How did koalas get to Australia?

[The Happy Humanist]

I've always wondered how, under the Flood scenario, the Koala bear got to Australia. Did he swim? And what did he eat on the journey?

[bernee51]

In welcoming an Aussie newcomer, and YEC, to the forum the question was asked "How did koalas get thre off the Ark?"

It was suggested that ...they probably walked. There is no requirement for the Koalas which eventually arrived in Australia to be the same ones that left the Ark however there is no reason why the descendants of the Ark borne koalas could not have eventually migrated to Australia."

Now koalas are pretty special animals. They are primarily aboreal and live primarily on a diet of eucalyptus leaves, and only a few of the uhundreds of varieties are suitable. They cannot live in deserts or rainforests. They are territorial and do not wander about much.

For koalas to have walked (swam?) from wherever the supposed Ark's resting place in (In Asia Minor) would be quite a feat for these animals. I would suggest impossible.

So how did koalas get to Australia?

(Not to mention the monotremes - they can be for a different thread)

[juliod]

After the tower of Babel story, when the aborigines were sent to australia, and their unique language created, the koala was sent there with them. Prior to that they were kept as pets by certain babelites.



DanZ

[bernee51]

After the tower of Babel story, when the aborigines were sent to australia, and their unique language created, the koala was sent there with them. Prior to that they were kept as pets by certain babelites.



DanZ

And where pray tell is that in the bible? Chapter and verse please.

[bernee51]

I've always wondered how, under the Flood scenario, the Koala bear got to Australia. Did he swim? And what did he eat on the journey?

Oops we seem to have doubled up.

A point of order - the koala is not a bear it is a marsupial.

[Sender]

In welcoming an Aussie newcomer, and YEC, to the forum the question was asked "How did koalas get thre off the Ark?"

It was suggested that ...they probably walked. There is no requirement for the Koalas which eventually arrived in Australia to be the same ones that left the Ark however there is no reason why the descendants of the Ark borne koalas could not have eventually migrated to Australia."

Now koalas are pretty special animals. They are primarily aboreal and live primarily on a diet of eucalyptus leaves, and only a few of the uhundreds of varieties are suitable. They cannot live in deserts or rainforests. They are territorial and do not wander about much.

For koalas to have walked (swam?) from wherever the supposed Ark's resting place in (In Asia Minor) would be quite a feat for these animals. I would suggest impossible.

So how did koalas get to Australia?

(Not to mention the monotremes - they can be for a different thread)

Welcome. Are you a fan of Drew Bogut?

[The Happy Humanist]

After the tower of Babel story, when the aborigines were sent to australia, and their unique language created, the koala was sent there with them. Prior to that they were kept as pets by certain babelites.



DanZ

And where pray tell is that in the bible? Chapter and verse please.

Psst...Bernie...I sense a chain being yanked.....

All: Please ignore my Koala topic, let's go with this one.

[kron]

Some interesting questions raised so far, it does not seem unreasonable that the people group which eventually found itself in Australia after Babel had Koalas, or their ancestors, with them as domesticated animals. As to the Koalas being primarily aboral and having a specialised diet, was it always so, or are these specialised characteristics the result of genetic mutations causing loss of generalised funcionality over the centuries?
Also after the flood and especially during the subsequent ice age there were many natural land bridges available so there would not neccessarily have been much swimming involved, and of course different animals have in the past been rafted from one location to another on mats of floating vegetation, of which there would have been an abundance after the flood. Just a few thoughts to chew on.

[bernee51]

after Babel had Koalas, or their ancestors, with them as domesticated animals.

At the time of the European invasion of Australia and since there is no record of, or history of, Aboriginal domestication of koala.

As to the Koalas being primarily aboral and having a specialised diet, was it always so, or are these specialised characteristics the result of genetic mutations causing loss of generalised funcionality over the centuries?

Centuries - you are jjoking, surely.

Also after the flood and especially during the subsequent ice age

The 'subsequent' ice age? According to YEC the earth was created what, 6000 odd years ago. When did the last ice age finish - I thought 10,000 or so years ago.

and of course different animals have in the past been rafted from one location to another on mats of floating vegetation,

Thor Heyerdahl has a lot to answer for.

Just a few thoughts to chew on.

Visions of koalas blissed out chewing on eucalypts.

[kron]

Ah life does get interesting.
I have to admit bernee that you're right. There is no record of Aboriginal domestication of Koalas, but then the Aboriginal Australians do not have a great reputation for record keeping of any sort, other than oral tradition which has in all probability been distorted over time. Whether Aboriginals ever in their history kept Koalas or not is something we'll probably never know for sure, but it's not impossible.
You ask if I'm joking when I suggest that loss of function or specialisation due to mutation took only centuries, not at all. Variation within a kind or speciation can happen rapidly and does not require millenia. Check the following references for confirmation.

Reznick, D.N., Shaw, F.H., Rodd, F.H. and Shaw, R.G., Evaluation of the rate of evolution in natural populations of guppies (Poecilia reticulata), Science 275(5308):1934—1937, 1997.

Morell, V., Predator-free guppies take an evolutionary leap forward, Science 275(5308):1880, 1997.

Losos, J.B., Warheit, K.I. and Schoener, T.W., Adaptive differentiation following experimental island colonization in Anolis lizards, Nature 387(6628):70—73, 1997.

Now for the biggie. Ice ages.....
Actually there is conclusive evidence for only one ice age, and that quite recently. One thing that has intrigued me overthe years is that scientists have proposed many theories for the cause of an ice age/ages each theory having it's own set of difficulties. Yet the one satisfactory explanation is deliberately ignored. An ice age is an inevitable consequence of a global flood such as described in the Bible.
Since the Biblical flood occurreds approx 4,000 years ago the subsequent ice age was probably 3,500 to 4,000 years ago. The only reason to think the ice age was 10,000 or more years ago is old earth evolutionary presupposition.

It seems Thor Heyerdahl demonstrated that it was indeed possible to migrate long distances by raft, I understand it was by this very means (rafting on vegetation) that tha Galapagos islands were populated by their many different species.

Eventually I'll learn some ofthe fancier techniques of posting, in the meantime I'll stumble on in my long winded fashion.[/url]