The better half of the joke

[Eloi]

... is that evolutionists not only say that some animal species come from previous ones, but they also say that each plant species comes from another previous one (or that they used to say BEFORE)... This, after, according to them, plants stopped living in the water to start living on land... kind of like when fish ceasing to be aquatic to become semi-terrestrial amphibians ... or humans stopped living in caves to start building houses

Did you know this part of the story? It is never ending.

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed are enough for so many SUPERDUPERULTRASLOW transformations that these scientists talk about?

[LittleNipper]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #47]

Why do you preach that the 6 day creation is a myth?

I'm not "preaching" that it is a myth ... it has been shown scientifically, and conclusively, that it cannot be true for too many reasons to consider it valid.

Please provide us with just one reason.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #51]

Please provide us with just one reason.

I'll refer you to a Christian scientist who summarizes the main reasons:

https://www.letu.edu/academics/arts-and ... -earth.pdf

Skip to Chapter 2 in the above PDF. He also addresses some common Young Earth Creationist arguments for a young Earth, and explains why they fall short. Again, there is simply too much evidence for an old Earth, and none for a young Earth that have not been thoroughly debunked with solid scientific observations and arguments.

[Eloi]

In this topic, opened by a JW, it is assumed as a premise to discuss that human beings were created by God about 6 millennia ago according to our studies of the Scriptures, and that the planet was created long before, and then it was prepared for thousands of years to create life on it.

The title of the topic is based on evolutionary speculations that every plant and animal, as well as human beings, had to evolve for a long time and transmute from one thing to another, until all things became the way they are today.

The diversity of plants and animals, as well as the diversity that exists among humans, is NOT PROOF OF SLOW EVOLUTION FROM ONE SPECIES TO ANOTHER. That diversity is based on mechanisms inherent within each created species, and that allow for discrete variations within each one... but they never allow for drastic changes, much less for one species to become another.

According to evolutionists, even an apple was once something else. A banana, maybe?

The point is that the time of existence of the Universe would not be enough for what we see to be the result of some casual transmutations of things that existed thousands of years ago. The fish of thousands of years ago were also fish, the mammals of thousands of years ago were mammals too, etc. All the animals found fossilized and dating back thousands of years are still obvious counterparts of others that still exist. Nothing became something else over time; they only adapted and changed some characteristics, but they DID NOT TRANSMUTE into new species. That lie has NEVER been proven with the fossil record.

It's been calculated that planet earth is 4.54 billion years old, i.e. 4 540 000 000. It would be necessary to calculate when it was transformed into a habitable place for life, and then how long the supposed transformation of inorganic material lasted, to become everything that exists today.

You have to be realistic and see the whole picture.

[brunumb]

As for evolution of the various kinds after the Flood, my belief is that they were bred by herders/farmers/shepherds as they figured out what traits they desired most. It is interesting to note that many of the various breeds of dogs and cast are actually a product of breeding carried out beginning in the 18th century. The various colors, shapes and textures of tulips apparently began in the palaces of the Ottoman Empire around the 16th century. And within a few recent centuries we've developed hundreds (if not more) varieties.

If the ark scenario had any merit there would be evidence supporting it rather than a lot of "could have happened" opinions. Only eight people survived the flood. Those people had to then reproduce to rebuild a population. Quite a lot of generations needed to achieve that given gestation times, time to reach sexual maturity, natural attrition rates and so on. Not going to get a lot of farmers for some time.

Next we have the issue of a devastated planet. You might as well dump these people and the animals from the ark in a wasteland and say "go fend for yourselves". It is well known that a minimum viable population for survival of a species in the wild is way more than just two. Most of the ark survivors would have perished very quickly. Even if we stretch credibility to the breaking point, we are not going to have farmers selectively breeding the thousands of different animal species from the ark to repopulate the planet.

