Evidence for God from Science

Don't know.

Pangea

Jbuza wrote:Don't know.

Pangea

Pangea is based off of fossil finds which do not include mammals.
Also if the flood caused the continents to split then how did the animals return to the very locations from whcih they came?

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

Jbuza wrote:Don't know.

Pangea

Pangea is based off of fossil finds which do not include mammals.
Also if the flood caused the continents to split then how did the animals return to the very locations from whcih they came?

I did a little checking and I am suspicous of your claim that their are NO Horse, elephant, or carnivore fossils in south America.

Pangea is based off the observation that the continents seem to resemble a sort of puzzle in which the peaces would fit toether to form one land mass. The Bible indicates that the lands were divided after the flood.

Where does it say the lands were divided? I'd like to read up on that, that may provide some really good explanations.

Jbuza wrote:Really can you name say 500 dinos, or say 250?

If you're asking if I personally can recite long lists of dinosaur names off the top of my head, then of course not. I'm no paleontology buff, but that doesn't mean the species never existed. Check out "Dinosaur species list" as a web search to lead you to any number of sites that provide journal citations describing the hundreds of species listed.

Ever hear of dormancy and germination?

What does germination have to do with animals on the ark? As far as dormancy is concerned, it is usually a response to temporal cues, such as temperature changes, decreasing day length, and other factors associated with oncoming stressful situations such as winter that occur cyclically. To propose that Noah "made" all the animals on the ark go into a state of dormancy would simply be another "what if" miracle that has no support from any observed event.

Also name 500 or 250 aquatic dinos.

See above

Some have proposed and there is some evidence of vestigial hibernation abilities in many animals.

Any evidence in taxa other than those who already have hibernating species currently...any evidence in elephants, kangaroos, lemurs, etc., other taxa from tropical climates that typically don't experience winter stress? What are your sources for this statement?

edit. Are you asking me to argue against some extinctions? What has the extinction of some dinosaurs got to do wiht it?

The extinction of ALL dinosaurs, terrestrial and aquatic, suggests this group was not "saved" by being placed on the ark, so I'm wondering what the interpretation of this fact is according to Christianity. Why did the dinosaurs become extinct?

Brigham wrote:Where does it say the lands were divided? I'd like to read up on that, that may provide some really good explanations.

10:25 Two sons were born to Eber: One was named Peleg because in his days the earth was divided,83 and his brother's name was Joktan.


This is it. Some people interpret this in different ways. For instance some say he dug irrigation ditches, Some say this refers to seperation of languages.

thx!

Jbuza wrote:

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:Pangea is based off of fossil finds which do not include mammals.
Also if the flood caused the continents to split then how did the animals return to the very locations from whcih they came?

I did a little checking and I am suspicous of your claim that their are NO Horse, elephant, or carnivore fossils in south America.

Do, read the entire post. I explicitly stated older layers.

Jbuza wrote: Pangea is based off the observation that the continents seem to resemble a sort of puzzle in which the peaces would fit toether to form one land mass. The Bible indicates that the lands were divided after the flood.

Seeing they fit together as a puzzle is not enough to reach such a conclusion.
http://www.moorlandschool.co.uk/earth/pangea.htm
http://geowords.com/histbooknetscape/i05.htm
http://kids.earth.nasa.gov/archive/pang ... dence.html

thereal wrote
If you're asking if I personally can recite long lists of dinosaur names off the top of my head, then of course not. I'm no paleontology buff, but that doesn't mean the species never existed. Check out "Dinosaur species list" as a web search to lead you to any number of sites that provide journal citations describing the hundreds of species listed.

Me either. I have seen there are about 750 dinosaur names in total, including duplicates like Brontosaurus which is actually the earlier discovered Apatosaurus and this number includes hoaxes. I simply do not believe that the dinsosaurs are as prevalant as the imagination of paleontologists would have us believe. That is why I posted some information about most dinos being based off a single tooth or single bone. I didn't believe your claim about thousands to millions of dinosaurs, and I don't believe that an entire animal existed because of a claims based on a single tooth or bone. I'm not sure what it is, but it certainly isn't science to draw or replicate an entire dinosaur based on one bone or tooth. In fact I would say it is foolishness skipping hand in hand with Darwinism.
---------------------
thereal wrote
What does germination have to do with animals on the ark? As far as dormancy is concerned, it is usually a response to temporal cues, such as temperature changes, decreasing day length, and other factors associated with oncoming stressful situations such as winter that occur cyclically.

This was in response to this, “And how were terrestrial bacteria, viruses, etc. maintained on the ark”. Sorry I should have been more clear on that. I don't believe they would have had to been on the ark to survive.
----------------------
thereal wrote
Any evidence in taxa other than those who already have hibernating species currently...any evidence in elephants, kangaroos, lemurs, etc., other taxa from tropical climates that typically don't experience winter stress? What are your sources for this statement?

