NOAH'S ARK GREAT FLOOD Update

[Guest Manny]

I would like someone to explain, if there were only two of every animal on the Ark how we don't have worse inbreeding than the Hapsburg Family that were the emperors in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

I dunno. I am not a geneticist or anything. But here's another, puzzling true story. Ever hear about how almost every human being on earth is a descendent of this one lady who lived in Africa about 2-3 million years ago? I mean, every human being on earth, or at least several million or billion of them. Maybe not all... but anyway I think you might know which story it is I'm referring to. See that's real science, and archeology. And if you can accept that as possible, then it proves Noahs Arc might be possible.

[Guest]

I would like someone to explain, if there were only two of every animal on the Ark how we don't have worse inbreeding than the Hapsburg Family that were the emperors in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Maybe all the animals were creatures we never heard of, and today's batch is a result of all that inbreeding. On the Ark, they were smart and helped with the navigation and the cooking and such, and now, well, they're just dumb animals. Inbreeding will do that.

[Mighty AC]

I dunno. I am not a geneticist or anything. But here's another, puzzling true story. Ever hear about how almost every human being on earth is a descendent of this one lady who lived in Africa about 2-3 million years ago? I mean, every human being on earth, or at least several million or billion of them. Maybe not all... but anyway I think you might know which story it is I'm referring to. See that's real science, and archeology. And if you can accept that as possible, then it proves Noahs Arc might be possible.

What?! One lady?

[The_Squid]

I am not a geneticist or anything.

That much is clear.

But here's another, puzzling true story. Ever hear about how almost every human being on earth is a descendent of this one lady who lived in Africa about 2-3 million years ago? I mean, every human being on earth, or at least several million or billion of them. Maybe not all... but anyway I think you might know which story it is I'm referring to. See that's real science, and archeology.

You are thinking of evolution as linear. It's not. The first human traits, and then humans as a species, evolved slowly over millenia. There were no two Homo sapiens that spawned all the other Homo sapiens.

And if you can accept that as possible, then it proves Noahs Arc might be possible.

lol

What a leap!!!

Edited January 7, 2013 by The_Squid

[Canuckistani]

I dunno. I am not a geneticist or anything. But here's another, puzzling true story. Ever hear about how almost every human being on earth is a descendent of this one lady who lived in Africa about 2-3 million years ago? I mean, every human being on earth, or at least several million or billion of them. Maybe not all... but anyway I think you might know which story it is I'm referring to. See that's real science, and archeology. And if you can accept that as possible, then it proves Noahs Arc might be possible.

Wow are you off..

In the field of human genetics,Mitochondrial Eve refers to thematrilinealmost recent common ancestor (MRCA) of modern humans. In other words, she was the most recent woman from whom all livinghumans today descend, on their mother's side, and through the mothers of those mothers and so on, back until all lines converge on one person. Because all mitochondrial DNA(mtDNA) is generally passed from mother to offspring withoutrecombination, all mtDNA in every living person is directly descended from hers by definition. Mitochondrial Eve is the female counterpart of Y-chromosomal Adam, the patrilineal most recent common ancestor, although they lived thousands of years apart.

Each ancestor (of people now living) in the line back to the matrilineal MRCA had female contemporaries such as sisters, female cousins, etc. and some of these female contemporaries may have descendants living now (with one or more males in their descendancy line). But none of the female contemporaries of the "Mitochondrial Eve" has descendants living now in an unbroken female line.

Mitochondrial Eve is estimated to have lived around 200,000 years ago,^[2] most likely in East Africa,^[3] when Homo sapiens sapiens (anatomically modern humans) were developing as a population distinct from other human sub-species.

How did the ark manage to contain 2 million animals (rough guess, two of everything, 1,000,000 land animal species) and food enough for what, at least two months? I thought you were a serious person, but you're just putting out bs here.

This is what happens when you conflate your non-logical truth with science. You just make a mess. Yes, there are truths beyond what science can answer, but then don't bring in scientific findings to those. If you want to talk science, then stick to science. But since you don't seem well versed in that, why not just stick to your non-logical truths and leave science out of it?

Edited January 7, 2013 by Canuckistani

[msj]

How did the ark manage to contain 2 million animals (rough guess, two of everything, 1,000,000 land animal species) and food enough for what, at least two months? I thought you were a serious person, but you're just putting out bs here.

According to this

it was magic, magic, magic!

[Canuckistani]

According to this youtube video it was magic, magic, magic!

fine. Then don't let them also try to bring in science when it suits their argument. These people want it both ways. They want to believe in a higher truth, but then try to use science to back that up, but only when it doesn't conflict with their higher truth, otherwise they try to question the validity of science. Science is valid within it's own field of reference. The materialists make the mistake of trying to say that science can contain all human experience. People like Manny are walking towards fundamentalism, where they try to use science when it suits them, and just make stuff up when it doesn't.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Canuckistani

[Guest Manny]

I bring in science because I love science. I do not refute facts. Also, you think I am "way off" as you absurdly put it. The wikipedia article you dug up is from your google search. I recalled the story from memory, I know what its about. I didn't bother to look up the details.

