150 days. Whoops, sorry... I mean 250,000 species must have survived, since that's how many we have.
Okay, now to the important part. There seems to be a problem with one of two things from a biblical standpoint. Either A) the story of Noah and the great flood is false since it appears to be logistically impossible, or B) the story of Noah is true but Creationism is false in that a large number of those species <b>must</b> have come about <i>after</i> the flood. Perhaps Noah only had a few animals, and a smaller amount of food. There's just no way he could have managed 500,000 species. If that's the case, then there is no explanation for why we have 1.5 million species of animals on this planet. Creationists, take your pick. Either have your cake, or eat it... you cannot have both. Unless you can somehow manage to make sense of both and retain the bible's reputation. My pick is easy... they're both false!
Let's talk logistically about this story about Noah. We all know it... god was upset at man for all his evil ways. He decided a little ethnic cleansing was in order. He didn't want to start over, however... he wanted Noah, his wife, and his sons to start a new family tree. So he tells Noah to build an ark. One capable of holding two copies of every species of animal on this planet. Noah must build this ark, collect food for he and all of the creatures, load them up onto the ark, then wait for the oncoming rain and deep fountains that will completely inundate the planet, to the highest mountain peak. 40 days and 40 nights of rain come, the planet is completely under water, and all of the bad dudes die. Noah sends out a dove to find some land, it comes back with an olive branch, the doors to the ark open, and they all begin to procreate like rabbits. I'm no biblical scholar, but that's what I was told it says in the Christian bible when I was a child. I just read the <a href='http://www.dltk-bible.com/genesis/chapter6-kjv.htm' target='_blank'>actual chapters from an online version</a>, and that pretty much sums it up.
Okay. By rough estimates, there are about 1.5 million documented species on this planet. For argument's sake, let's assume that those that live in water were unaffected by the flood, thus they did not need to go onto the ark. No idea what the breakup of these species are, but let's say that a million of them were aquatic. Considering there are over 300,000 species of beetle alone, the 500,000 figure of air-breathing animals doesn't seem too far off. Since there are two of each... one male, one female... that is one million animals on the ark. Let's also assume that all species we now deem extinct... dinosaurs and all other creatures that have died off... either died off prior to Noah's life or were not deemed worth saving by god. We have nothing but guesses to go on so far as what they ate and how much, so we can't really use them, anyways.
Next, it says that the water came in the 600th year, in the 2nd month, and the 17th day of Noah's life. The Earth was dry again in the 601st year, the 1st month, and the 1st day of Noah's life. Assuming the Earth rotated around the Sun at the same rate in Noah's time as it does today, let's assume that Noah and all the animals were in the ark for roughly 300 days, rounding down from 318.
Next, Noah needs to collect enough food for a million animals for 300 days. He doesn't need to collect the animals, as they will "come unto thee." But he does need to "gather it to thee" all the food for all those animals, along with food for himself and his family. For argument's sake, let's rule out all of the insects. Let's just talk about the really big animals, and their dietary requirements for 300 days on a big-**** boat. The bible doesn't talk about water. Let's assume that the rain was sufficient and ignore it completely.
Elephant: 300 pounds per day. 2 species of elephant, 4 total animals, that's 1200 pounds per day.
Rhinoceros: 40lb, 5 species, 10 * 40 = 400
Giraffe: 75lb, 3 species, 6 * 75 = 450
Tigers: 30lb, 8 species, 16 * 30 = 480
Buffalo: 60lb, 7 species, 14 * 60 = 840
Giant Panda: 25lb, 1, 2 * 25 = 50
Bears: 80lb, 8, 16 * 80 = 1280
I've still got close to 500,000 left to go. But considering those large ones, let's take averages for the rest of the animals. For this I'll use figures from zoos. One zoo says they purchase 180 tons of food every year for their 3600 animals. That comes down to an average of .28 pounds per animal per day. Let's assume these animals were on a diet, and only ate every other day. So 150 days. Ruling out all of the insects, since they can't eat very much, let's only count the bigger animals. Let's say there are 20,000 species of animals capable of eating .28 pounds per day... the kind that would be in a zoo. .28 times 40,000 animals, times 150 days... that's 1.7 million pounds, or 840 tons. Looking at just the really large animals mentioned above, they alone would take 350 tons of it.
