The Latest Debunking of "Intelligent" Design, aka Creationism

[All_Around_Brown]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/21106.html


Science strikes again to combat the junk science that is intelligent design.

600 million years: now is that enough time for the camera eye to evolve?

 

[Lifer]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/21106.html


Science strikes again to combat the junk science that is intelligent design.

600 million years: now is that enough time for the camera eye to evolve?

so is Pluto a planet this week, or was that last week?

 

[Fogbuster]

This only proves that God made simpler creatures before He made more complicated ones.

Next question.



//

 

[PatsFanInVa]

No, actually it points toward a gradual evolutionary development of life, consistent with evolution, and inconsistent with the "intelligent design" model.

As to creationism proper:

Dimensions of Noah's Ark:

300 cubits x 50 cubits x 30 cubits. A cubit is approximately 18 inches.

So thats 450 feet x 75 feet x 45 feet.

Even though it's structurally impossible, let's say all that space is available to house the various species of the earth. No pathways in between, no ventillation, nothing. Just little enclosures for animals of all sizes which could not survive a flood (i.e, no whales need fit.)

We therefore have an ark of approximately 1.5 million cubic feet (1,518,750 to be exact.) Most scientists estimate the number of animal species on earth at about 1 million. Noah supposedly took one male and one female of each species, so that's 2 million critters.

So, stacking the perfectly wrough enclosures continously from the floor of the ark to the top, using every cubit of enclosed space, and zero cubic feet wasted on any kind of divider vertically or horizontally, the ark would be crammed full of critters with less than one cubic foot per animal.

Of course, this makes no provision for the processes of life. No room for any sort of food. No way to circulate air, remove CO2, or provide sanitation for the poop and pee.

An elephant eats about 500 pounds of food, and drinks about 35-50 gallons of fresh water a day. ONE elephant. You have a 375-day enclosure period in the bible, for two elephants. You really need room for about 375,000 pounds of vegetation, and 37,000 gallons of water. That's for a pair of elephants. I'll not bother with the math, converting those quantities to volume (space) from weight. Point is, these processes would take up in excess of the physical space accorded to the various species.

Yet, "creation science" believers continue to blather that fossils of extinct forms are merely the "monsters" who perished in the flood. All the life we see around us today survived on Noah's Ark.

Demonstrably bogus.

Do you two still believe that particular fairy tale, or do you accept that the forms that are dated as older than the biblical age of the earth (6,000 years, according to Bishop Berkeley), are in fact simply older than the biblical age of the earth?

PFnV

 

[Fogbuster]

.

The Noah's ark account in Genesis is obviously filled with symbolic representation of the animals, the ark itself, and so forth, but it does have a number of factual pieces, one of which regarding the 2nd son, Ham, and his faithlessness toward his father, Noah; but the ark itself has little to do with God's creation of the cosmos, which remains obvious to anyone who opens his or her eyes to see that all things of creation follow the same principle of life: all beings exist by two absolutes: one is that everything is composed of internal character and external form; second is that all things are composed of dual characteristics of masculinity and femininity, often referred to as "yang" and "yin".

The reality of God's hand in creation is seen when observing the constant of these two principles in all aspects of the visible physical and invisible spiritual worlds. God's hand is seen everywhere, and God's invisible existence is as real as the fact that no one can visibly show their mind, yet everyone knows that they have one. So, God's invisible existence is completely natural, and even preferable, since if God were visible He would be inundated by all things, and life would be untenable. Because God is invisible, it gives Him the chance to be the internal "mind" behind all, and also the internal mind which can reside inside the hearts and minds of humans, whom he created as his children.

God is clever and smart, in addition to being good.


//

 

[PatsFanInVa]

.
The Noah's ark account in Genesis is obviously filled with symbolic representation of the animals, the ark itself, and so forth, but it does have a number of factual pieces, one of which regarding the 2nd son, Ham, and his faithlessness toward his father, Noah; but the ark itself has little to do with God's creation of the cosmos, which remains obvious to anyone who opens his or her eyes to see that all things of creation follow the same principle of life: all beings exist by two absolutes: one is that everything is composed of internal character and external form; second is that all things are composed of dual characteristics of masculinity and femininity, often referred to as "yang" and "yin".

The reality of God's hand in creation is seen when observing the constant of these two principles in all aspects of the visible physical and invisible spiritual worlds. God's hand is seen everywhere, and God's invisible existence is as real as the fact that no one can visibly show their mind, yet everyone knows that they have one. So, God's invisible existence is completely natural, and even preferable, since if God were visible He would be inundated by all things, and life would be untenable. Because God is invisible, it gives Him the chance to be the internal "mind" behind all, and also the internal mind which can reside inside the hearts and minds of humans, whom he created as his children.