Once again, what evidence can you provide to prop up any of your suggestions. For example, can you identify the original species of each animal family that would have been on the ark? There are many different species of large and small cats across the planet. What was the starting point that all these variations arose from? What evidence do you have in support of that? How did all the different species establish themselves in unique habitats across the entire planet after disembarking from the ark at one specific location? Again, what evidence do you have in support of that?

Plucking wild ideas out of the air does not constitute an argument. You might as well just fall back on God-magic for all the merit they hold. There are so many holes in the ark hypothesis that it just can't float.

[Clownboat]

So a global flood happened some thousands of years ago and killed off everything, less what was on Noah's ark?
We have around 8.7 million species of animals on this planet. Did Noah have 8.7 million species of animals on the boat, or do you in fact believe in a form of evolution that is so accelerated as to make a biologist blush? How did we get from hundreds or thousands of species on the ark to the 8.7 million we have today without some made up form of hyper evolution?

It's dumb to complain about evolution and then ascribe to a hyper form of it and that is all you are doing here. Enjoy your reasoning, I find it nonsensical for the reasons listed.

If you are indeed interested you may just wish to regard this presentation. I find them very thought provoking, and thinking is how people learn and grow in maturity.

This is a dodge. The question asked of you was simple and bolded for you. Please supply an answer or admit that you cannot to the question as to if Noah had 8.7 million species of animals on the ark.

Then keep this claim in mind from a fellow JW here:
"Nothing became something else over time; they only adapted and changed some characteristics, but they DID NOT TRANSMUTE into new species. That lie has NEVER been proven with the fossil record."

This suggest that Noah had over 8.7 million pairs of animals on the ark.

As for evolution of the various kinds after the Flood, my belief is that they were bred by herders/farmers/shepherds as they figured out what traits they desired most.

According to the story, the herders/farmers/shepherds all died in the flood (only 1 family survived it in the story). So did Noah have 8.7 million species on the ark, or do you in fact believe in some form of super evolution that got us to 8.7 million species that we have currently?

It is interesting to note that many of the various breeds of dogs and cast are actually a product of breeding carried out beginning in the 18th century. The various colors, shapes and textures of tulips apparently began in the palaces of the Ottoman Empire around the 16th century. And within a few recent centuries we've developed hundreds (if not more) varieties.

This is in fact not interesting because we understand how humans breed the different breeds NOT SPECIES of dogs and cats.
This is not a tomato vs tomato thing. I'm saying tomato and your saying "bowling shoes". Species does not equal breeds.

Anyway here is the presentation regarding animals on Noah's Ark:

Why do you not seem to have thoughts of your own? Does it have to do with being disfellowshipped if you say something out of line, therefore debating via links would possibly protect you?

[LittleNipper]

So a global flood happened some thousands of years ago and killed off everything, less what was on Noah's ark?
We have around 8.7 million species of animals on this planet. Did Noah have 8.7 million species of animals on the boat, or do you in fact believe in a form of evolution that is so accelerated as to make a biologist blush? How did we get from hundreds or thousands of species on the ark to the 8.7 million we have today without some made up form of hyper evolution?

It's dumb to complain about evolution and then ascribe to a hyper form of it and that is all you are doing here. Enjoy your reasoning, I find it nonsensical for the reasons listed.

If you are indeed interested you may just wish to regard this presentation. I find them very thought provoking, and thinking is how people learn and grow in maturity.

This is a dodge. The question asked of you was simple and bolded for you. Please supply an answer or admit that you cannot to the question as to if Noah had 8.7 million species of animals on the ark.

Then keep this claim in mind from a fellow JW here:
"Nothing became something else over time; they only adapted and changed some characteristics, but they DID NOT TRANSMUTE into new species. That lie has NEVER been proven with the fossil record."

This suggest that Noah had over 8.7 million pairs of animals on the ark.

As for evolution of the various kinds after the Flood, my belief is that they were bred by herders/farmers/shepherds as they figured out what traits they desired most.

According to the story, the herders/farmers/shepherds all died in the flood (only 1 family survived it in the story). So did Noah have 8.7 million species on the ark, or do you in fact believe in some form of super evolution that got us to 8.7 million species that we have currently?

