Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

More science which destroys Young Earth Creationism and the food. Today: Elephants disprove the Flood myth! [Spirituality & Religion]

The diversity of Proboscideans (the group to which elephants and several extinct species belong) makes the Flood myth utterly impossible.

The first problem is one of diversity. Since creationists must rely on the non-scientific category "kind" as a rescue device for having far fewer animals on the Ark, this means that at most 2 or 3 members of Proboscidea would have been included.
Unfortunately that means that all the members of this order must have diversified after the flood AND THE MATH DON'T ADD UP.
To achieve the observed diversity then there would have to be one new species of Proboscidean in EVERY generation which has never been observed even in the fasted reproducing animals like fruit flies or bacteria.
Strike one.

The second problem is that even if the creationist only includes a couple members of Proboscidea AND assumes they are juvenile animals AND assumes a metabolic rate as if they were sleeping the whole time THEN 60% OF THE AVAILABLE SPACE ON THE ARK would still be required to feed and house them.
Doesn't leave much room, yeah?
Strike two

The last problem is obvious and simple: If that level of rapid diversification is impossible and then the creationist must have many MORE "kinds" of Proboscidean on the ark which takes that already crippling 60% to something more like 400%
Steeeerike three

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
That's just a painting, and a mighty poor at that. God created the elephants and science still points to Him.
@GodSpeed63

lol weird dig. The painting looks pretty good to me🤔 But let me ask you a question: Do you have any intention or ability to make an intelligent response to the arguments i presented for how Proboscidean diversity precludes the Ark story?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@Pikachu
weird dig

Whether you think it's a dig or not, it's still the truth.
@GodSpeed63 🤷‍♀️ Why are you so concerned about the quality of the painting? Art is subjective. Seems a bizarre hill to die on.
@GodSpeed63

Lol Child! i know you can read so stop babbling about the picture. I ask you again: Do you have any intention or ability to make an intelligent response to the arguments i presented for how Proboscidean diversity precludes the Ark story?

Yes or no?

@canusernamebemyusername

lol well do you think he's going to risk talking about the evidence?
@Pikachu No:(
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@Pikachu
Child!

You have nothing. You can try to discredit me all you like but your efforts will be futile. BTW, learn to spell.
Sharon · F
@GodSpeed63
You can try to discredit me all you like
You've already succeeded in doing that all by yourself.
@GodSpeed63

lol little boy is getting upset!

You can try to discredit me

lol try? Try nothing, sport. I gave three points of argumentation making the case and all you have, child, is a criticism of the painting 😆😂
You
Have
Nothing


I know the answer to this question is obvious🙄 buuuut i've already started my strikes so:

Do you have any intention or ability to make an intelligent response to the arguments i presented for how Proboscidean diversity precludes the Ark story?

Yes or no?
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@Sharon @Pikachu
little boy is getting upset!

Well, quit crying, little boy, and come up with something substantial. You still have two strikes against you, just don't strike out.
@GodSpeed63

Ok, and Godspeed's final answer on how Proboscidean diversity does not disprove the Ark story is "That's a bad painting!"😏

lol you heard it here ladies and gentlemen.
Sorry my little friend but i think you know that makes

This message was deleted by the author of the main post.
@GodSpeed63

I'm still here

Nope. You're gone.
I'm not going to block bud but don't be that guy.
You have no intention of debating the arguments so just keep some dignity and see yourself out.
This message was deleted by the author of the main post.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63
That's just a painting

In that case, try some genomic evidence (you can have this one for free)

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1720554115

You’ll notice that the only aspect of this paper that involves your god is that it’s completely unnecessary for anything
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@newjaninev2
You’ll notice that the only aspect of this paper that involves your god is that it’s completely unnecessary for anything

That's still not evidence that support your claim that God doesn't live.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63
your claim that God doesn't live

A claim I have never made

So your god remains completely unnecessary for anything
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@newjaninev2
A claim I have never made

Are you saying that you believe that God lives now?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 No, I’m telling you that I have never made the claim that your god doesn’t live

Why would I make any claims about an unnecessary postulation?
redredred · M
@Pikachu if you get an answer follow up with where did Noah get the kangaroos and howler monkeys
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@newjaninev2
No, I’m telling you that I have never made the claim that your god doesn’t live

So which is it?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 Are you a little confused about what I just told you?

I’ll repeat it for you

I have never made the claim that your god doesn’t live

Your claim about me in that regard is simply false
GodSpeed63 · 70-79, M
@newjaninev2
Are you a little confused about what I just told you?

Maybe I should make this more simple for you: Which is it, do you believe that God lives or you don't?
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
He doesn’t have to discredit you, you did it yourself long ago.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 I have no gods, so if you want me to have beliefs around yours, you’ll need to provide a compelling necessity for me to even give the postulation any thought whatsoever.

Do you have such a compelling necessity?