God is clever and smart, in addition to being good.//

So basically there is no need to trumpet literal biblical accuracy.

Well, that should dispense with about 90% of the more ridiculous conversations we've all had to have regarding religion. The bible is not literally true; so it is all about the interpretation.

I do like, however, how you've asserted that the record of a family squabble from one night many years before the story was recorded, is a "fact" (i.e., Ham "uncovering the nakedness" of Noah while Noah was sleeping off a drunk.)

By contrast, recorded physical dimensions of the ark are put down as "symbolic."

I think the reverse is more likely to be true; the fact is, that was a darn big boat, just not big enough to load in all the species on earth.

By the way, some things are symbolic - fair enough. Something tells me that the "literal" biblical account of creation is one of those things. Especially since you can measure the age of things all around you, and find them older than the "created" universe.

PFnV

 

[ulsterkw]

So basically there is no need to trumpet literal biblical accuracy.

Well, that should dispense with about 90% of the more ridiculous conversations we've all had to have regarding religion. The bible is not literally true; so it is all about the interpretation.

I do like, however, how you've asserted that the record of a family squabble from one night many years before the story was recorded, is a "fact" (i.e., Ham "uncovering the nakedness" of Noah while Noah was sleeping off a drunk.)

By contrast, recorded physical dimensions of the ark are put down as "symbolic."

I think the reverse is more likely to be true; the fact is, that was a darn big boat, just not big enough to load in all the species on earth.

By the way, some things are symbolic - fair enough. Something tells me that the "literal" biblical account of creation is one of those things. Especially since you can measure the age of things all around you, and find them older than the "created" universe.

PFnV

Interestingly, the measurements of the ark, as mentioned in the bible, have a very good height/length ratio which is in very common use in modern ships today. Also, please find something in the bible where it says the earth was made 6,000 years ago. I would be interested in finding that verse

 

[reflexblue]

Interestingly, the measurements of the ark, as mentioned in the bible, have a very good height/length ratio which is in very common use in modern ships today. Also, please find something in the bible where it says the earth was made 6,000 years ago. I would be interested in finding that verse

There is no verse,and I agree with you on the dimensions. I've seen model test done in tanks that prove the design was feasable,and would have been sea worthy. That being said I'm not a creationist.Really what does it matter if it was 6,000 yrs ago or 3,000,000,000 years ago for evolution to take place.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Of course there is no such verse.

There is, however, an underlying tradition of thought coddled by the creationists, asserting that Noah preserved all the animals in the ark, and the ones he didn't get, died in the flood.

Noah did no such thing. That is obvious.

It is worth noting, however, that Bishop Berkeley, the great-grandfather of all the biblicist earth-daters, did painstaking work based on the passages that are in the bible: so and so lived this many years, then spawned such-and-such, then lived this many more years, then died. Then such-and-such begat so-and-so, etc. etc.

All Berkeley (and his intellectual kin) did was count up begats as best they could. They're all within a few hundred years of each other, in the 5500 - 6500 range. And it is all derived from biblical "math."

Trouble is, it's a lie.

It's one of the lies that separate biblical literalists from modern man.

PFnV

 

[PatsFanInVa]

There is no verse,and I agree with you on the dimensions. I've seen model test done in tanks that prove the design was feasable,and would have been sea worthy. That being said I'm not a creationist.Really what does it matter if it was 6,000 yrs ago or 3,000,000,000 years ago for evolution to take place.

Hey dum dums!

Nobody ever argued that the ark wasn't seaworthy.

So although it demonstrates quite convincingly that ancient semites could make a boat float, it has absolutely no bearing on whether the ark could have done what the bible says it did -- i.e., preserve some million or so living animal species.

The math does not work. Not the math on whether those dimensions would float, the math on whether that ship would carry all presently extent species.

I mean, what you're doing here is like marveling that mirrors can indeed focus and reflect sunlight, in support of an argument that the ancient Greeks fought invaders from space with solar powered laser beams. Two different things.

PFnV

PS, the dum-dums! is meant lightheartedly. But come on guys. It's hardly a slam dunk to say "HEY! I've proven the ark would float!!!" We know seafaring vessels had existed for thousands of years prior to the biblical story, or for that matter the Gilgamesh epic it recapitulates. So it's hard to be impressed by the boat floating... it's carrying all animal life on earth that's the key here.

 

[Wildo7]

so is Pluto a planet this week, or was that last week?

I love how you bring up a reclassification of a satellite v. planet as if that means science is somehow invalid. You wouldn't even be aware of Pluto if it weren't for science. What does this have to do with anything?