Let's also assume that all of the carnivores decided to be vegetarians for the little boat ride. And all of the vegetarians decided to eat exactly the same thing, to make it easy on poor old Noah so he didn't have to gather so many different types of food. Noah had to collect 840 tons of food to bring aboard his boat. Let's assume that Noah lived really close to a farmer, and that all of the food was readily available to him and his three sons, and all their wives. 1.7 million pounds, 8 people to help... that's 210 thousand pounds per person. The bible says that god gave Noah a week... seven days... with which to prepare. 7 days, that's 30 thousand pounds per day. If each of them worked around the clock, non-stop, every second of every day for the entire week, they would have to harvest, transport, and store on average 20 pounds of food every minute. This, of course, does not give them much time to actually build the tremendously huge ark in the same seven days, or to actually sleep.
Next, the logistics of feeding the animals. At least a million of them. Assuming they were all kept in separate cages, and they were not each given their entire allotment of food right off the bat, Noah and his helpers must have made the rounds to visit every animal at least once every two days. A million animals, two days, 8 people. Assuming all 8 humans worked around the clock, every second of every day, they had exactly 6 seconds to get the food, visit the animal, feed it, and move to the next. Hopefully the food was well positioned inside the ark so that they didn't have to run very far. Otherwise they may have gotten very tired with the non-stop feeding. I can only imagine the checklist they must have had to make sure they fed all 500,000 species.
Nothing is mentioned about what happened to all the plants that were on the Earth prior to the flood. So I have to assume that some survived the drowning and lack of sunlight over 150 days. Whoops, sorry... I mean 250,000 species must have survived, since that's how many we have.
Okay, now to the important part. There seems to be a problem with one of two things from a biblical standpoint. Either A) the story of Noah and the great flood is false since it appears to be logistically impossible, or B) the story of Noah is true but Creationism is false in that a large number of those species <b>must</b> have come about <i>after</i> the flood. Perhaps Noah only had a few animals, and a smaller amount of food. There's just no way he could have managed 500,000 species. If that's the case, then there is no explanation for why we have 1.5 million species of animals on this planet. Creationists, take your pick. Either have your cake, or eat it... you cannot have both. Unless you can somehow manage to make sense of both and retain the bible's reputation. My pick is easy... they're both false!
Comments
now, and the sensitivity of coral reefs to things like changing environmental conditions is well documented).
At the rate of growth of a coral reef, and it's sensitivity, getting the likes of the great barrier reef back would take more time than the creationists claim between now and the flood.
Simply put, Noahs ark is impossible (from a biblical stand point), but then again if you consider it as a story, I am of the firm belief that it was tied to a local flood that happened at the time. One farmer built a small boat, saved his family, his goats and maybe a chicken or two. How that turned into a world flood with every animal on earth is really bizzaire though.
Note: Lets confine discussion to Noahs ark here btw, and not make this a general evolution thread (there is another one already).
Also.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The whole earth was covered with the Flood waters, and the world that then existed was destroyed by the very waters out of which the earth had originally emerged at God's command (Genesis 1:9; 2 Peter 3:5,6). But where did those waters go after the flood?
There are a number of Scripture passages that identify the flood waters with the present-day seas (Amos 9:6 and Job 38:8-11 note "waves"). If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah's day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9)[1]. They are the same waters!
Isaiah gives this same statement that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth (Isaiah 54:9). Clearly, what the Bible is telling us is that God acted to alter the earth's topography. New continental landmasses bearing new mountain chains of folded rock strata were uplifted from below the globe-encircling waters that had eroded and leveled the pre-Flood topography, while large deep ocean basin were formed to receive and accommodate the Flood waters that then drained off the emerging continents.