It is interesting to note that many of the various breeds of dogs and cast are actually a product of breeding carried out beginning in the 18th century. The various colors, shapes and textures of tulips apparently began in the palaces of the Ottoman Empire around the 16th century. And within a few recent centuries we've developed hundreds (if not more) varieties.

This is in fact not interesting because we understand how humans breed the different breeds NOT SPECIES of dogs and cats.
This is not a tomato vs tomato thing. I'm saying tomato and your saying "bowling shoes". Species does not equal breeds.

Anyway here is the presentation regarding animals on Noah's Ark:

Why do you not seem to have thoughts of your own? Does it have to do with being disfellowshipped if you say something out of line, therefore debating via links would possibly protect you?

Who cares how many species were on the Ark? Do you? Do you even believe there was a FLOOD? Scientists have estimated that there are around 8.7 million species of plants and animals in existence, HOWEVER, these same guessers have only even identified around 1.2 million species, most of which are small insects. IF SCIENTISTS KNOW OF ONLY 1,2 MILLION SPECIES, WHY WHOULD THOSE THAT DON'T EVEN BELIEVE IN GOD, CREATION, NOAH, OR THE FLOOD ATTEMPT TO PRESSURE CREATIONISTS TO FIT 8.7 MILLION ON THE ARK IN EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE THE BIBLE SEEM REDICULOUS? IT IS BECAUSE THEY ARE ARROGANT AND HAVE NO PROBLEM TWISTING THE FACTS IN EVERY EFFORT TO SWAY THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT DOESN'T KNOW ANY BETTER! And many of the species are water animals, and GOD only told Noah to be concerned with land animals and not those that were aquatic.

[Eloi]

Most evolutionists ignore that all the diversity of species that exist today can be summarized in many fewer genera that can over time diversify among themselves and give rise to new specimens with diverse characteristics WITHOUT BECOMING different species or genera.

For example, dogs and wolves can become related, so it would only take one pair of them for both to emerge over time. That can happen naturally with many types of animals that are considered distinct species. It is called MICROEVOLUTION, and it has nothing to do with the transmutation of one species into another or from one genus to another.

Based on this proven reality, a few specimens of terrestrial animals inside the ark were able to reproduce and give rise to all the animal diversity that exists today.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Eloi in post #57]

Based on this proven reality, a few specimens of terrestrial animals inside the ark were able to reproduce and give rise to all the animal diversity that exists today.

Wrong again I'm afraid. Here is a much better analysis of the Noah's ark myth that is simple to read:

https://ncse.ngo/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark

If you don't want to be bothered to read the article, I can sum it up for you. The entire story is so impossible, from so many science angles (and common sense), that we know for certain it did not and could not have happened. If you want explanations of why, read the above article or many others like it that actually run the numbers and make rational arguments on its feasibility (or lack thereof). AIG and other sources try to make the story compatible with modern science but fail miserably because they don't consider the entire scenario, or even invoke miracles to explain the parts that have no other explanation (eg. the source for all the water).

[Eloi]

Did everyone else notice as I did that there is no rebuttal to the reasoning in my comment in the above comment?

[brunumb]

Most evolutionists ignore that all the diversity of species that exist today can be summarized in many fewer genera that can over time diversify among themselves and give rise to new specimens with diverse characteristics WITHOUT BECOMING different species or genera.

For example, dogs and wolves can become related, so it would only take one pair of them for both to emerge over time. That can happen naturally with many types of animals that are considered distinct species. It is called MICROEVOLUTION, and it has nothing to do with the transmutation of one species into another or from one genus to another.

Based on this proven reality, a few specimens of terrestrial animals inside the ark were able to reproduce and give rise to all the animal diversity that exists today.

All those species in just a few thousand years? You jest. If there was any truth in your claim, then we should be seeing new species popping up everywhere even today. We DON'T.