Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "Piorokrat" <piorokrat@autograf.pl>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: Global Flood
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:37:42 +0100
Organization: Tadex Niejadex
Lines: 134
Sender: piorokrat@autograf.pl@ro39.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
Message-ID: <botmgc$e07$1@news.onet.pl>
References: <ZYadnXcGfYmyujCiRVn-gQ@comcast.com> <62grb.158$pE3.60@twister.socal.rr.com> <u8qdnegdRbmi3TOiRVn-iw@comcast.com> <t_Hrb.8714$pE3.3974@twister.socal.rr.com> <9fmdncIASo9v-CyiRVn-tw@comcast.com> <borrie$lnq$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl> <s-6dnUgrKcXm5CyiRVn-hg@comcast.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ro39.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
X-Trace: news.onet.pl 1068653900 14343 80.50.101.39 (12 Nov 2003 16:18:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@onet.pl
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Nov 2003 16:18:20 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:413
news:s-6dnUgrKcXm5CyiRVn-hg@comcast.com...
>
> "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote ...
> > Peleg refers in my humble reading of Genesis, looking at the context,
and
> in
> > particular to the positioning of the Babel event narrative in between
the
> > two mentions of his generation, to the diffusion of the population of
> earth
> > at the time of Babel, but I think it is fair to say that there could
have
> > still been significantly accelerated continental drift for a while even
> > after the waters had subsided.
>
> Slightly accelerated?! You're not kidding this kind of "accelerated
> continental drift" would produce worldwide earthquakes and had the seas
> boiling!!
> The continents didn't break apart a few thousand years ago!
How do you know that?
> >Apart from anything else, large earth
> > movements were an integral part of that drainage, and that is what gives
> us
> > the massive 'oligocene' water deposits that we are still drinking today.
> for
> > example there is one 450 metres beneath where I am sitting right now. It
> is
> > a massive underwater lake of good drinking water. During that latest
drift
> > the salts were also released into the seas that had not been salty up
> until
> > that time, and direct intervention was needed to enable certain kinds to
> > begin osmoregulation, which is a feature that could never have evolved,
> > because it is complex, you need to have it only if you are in a certain
> > environment, and if you are in that environment without it, you die.
>
> What you are saying is partly true, some of the salt did come from the
> breaking up of the rocks/mountains but this was a very gradual
process...not
> something that just happened recently [< 4000 years].
So, how did osmoregulation 'evolve', then?
>
> > God also decided what eco-systems were going to be used where, and led
> > certain of the animals in that direction just as he had led them to the
> ark
> > from various places in the first place. If the three toed sloth was not
> > going fast enough for God's liking, either he could have made some
> > generations extremely large, so that we have the giant sloths that were
> > around for a while and then unaccountably vanished, or else he could
have
> > got an angel to carry them there.
>
> You've ignored 90% of the post...there are many more problems than just
the
> sloth. The marsupial mole is not the kind of animal that is going to make
a
> worldwide trek...it burrows in the sand....plenty of that RIGHT WHERE IT
> WAS!! But we only find it in Australia.
All marsupials were placed in Australia, except for the American opossum.
God put them where they are. He wanted Australia to have a different style
to other places.
Otherwise, how do you account for non appearance of marsupials elsewhere?
Why would they only evolve in one place? The possums show they could have
claimed the Americas too, but instead they were the exception that proved
the rule.
>
> My question to you is...does it pain you to think that there is a story in
> the bible that is myth/fable?
Not as much as it pains you to think of established science resting on
myth/fable, evidently.
>
> >I don't discount such a possibility, and I
> > find it easier to believe that some of the big holes in evolutionary
> > thinking, such as hyraxes to elephants, and four footed animals to
> > cetaceans, etc etc. Also, if we are talking about evolving into niches,
> why
> > is it from an evolutionary perspective that all across Eurasia there is
a
> > belt about 100 miles wide where there are no bears; it's too cold fro
the
> > brown bear, but not cold enough for the white bear. Why did nothing
evolve
> > to fill that gap?
> >
> > In fact as we know nature abhors a vacuum, so that in an empty planet
> > migrations of both men and animals happened at a rate much quicker than
> that
> > we could expect today. Business likewise will develop fast if there is
no
> > competition, but once the market in a new area settles it becomes far
> harder
> > to enter. We've seen that in East europe illustrated before our very
eyes
> > over the last twelve years.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Uncle Davey
>
> I don't support macro-evolution either, this is also off topic.
I don't see why it is off topic. It illustrates what I am saying.
> >
> > PS. It is also possible that the first divisions of earth were pre
Babel,
> > but that even though they owned lands further afield the tribes of man
> > preferred congregating there anyway.
> > I'm thinking of writing a novel about a fictional family living at that
> time
> > and learning to cope with the language division, but that's as far as it
> > ever gets, thinking about it.
> >
>
> Not sure what you're saying here.
>
I was going back to the Peleg theme again as an afterthought.
Uncle Davey
|
|