The source for that statement was the articles that I posted for discussion. Seems somewhat iffy to me, as the account tells the God told Noah to take all kinds of food onto the ark for him and his family and for the animals. While it certainly isn't beyond the possibilities that God could slow the metabolism if he wished, the account tells that the animals would need food.
----------------------
The extinction of ALL dinosaurs, terrestrial and aquatic, suggests this group was not "saved" by being placed on the ark, so I'm wondering what the interpretation of this fact is according to Christianity. Why did the dinosaurs become extinct?

I don't happen to believe that all the dinosaurs are extinct, and in fact I don't happen to believe that many of the dinosaurs ever lived, especially the ones that are drawn based on a single tooth or bone. In one of the articles I posted it was shown that one “dinosaur” was in fact a subspecies of crocodile. Many dinosaurs that are based on minimal evidence such as a tooth are fantasy until there is real evidence for them. Genesis tells us that man lived up to 900 years old, and if one takes into consideration the current life span of reptiles and extrapolates their ages in the antediluvian era, than it isn't unreasonable to expect many living reptiles to have been enormous in that age. This coupled with the greenhouse effect from the water canopy would have created an environment could have truly created enormous reptiles.

I cannot say why some animals in the past went extinct unless you would like me to guess.
------------------------

Bgood wrote
Do, read the entire post. I explicitly stated older layers.

Oh. Sorry, I sometimes forget that you believe strata to be laid down in accord with uniform geology.
---------------------
Bgood wrote
Seeing they fit together as a puzzle is not enough to reach such a conclusion. [Pangea]

Agreed. I take that fact together with the Genesis account that seems to indicate, to me, that dry land was one mass. I also use the passage I posted above, that indicates, to me, that the land seperated.
-----------------------

Jbuza wrote:Bgood wrote
Do, read the entire post. I explicitly stated older layers.

Oh. Sorry, I sometimes forget that you believe strata to be laid down in accord with uniform geology.
---------------------
Bgood wrote
Seeing they fit together as a puzzle is not enough to reach such a conclusion. [Pangea]

Agreed. I take that fact together with the Genesis account that seems to indicate, to me, that dry land was one mass. I also use the passage I posted above, that indicates, to me, that the land seperated.
-----------------------

You do realize that it was the fossil correlations which galvanized this theory. Also you do realize that the continents are still drifting to this day. Also there is no evidence for the earthquakes and lava outpouring required for the catastrophic flinging of continents which you seem to be proposing. The Atlantic floor Basin has several ridges and rises which would go counter to this hypothesis.

Actually believe it or not the fossils had little to do with my theory about continental drift. Yes I agree the continents continue to move. Really you don't think there is any evidence of earthquakes and lave outpourings? Did I propose it happened in one day? How do ocean ridges go counter to the theory that the continents drifted apart?

Jbuza wrote:Actually believe it or not the fossils had little to do with my theory about continental drift. Yes I agree the continents continue to move. Really you don't think there is any evidence of earthquakes and lave outpourings? Did I propose it happened in one day? How do ocean ridges go counter to the theory that the continents drifted apart?

Not only mid-ocean ridges but various other formations.

The formations do not go counter to continental drift, but for it to happen in a generation it had to be a continental rip.

Apparently the continents had to move 3000km in the last 6000 years.
Seeing that they now expand at a rate of 2-4 cm a year, how fast do you think the initial expansion(explosion) was?

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

Jbuza wrote:Actually believe it or not the fossils had little to do with my theory about continental drift. Yes I agree the continents continue to move. Really you don't think there is any evidence of earthquakes and lave outpourings? Did I propose it happened in one day? How do ocean ridges go counter to the theory that the continents drifted apart?

Not only mid-ocean ridges but various other formations.

The formations do not go counter to continental drift, but for it to happen in a generation it had to be a continental rip.

Apparently the continents had to move 3000km in the last 6000 years.
Seeing that they now expand at a rate of 2-4 cm a year, how fast do you think the initial expansion(explosion) was?

By that Rate 4cm per year it would have been 240 metres for 6000 years

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

Jbuza wrote:Actually believe it or not the fossils had little to do with my theory about continental drift. Yes I agree the continents continue to move. Really you don't think there is any evidence of earthquakes and lave outpourings? Did I propose it happened in one day? How do ocean ridges go counter to the theory that the continents drifted apart?

Not only mid-ocean ridges but various other formations.

The formations do not go counter to continental drift, but for it to happen in a generation it had to be a continental rip.

Apparently the continents had to move 3000km in the last 6000 years.
Seeing that they now expand at a rate of 2-4 cm a year, how fast do you think the initial expansion(explosion) was?

Where does the 6000 year date come from seeing as Pangea was millions of years ago?