That is why the oceans are so deep, and why there are folded mountain ranges. Indeed, if the entire earth's surface were levelled by smoothing out the topography of not only the land surface but also the rock surface on the ocean floor, the waters of the ocean would cover the earth's surface to a depth of 1.7 miles (2.7 kilometers). We need to remember that nearly 70 percent of the earth's surface is still covered by water. Quite clearly, then, the waters of Noah's Flood are in today's ocean basins.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This almost might be more logical then to suggesting that the landmasses have moved over billions of years, saying that most of the water we have today is still left over from the flood. This explains how animals / people migrated so easily all over the Earth.
<a href='http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-floodwater.html' target='_blank'>More.</a>
Honestly though, not from a religious standpoint, I think the explanation of the oceans, and the landmasses and migration of people makes alot of sense. Also, I really think it makes alot of sense of alot of the "wonders" of the world, such as the Grand Canyon being testament to the catastrophy of the flood.
And not getting into Evolution, but this also explains some of the fossil record, Cambrian explosion perhaps, with a sudden explosion of fossils (death of creatures from the flood), and then the pressure from the waters and such.
Remember, to a person in the ancient world, a flood covering an area of 1000 square miles = the world is flooded.
On the time frame, if it is to be believed, the flood happened about 6000 years ago or more. Plenty of time for the great barrier reef to form. But the question is, where did all that water come from and where did it go? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Hold on, if those didn't exist before the flood, where did the animals that HAVE to live in these deep sea crevices, that are found <i>nowhere else on earth</i> come from?
Without natural selection/evolution acting now you cannot possibly have any animals that can live in those deep sea crevices, so this theory is basically wrong by defacto.
Incidently, what happens to the coral reefs still?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->then to suggesting that the landmasses have moved over billions of years<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really, we know they are moving and continue to do so. Unless you can trump the entire field of tectonic studies (and geology) I wouldn't really say it's improbable.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->, saying that most of the water we have today is still left over from the flood. This explains how animals / people migrated so easily all over the Earth.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
O_o eh.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Honestly though, not from a religious standpoint, I think the explanation of the oceans, and the landmasses and migration of people makes alot of sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You know, except you ignore the fact that unique animals live in those areas (and if they only exist after the flood where do they come from?) and have utterly ignored what happens to things like the coral reefs.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, I really think it makes alot of sense of alot of the "wonders" of the world, such as the Grand Canyon being testament to the catastrophy of the flood.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really, that's something called 'plate tectonics'. You know, the same thing we KNOW is making the Himalayas for example.
Honestly, from an intellectual standpoint, I'd be thrilled if we ever got the technology to reach the bottoms depths of the ocean and somehow excavate and look underneath the depths of the oceans.
Aegri, saying that the fossils were all over the Earth, not just a specified area. And that the deep-sea crevices and such were byproducts of a catastrophe, that instead of erosion over millions and millions of years, that alot of the things around us are from giant worldwide disasters, which is possible.
And I didn't say plates couldn't move. Although It's questionable of entire landmasses moving from one centralized position to where they are today. I also don't understand where you getting off saying a phenomon named by man trumps religion ? Especially assuming that it's something (Please think theoretically) created, we simply named it, we didn't create plate tectonics, even though we study it.
Oh, and Aegri, don't be a jerk, because you are being one. <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->and have utterly ignored what happens to things like the coral reefs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>I was still typing, I never saw your post, I was still typing ! I was just reading something and I took a bit longer to reply, I only saw the original post !</b>
Not really, it takes thousands of years for a barrier to form that far and wide (You should look up just how damn big the great barrier reef is, it deserves the 'great' in its name).
In addition, it's hard to form another reef when it's entirely dead.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And not getting into Evolution, but this also explains some of the fossil record, Cambrian explosion perhaps, with a sudden explosion of fossils (death of creatures from the flood), and then the pressure from the waters and such<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except, the Dinosaurs don't match this, 2nd the Cambrian explosion is <i>different</i> from the extinction event.
Incidently, you mention pressure here funnily enough. Care to explain why we don't have dead dolphins, sharks and other fish there too? The rapid change in pressure would of killed masses of creatures in the ocean? Why are they not present?