If you cn't see what the larger point is, that's your problem. Seems to me your the people who want to turn a blind eye to whats possible, even when science shows it is. Thats called having it both ways.

[Canuckistani]

I bring in science because I love science. I do not refute facts. Also, you think I am "way off" as you absurdly put it. The wikipedia article you dug up is from your google search. I recalled the story from memory, I know what its about. I didn't bother to look up the details.

If you cn't see what the larger point is, that's your problem. Seems to me your the people who want to turn a blind eye to whats possible, even when science shows it is. Thats called having it both ways.

Science says it's possible to house 2 million animals and all their food for 2 months on a wooden boat? Science says that the earth, within human presence (or any time) was covered in water above Mt Everest (funny how the bible didn't mention that mountain)? The science you tried to claim, that we are all descended from one person doesn't exist. And so on. But keep deluding yourself.

[Guest Manny]

I never said any of those things. I never mentioned 2 million animals. You've made this stuff up, because that's all you want to see and hear, stupid fundamentalist ridiculous stuff. You want to turn anyone who has a religious thought into an idiot, and come at them claiming they say things, that are complete lies. Sorry, but its a disappointing debate, in that you wont stop with the fucking ad hominem.

[Canuckistani]

I never said any of those things. I never mentioned 2 million animals. You've made this stuff up, because that's all you want to see and hear, stupid fundamentalist ridiculous stuff. You want to turn anyone who has a religious thought into an idiot, and come at them claiming they say things, that are complete lies. Sorry, but its a disappointing debate, in that you wont stop with the fucking ad hominem.

I do think you're being an idiot here, because you're trying to justify some sort of mishmash of the bible using science you don't seem to understand. You seem to be picking and choosing which part of the Noah's myth you're going to believe in actually happened with evolution you don't understand. I guess you've made up your own version of this myth that actually happened. You could recount it to us and we could then examine it from a scientific pov to see it that's feasible with our current understanding. But I suggest you just go for the inspirational part of the story, which seems to mean a lot to you, and leave off trying to justify it with scientific understanding. It just creates a mess that's easily refuted, and then where are you - stating that logic only takes you so far. Ok then, but then don't try to use logical deductions for your argument, you're trying to have it both ways.

[Guest Manny]

Why should I argue what I think science is saying, to a bunch of high school science students? So you can look it up in your textbook, and say "oh look, he rounded off some numbers there. Hes wrong!"

Then its high fives all around, eh boys?

[Canuckistani]

Why should I argue what I think science is saying, to a bunch of high school science students? So you can look it up in your textbook, and say "oh look, he rounded off some numbers there. Hes wrong!"

Then its high fives all around, eh boys?

If it comforts you to think so, be my guest.

I know I've been rude, but what you're doing really steams me up. It demeans scientific knowledge and inner knowledge both.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Canuckistani

[The_Squid]

Why should I argue what I think science is saying, to a bunch of high school science students? So you can look it up in your textbook, and say "oh look, he rounded off some numbers there. Hes wrong!"

Then its high fives all around, eh boys?

"You people are too dumb to debate science". lol. Is that why your posts are nonsensical.... Cuz we are too dumb! lol

Edited January 7, 2013 by The_Squid

[Guest Manny]

As though a discussion about things metaphysical should be sensible. Yes, you areTOO SMART. Thats the real problem here

[Canuckistani]

As though a discussion about things metaphysical should be sensible. Yes, you areTOO SMART. Thats the real problem here

But don't drag in science. Metaphysical means besides physics - ie the books of metaphysical ideas were kept next to the science books, not mixed up among them. (You could look it up. Or don't bother, i did it for you:

The word "metaphysics" derives from the Greek words μετά (metá) ("beyond", "upon" or "after") and φυσικά (physiká) ("physics").^[7] It was first used as the title for several of Aristotle's works, because they were usually anthologized after the works on physics in complete editions.

)

And here is what Wiki has to say about metaphysics:

Prior to the modern history of science, scientific questions were addressed as a part of metaphysics known as natural philosophy. Originally, the term "science" (Latin scientia) simply meant "knowledge". The scientific method, however, transformed natural philosophy into an empirical activity deriving from experiment unlike the rest of philosophy. By the end of the 18th century, it had begun to be called "science" to distinguish it from philosophy. Thereafter, metaphysics denoted philosophical enquiry of a non-empirical character into the nature of existence.

You want to talk about metaphysics, go for it.You want to talk about mysticism and inner wisdom, which you were really alluding to several times there, fine. (I think tho you'll find those topics are too delicate for a general forum like this. Most people have no understanding of them, or a very poor one. What did Jesus say? "Don't throw your pearls before swine.") You want to make of mess of those by bringing in empirical science, leave me out. It doesn't make you look very smart, either.