Incidently, why aren't there any 'weird' creatures like trilobytes still around? Why did the flood wipe them off the face of the earth, but not Xiphosurids? Why are other odd animals like Amiskawa not alive?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Aegri, saying that the fossils were all over the Earth, not just a specified area.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which shows your not familiar with your material, we get most of the cambrian explosion fossils from one place the Burgess Shale. In this area we had a semi freak accident that seems to have buried a lot of animals in one place.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And that the deep-sea crevices and such were byproducts of a catastrophe,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, that is by God according to you.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->that instead of erosion over millions and millions of years, that alot of the things around us are from giant worldwide disasters, which is possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Lets see, no. I'd love to know how in 150 days a massive trench forms though!
I also love how you keep dodging the coral reef!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And I didn't say plates couldn't move.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course not, because it's a fact they move.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Although It's questionable of entire landmasses moving from one centralized position to where they are today.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really, if you have sufficient time and the plates move (and you understand this to be true) then it's perfectly reasonable.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I also don't understand where you getting off saying a phenomon named by man trumps religion ?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because it is a fact, while you continually dodge my arguments about things like extinction and the like.
I find it odd you have yet to answer where the deep sea life comes from O_o
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Especially assuming that it's something (Please think theoretically) created, we simply named it, we didn't create plate tectonics, even though we study it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm saying that you're basically wrong, then using the supporting evidence from plate tectonic studies (which you yourself have agreed are true).
As I said, you explain the grand canyon being a miracle, but I bring up the (more valid, due to the fact we've observed it) fact that tectonics are capable of easily creating things like that such as the Himalayas and indeed the Grand Canyon.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I was still typing, I never saw your post, I was still typing ! I was just reading something and I took a bit longer to reply, I only saw the original post ! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was my first post btw O_o You responded to my plate tectonics, yet not the first argument I made mere moments after the initial post.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I like that. It says "It has been said that in nearly all groups of animals there is at least an indication of a latent ability to hibernate or aestivate. Perhaps these abilities were supernaturally intensified during this period. With their bodily functions reduced to a minimum, the burden of their care would have been greatly lightened." They're just inventing stuff to make it seem feasible. There is nothing in the bible that states god "supernaturally intensified" the animals' innate abilities to hibernate. These are just bold hypotheses from desparate believers with absolutely no bearing on reality.
Conveniently, nothing is said about how Noah managed to build the "the largest sea-going vessel ever built until the late nineteenth century" in only seven days. Considering he had to chop down a tremendous number of trees to build an ark 450 feet long, can you imagine how long it took him to do so? Meanwhile collecting all the food? It's amazing to consider that no <b>wooden</b> vessel has ever been built (since) that measures anywhere close to 450 feet... longer than a football field. Three levels. Can you imagine the sheer weight of the wood required to build it? The supports required? Thanks for that link, it seems even more improbable now.
Here's one I found: <a href='http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~cmf/evolution/claim4.html' target='_blank'>Noah's Ark</a>
In regards to the Great Flood stories omnipresent in other religions, I do believe there really was a flood of tremendous magnitude. A local one, however, and not a global one that reached above the highest mountain peak. It happened in the Black Sea, after the end of the last ice age. Lots of the ice melted, the oceans rose, and the area near Istanbul collapsed under the sheer pressure, flooding the entire Black Sea area. Where do you think Mt Ararat is? Lots of people lived there at the time, and this onslaught of water... although quick, it was not catastrophic... forced people to vacate their homeland. They passed the story on to their children, and their grandchildren, and so on... all before the religions we recognize today were even invented.
<a href='http://www.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/09/13/great.flood.finds.ap/' target='_blank'>Undersea explorer finds new evidence of great flood</a>
There was a great flood, and that is what is related in the Christian bible and other religion texts. Unfortunately, people added their interpretations to it and added their god to the story, much like all accounts of pre-history. And so it is with Noah's Ark. You've got such a compelling story, you might as well tell people how poweful god can be if you do bad things. Association? God = powerful, don't **** him off = behave yourself = no floods.
In addition, it's hard to form another reef when it's entirely dead.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In relation to ? How many thousands ? Did we witness and record the beginning of it ? What was it's starting point ? Is it all based on that it may remain a constant growth ? Or does it slow down after a certain point ? Was there something that may have slowed is creation ?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Except, the Dinosaurs don't match this, 2nd the Cambrian explosion is different from the extinction event.
Incidently, you mention pressure here funnily enough. Care to explain why we don't have dead dolphins, sharks and other fish there too? The rapid change in pressure would of killed masses of creatures in the ocean? Why are they not present?
Incidently, why aren't there any 'weird' creatures like trilobytes still around? Why did the flood wipe them off the face of the earth, but not Xiphosurids? Why are other odd animals like Amiskawa not alive? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
- Dinosaurs still could have existed. Never said they were wiped out, but it could explain the immense amounts of complex creatures and such that suddenly appear.
- It happened over a period of time, it didn't just happen in a second, I would assume that sea life responded to the growing waters, they need oxygen, I wouldn't assume they would remain far away from the top of the ocean. We also don't know how large the ocean was, so we can't assume for how many there are today.
- Who knows what went extinct before the flood. I also haven't studied the time periods of the fossil record, so I couldn't explain the order in which they died/ went extinct.
And Aegri, I simply cannot really discuss for you, everything is black and white for you, I've got this feeling that you couldn't step out of your mindset to think about something theoretically, theoretically ! , I don't expect you to believe it, but for the sake of debate and the forum of ideas you assume that there was a catastrophe, then you can debate whether or not certain things could be the byproduct, honestly, you just like stirring things up.
And me responding to you Aegri, I used edit.
Aegri, is this a case of that it's not possible, or that you don't want to think about if the flood did happen, if these things could have happened ? You keep saying there could be alternative ways, but that doesn't mean it couldn't / didn't happen.
Coral reefs are amazingly slow growers, there is a wealth of documentation on how coral reefs grow and their ecology. Understandably there is a lot of interest in this.
It has been (sadly) shown that the coral reefs we have today are dying at an amazing rate, and have already suffered in some cases crippling blows they will not recover from in our lifetime.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->it all based on that it may remain a constant growth ? Or does it slow down after a certain point ? Was there something that may have slowed is creation ?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Coral growth is fairly slow from beginning to end by varies by coral.
A coral <i>reef</i> which is an <i>entire ecology</i> is something else entirely and what you're missing.
If you wipe out a coral reef you render the entire ecology extinct, it is really that sad <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->- Dinosaurs still could have existed.? Never said they were wiped out,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So they aren't wiped out O_o
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->but it could explain the immense amounts of complex creatures and such that suddenly appear.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well...no not really. I fail to see how this explains that at all well.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->- It happened over a period of time, it didn't just happen in a second, <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It happened in a very fast period of time even compared to pollution. In fact lets think about this for a moment. Coral reefs are going extinct TODAY fact because we've polluted the waters over a long time (YEARS), yet you are claiming they would be able to adapt in DAYS to a massive change in pressure/sunlight levels and oxygen/hydrogen sulfide content?
<i>Get real</i>.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->they need oxygen, I wouldn't assume they would remain far away from the top of the ocean. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
HAHAHAHHAHAA <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> Classic. You don't know a lot about sea ecology do you?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->- Who knows what went extinct before the flood.? I also haven't studied the time periods of the fossil record, so I couldn't explain the order in which they died/ went extinct.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You should possibly have a look <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And Aegri, I simply cannot really discuss for you, everything is black and white for you, I've got this feeling that you couldn't step out of your mindset to think about something theoretically<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ohhhhhh that was nice and low I feel.
Do you always resort to calling the other side narrow minded sirus?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> theoretically !<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But I'm giving evidence against what you are saying. You haven't explained key issues that make your 'theoretical' parts utterly improbable or massive leaps of logic that are impossible.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->, I don't expect you to believe it, but for the sake of debate and the forum of ideas you assume that there was a catastrophe,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The initial premise of the debate is that noahs ark is fundamentally impossible based on these reasons.
I've already in several cases assumed this is so, but every time you ignore me anyway (like where deep sea creatures specifically adapted to the dark, highly pressurised environment came from). Also you have not explained how these rifts 'suddently' appear other than 'God did it' which is an impossble premise given the debate topic.