BTW, long ago I walked out of the first class of a 300 level metaphysics course because the prof was not open at all to talking about mystical experience. He saw metaphysics as an empirical inquiry as well. So metaphysics may not be all that you think it is either.

Have you read Ken Wilber? His journey started as a graduate student of Chemistry who got hung up on the assumptions basic to science that could not be proven. Goedel's incompleteness theorem, say. He began to look at the inner way, and has written an number of books on the subject - including the relationship between science and mysticism, and the different ways of knowing. You might find that interesting. Spectrum of consciousness, his very early work is a good place to start.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Canuckistani

[betsy]

Didnt see that one mentioned. Maybe you guys watch too much TV.

They love cartoons. And cartoonish comic books.

Edited January 7, 2013 by betsy

[betsy]

I'm not sure who's more the child in this debate.

Then perhaps you ought to go back from the beginning and read everything.

[betsy]

Of course, Canuckstani, Jbg, The Squid, Msj, BCsapper etc, are all insisting that Noah's Ark story be taken literally......even though I've repeatedly explained that I personally don't. But still they insist. We know why.

In taking Noah literally, they somehow think it detracts from the most incredulous mythical yarn of all time......

........that the whole universe (AND NOT just 2 animals of every kinds, mind you) - but the WHOLE UNIVERSE (trillions of planets and stars) were all contained in a zit-sized volume!

Smaller than a pea! And they laugh at the ark!

How they all got there? They don't know. But they believe it's all true!

Edited January 7, 2013 by betsy

[Mighty AC]

The gaps your god can exist in are getting smaller and fewer in number. We don't know what preceded the bang or if it was even the only one; but then again neither do you. Of course you claim to know that a magic being even more complex than the universe created it. You will also claim that this being always existed so it doesn't require an origin. You then also say that the only justification this being requires is your own unproven belief. Those who live in glass houses and believe in magic men shouldn't throw stones.

[Mighty AC]

I once met a very old woman at a nursing facility that was absolutely convinced that she could teleport. She would travel from place to place several times per day and tell everyone about her trips. Of course her faith in her ability to travel didn't make it true, but it was cute. Though only because she was old, senile and had nothing better to do with her time than make believe.

edit: typo

Edited January 7, 2013 by Mighty AC

[guyser]

That "Shermnas Lagoon' comic is so apt . Suits the whackos to a T.

[Sleipnir]

In taking Noah literally, they somehow think it detracts from the most incredulous mythical yarn of all time......

........that the whole universe (AND NOT just 2 animals of every kinds, mind you) - but the WHOLE UNIVERSE (trillions of planets and stars) were all contained in a zit-sizedvolume!

It only goes to show how little you know about the topic of astronomy.

All in the span of 15 some odd billion years.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Sleipnir

[betsy]

You can give all the drawings and the cartoons that you want, Sleipnir....it's still all assumptions!

[betsy]

The gaps your god can exist in are getting smaller and fewer in number. We don't know what preceded the bang or if it was even the only one; but then again neither do you. Of course you claim to know that a magic being even more complex than the universe created it. You will also claim that this being always existed so it doesn't require an origin. You then also say that the only justification this being requires is your own unproven belief. Those who live in glass houses and believe in magic men shouldn't throw stones.

You don't even know if there was indeed a bang, never mind what preceded the bang.

If it was another bang....then call it the bang bang....instead of the Big Bang (since you won't know either which of the two is bigger). Then you're really screwed if somebody came up with the hallucination that there was third bang! Or a fourth!

Btw, weren't you the one who talked about OBSERVATION? Hallucinations count?

Oh, I don't want to go on the merry go round with you. You guys tend to go off on a spiral spin....doesn't take much wind, either!

You guys laughing at the ark that took a pair of every kind - wondering how they all fit! And yet you guys believe the entire universe - trillions of planets, stars, asteroids, meteors, black holes, etc..and everything else that litters the universe - all came out from a zit! A ZIT! And really, smaller than a zit! A blackhead?

At least with mine, I say, "don't take it literally guys. It doesn't have to be taken literally!"

And yours???

There's the big differerence there between you and me. Mine is not to be taken literally - yet (so far). But yours is! And you believe every word of it!

The point in my post being: the pot calling the kettle black! And usually, the pot exceeds the blackness of the kettle!

I once met a very old woman at a nursing facility that was absolutely convinced that she could teleport. She would travel from place to place several times per day and tell everyone about her trips. Of course her faith in her ability to travel didn't make it true, but it was cute. Though only because she was old, senile and had nothing better to do with her time than make believe.

edit: typo

I don't know if you guys are cute. But that certain kind of "innocence" about your faith in your belief, is.

Just like us believers in God.

Edited January 8, 2013 by betsy