Before you start throwing that sort of accusation around, it would be better if you learnt what the premises of the debate were first.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's another good one. "sea life responded to the growing waters, they need oxygen, I wouldn't assume they would remain far away from the top of the ocean." That is almost too funny to respond to. You do know that only aquatic mammals breathe oxygen, right? Fish have these wonderful things called gills.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wait, Aegeri... maybe the sea life had abilities that were "supernaturally intensified" to allow them to adapt really really quickly! OH YEAH!
I think he meant about the dissolved oxygen content in the water, which does change the further down you get.
His statement is still utterly ridiculous, because marine life doesn't just randomly congregate at the top of the water. Little sea life actually lives in the pellagic (open water) part of the sea and is actually benthic (Hickman, Animal Diversity). That means they live on the floor of the ocean.
How many species of crabs, starfish, sea cucumbers and many other animals survived the flood (as well, they don't really swim very well) is beyond sane logic.
Ah, let's hope <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I don't know about the Coral Reef, those were legitimate questions just for my knowledge, they weren't meant to strike at you.
Dinosaurs aren't reliant on each other, if one dies they don't all die do they ? Certain species could still live while others were dead correct ?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well...no not really. I fail to see how this explains that at all well.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well lets see, say if theres 500 dinosaurs, and a few die every year and some are born, and you remain around 500, that leaves that only a couple will make it into the fossil record, now 498 of them die all within 3 days, and have an enormous amount of pressure exerted on their remains which helps fossilize them.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It happened in a very fast period of time even compared to pollution. In fact lets think about this for a moment. Coral reefs are going extinct TODAY fact because we've polluted the waters over a long time (YEARS), yet you are claiming they would be able to adapt in DAYS to a massive change in pressure/sunlight levels and oxygen/hydrogen sulfide content?
Get real.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was talking about the flood in relevance to sea creatures, it didn't happen fast enough for dolphins to die because of the immediate change in the pressure.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->HAHAHAHHAHAA Classic. You don't know a lot about sea ecology do you?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You were talking about sea mammals, dolphins wouldn't immeaditely die because of what reason ? I assumed that you were thinking that it flooded quickly enough to harm sea mammals, I was insinuating that they would remain at the same point regardless of depth, that they would adapt to the situation and stay where it was possible from themselves to exist.'
Aegri, you seem much more interested in trying to prove people wrong then you do about the exchange of ideas and sharing of information.
I can't explain everything because I simply don't believe that things were the same as they are now. Nothing stays the same, this is proven on a meta-physical realm, and to believe that everything in the world remains persistent can be refuted on multiple levels.
Sorry for the double post.
Coral are primary producers, when they die out so does everything else. The same thing occurs on land, when you elimate species from an ecosystem it begins to break down.
Fossilisation is very difficult, requiring more than pressure and a lot of luck.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I was talking about the flood in relevance to sea creatures, it didn't happen fast enough for dolphins to die because of the immediate change in the pressure. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you change my arguments to suit yourself?
I've never once mentioned dolphins, not in any of my posts (on this topic). I'm very interested in corals, and you continue to ignore that.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You were talking about sea mammals, dolphins wouldn't immeaditely die because of what reason ? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where the heck have I been talking about sea mammals? I've had a thing for corals **** >_<
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> was insinuating that they would remain at the same point regardless of depth, that they would adapt to the situation and stay where it was possible from themselves to exist.'<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And with everything else they eat dead what are they going to do?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Aegri, you seem much more interested in trying to prove people wrong then you do about the exchange of ideas and sharing of information. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are making up my arguments!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Damn Aegri, you use an example of sea mammals as in Dolphins and Whales, <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
WHERE THE HELL DID I?
I've mentioned them once where I asked why they don't turn up in the pre cambian fossils at the burgess shale (which was caused by a deep sea land slide btw).
I have gone on and on about corals, either answer what I've been using or don't bother.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I was relating to the fact that animals will react to survive, if they are unsuitable for a certain depth, or a change in oxygen they would probably find a place that better suits their needs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But how can they if they live on the bottom of the ocean?
Incidently, just to correct you out of sheer annoyance, sea cucumbers aren't crustaceans, they are Enchinoderms (related to starfish);
edit. Neverrrrmind.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Incidently, you mention pressure here funnily enough. Care to explain why we don't have dead dolphins, sharks and other fish there too? The rapid change in pressure would of killed masses of creatures in the ocean? Why are they not present?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just to clarify, I'm emphasizing that the creatures reliance on oxygen would most likely keep them in a range near the top to suit their need for oxygen.
Where does it say in the bible it took 120 years?
Genesis 6:22 Noah did everything just as God commanded him.
7:1 The LORD then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation.
2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate,
3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
Thus, he got the instructions from God to create the ark, then after he had completed the project, God warned him that he would have 7 days to put all the animals into the ark, as they came to him.
Assumption that construction took 120 years explained. Since Noah lived for a good length of time, and could have hired work, and had all the time in the world, day and night to work on the ark, I think that 120 years is a fair period of time.
And how did he live for 120 years presumably to construct this O_o
that's a lot of water.
Question: Where did it come from, and where did it go?
Rain is evaporated water. Or if you look at it, the total amount of water on this planet remains constant (because conservation of mass, and energy... and the like).
It's impossible for water to have rained enough to have gone that deep. I mean, it's just impossible. If this REALLY happened, every time it rained we'd be drowned, simply because the clouds would be holding such a great amount of water.
As for the amount of water staying constant, and thus forming the oceans today...
...
impossible. In order for land to rise above water where it previously had been 100% submerged, the land would actually need to expand. In fact, the land would need to expand exactly the height of the highest mountain. Land... can't expand like that. It just doesn't happen. Conservation of mass and energy again here, folks.
Evis: Its impossible.
Sirus: Actually, its possible because of x,y,z
Evis: Its impossible, how do you explain a,b,c.
Sirus: Hmm, good point. But also, if you...
Evis: Its impossible.
Sirus: No, if you look at my arguments...
Evis: Its impossible.
Sirus: ... Are you even reading my posts?
Evis: Its impossible.
Sirus: ... Wubby Flufflemuffs...
Evis: Its impossible.
Sirus: ...
Aeg: I like pie. Oh, and you're wrong. Sensical Argument.
Aeg: Guys? Guys, I'm posting too.
Aeg: :'-(
Alright, perhaps thats a bit simplified, but thats the flow of this topic so far. :-P
Anywho, I like Catholicism. I can more or less beleive what I want and its cool with that. I personally think its a historic event exaggerated in mythic proportions. Theres evidence of a massive flood in the ancient world (see: Epic of Gilgamesh). I'm guessing that it caused particular devestation in the Hebrew world, and one guy build a boat and saved some animals, and the story grew more bombastic in oral tradition. The story still holds a moral and spiritual truth though (God loved the world such that he promised not to blow it all to hell on a whim again.)
EDIT
There ya go Aeg. :-)
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->For a long time Brown was an evolutionist, but after years of study he became convinced the validity of the Creation thesis and of the concept of a global Flood. The Hydroplate theory asserts that before the Flood, approximately 50% of the water in present oceans was contained in underground reservoirs, a huge underground body of water. One huge supercontinent would have covered the surface of the Earth, including some small mountains and small oceans. The Hydroplate theory derives for the most part from a little known verse in Genesis (Gen 7:11). The Bible gives two sources for waters of the Flood. "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." (Gen 7:11). The Hydroplate theory therefore puts the fountains of the great deep 16 km below the Earth's surface. Though this theory postulates pre-Flood conditions that differ quite significantly from those currently prevailing, such conditions are actually just what is required to provide a plausible explanation for a world-wide Flood. For example, if one postulates a pre-Flood world where conditions were to a great extent the same as present, then even a melt-down of all the Earths polar ice-caps would not provide enough water to cover the entire surface of the Earth. Many high plateau areas and mountain ranges would still be above water.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually I've answered all of the arguments put forward and mostly with (unanswered) arguments of my own, I think you've got a little mixed up there <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Incidently, I can't dispute the fact I have a strange allure to pies though.
Hmmmmmmmm pie.
Ahhh finally, something actually sensical in support of noahs ark.
While that theory is rather nice (and in fact, could even be distinctly *audience gasps* plausible) it does have a few flaws. The first is that it doesn't have a lot of actual hard geological evidence for it. Seismic imaging (which can go to a fair depth below the earths crust) has not really revealed any extremely large caves or lakes of water that would be sufficient to cover the earth. It also doesn't really explain how that water got there (typically these underground lakes form under specialised conditions) or presents any solid evidence that these exist or not (I've actually seen this before BTW, other than your quote).
However, unlike insane ideas like there being a massive water firmament in the sky, this could still have some plausibility. It could be that these large lakes were contained deep beneath the current oceans (trying to use seismic graphing units under the ocean is a little hard), and possibly the giant ocean rifts are the sites of these.
However that is still a little hard to swallow considering the tectonic plates movements (that we know of) and how the interact in the ocean. The fact the earths crust isn't actually that thick (comparatively!) to where you start finding magma and the like leaving little room for a lot of water. In addition to this, it doesn't explain what occupies that volume of space afterwards, all well and good to say there is water under the crust that rose up, but what stops it from just going back and not doing anything? Not a hell of a lot that we can be 100% certain of.
However, it is at least somewhat plausible an idea, I give it that.
[But it doesn't solve classic flood problems like pressure increases, coral reef extinctions etc]
Oh, and coral reefs produce larvae, which can make new reefs.
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say about the pressure increases though, please clarify.
edited for clarity
True, I haven't said they couldn't. Evidence for their existence is the problem however, because, there isn't much.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Who's to say that the high-pressure critters couldn't have been living in the caverns? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Probably because they would of been killed by the emptying of them.
Again, if these don't empty, then how does the water level ever increase? Are you insinutating that these organisms would survive being blown into orbit?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The hydrogen sulfide from volcanic vents makes a good base of a food chain. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is assuming you have bacteria that can actually use the H2S and fix Carbon with it to make complex cabohydrates. Animals don't do this incidently, it is a bacterial process.
Also, you would have a horrific deficiency in oxygen which sea worms (what you are talking about) actually need to live. Also they require heavy metals and a few other things to live happily.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If these caverns did exist (and I say did because they aren't there now), then when they cracked, they would have been under such high pressure that the rock over it would have been blown far into near orbit, allowing for the thin crust you speak of.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That I do not accept. No multicellular creature could live in the kind of pressure you just described at all. Also how this forms is very dubious. Why is this water under such intense pressure and how did it actually get that pressurised?
Blown into orbit O_o now this is sounding utterly nutty.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh, and coral reefs produce larvae, which can make new reefs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
O_o that is a REALLY poor argument. Firstly, the larvae they produce are done so at different times of the year in responce to certain enviromental conditions. These larvae would be destroyed (in fact they wouldn't even recombine) because of the intense pressure they would be subjected to when they are released. In addition to this with no place to settle and grow for almost 150 days they would essentially be completely stuffed.
Finally, regenerating the ENTIRE reef in 4000 years is frankly impossible for them at their measured growth rates. In addition to this, we've had the extinction of a lot of other animals at the time. To compound problems, corals don't carry algae, algae infect the coral. So when they do settle, with no light they will get no algae and will hence die. Remember that the land is entirely covered in water, so there would be few, if in fact any places where there will be enough light for the larvae to rest (cell division is trigged by light incidently) as such they will die.
And they aren't very hardy their larvae either. So we still have a mass extinction that so far remains completely unexplained (because we do in fact have coral).
Incidently, Dinosaurs and many birds produce eggs, it doesn't save them from going extinct when their environment is destroyed.
And it breaks down to the fact that if God doesn't exist, then the topic is moot, and if he does exist, the topic is moot.
But Aegeri, you present a good case for your side, however much I disagree sometimes, or disagree with what they lead to, you definetly are very versed.
Being that I hardly know anything about science, I'll let Decimator take over. I honestly can't produce a very clarified or definitive case for my side since I honestly am not learned in much of modern science. Anyways !
Thanks for being a good sport Aegeri, now I'm off to go talk politics <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->