 

[wistahpatsfan]

Hey dum dums!

...The math does not work. Not the math on whether those dimensions would float, the math on whether that ship would carry all presently extent species.

.

Any modest boat could have carried all the species of animals known to the primatives who "wrote" the Bible. That ****hole region had maybe 5 or 6 animal species ...tops! It says so in the Bible: In the manger, there was a cow, donkey, a sheep and some chickens. That's what - FOUR? I rest my case. The Ark was real!

 

[godef]

Any modest boat could have carried all the species of animals known to the primatives who "wrote" the Bible. That ****hole region had maybe 5 or 6 animal species ...tops! It says so in the Bible: In the manger, there was a cow, donkey, a sheep and some chickens. That's what - FOUR? I rest my case. The Ark was real!

Ark ark ark!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Any modest boat could have carried all the species of animals known to the primatives who "wrote" the Bible. That ****hole region had maybe 5 or 6 animal species ...tops! It says so in the Bible: In the manger, there was a cow, donkey, a sheep and some chickens. That's what - FOUR? I rest my case. The Ark was real!

It clearly says in one of the gospels that the **** crowed three times. And if it's anything like mine, a modest boat wouldn't cut it.

QED

PFnV

 

[reflexblue]

Hey dum dums!

Who you callin a dum dum . Ok I admit it. But I never said anything about stuffing a few million species into a floating bath tub,thats God's area.
Interestingly enough the History Channel has a serious called "The Universe" and they were taking about flood myths. The Great Flood myth is the only consistent myth to be told in different civilizations about 159 variations of the myth exist. Most dating to around the same time covering an area from Africa, throughout Mesopotamia, India,and Australia. The explanation, a meteorite app. three kilometers in length struck the Indian ocean. After using the known areas that the myths originated from,it was calculated the meteorite hit about 900 miles to the South,South East of Madagascar. A 15+ mile wide crater was found on the ocean floor there further supporting the premise There is now an expedition working on retreving core samples from that area.

How do we know the Bible meant only species from the Known world surrounding the middle east,the known world of Noah?

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Or, it was the eruption of Thera, now Santorini. Or, not. Love that show though, although I missed that one.

My thought is that everybody having a flood myth dating from the same time is one thing, everybody having a flood myth in general is another.

And "everybody has a flood myth" could be a pretty loose description; if a people has a story that the crops were all drowned out one year because the river rose too high, that's a flood myth. It's even a disasterous one. And if I'm trying to sell "everybody has a flood myth," I definitely count it.

Regardless, I know that stories of floods are pretty widespread, so open-minded on that one.

PFnV

 

[Wildo7]

There's lots of myths that are widespread. Pretty much every country in the world has it's Yeti/Loch Ness/Sasquatch story for example. Personally, I think that some natural phenomena occurred and in the age where global communication didn't exist, these stories were amplified by word of mouth throughout generations. How would Katrina or the Tsunami come across if it occurred on the other side of the world and was relayed to you through a million people? Purple monkey dishwasher?

 

[Lifer]

I love how you bring up a reclassification of a satellite v. planet as if that means science is somehow invalid. You wouldn't even be aware of Pluto if it weren't for science. What does this have to do with anything?

wow, what a leap! I didnt say it meant Science is invalid. Its said to make the point that science is not perfect. I agree with those who say that it doesnt have to be one or the other. Science and the Creator can co-exist.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

There's lots of myths that are widespread. Pretty much every country in the world has it's Yeti/Loch Ness/Sasquatch story for example. Personally, I think that some natural phenomena occurred and in the age where global communication didn't exist, these stories were amplified by word of mouth throughout generations. How would Katrina or the Tsunami come across if it occurred on the other side of the world and was relayed to you through a million people? Purple monkey dishwasher?

From time to time people discuss one or another phenomenon as central to the flood stories across cultures. Creation myths are widespread, because everybody wants to know how they got here. That's pan-human, and intrinsically so. Monster myths, ditto: things that go bump in the night. Things bigger than you that will eat you. A universal flood myth -- were the "universals" traced to an identical time -- would be a pretty convincing clue that there was, in fact, a cataclysm involving inundation with water.

Now, the notion that "everybody has a flood myth" but their origin stories are separated by thousands of years, is something else entirely. It's especially unconvincing if "everyone" is everyone living in a coastal region, say, the Mediterranean. But our flood myth comes from Iraq rather than the Med. So: date the Mediterranean flood stories, do the same for the Gilgamesh epic, and you get an idea of whether you can at least say that a region of Mesopotamia got flooded at the same time as the Mediterranean. While that would not prove a global deluge, it would at least give us an idea of whether the flood in question is regional.

It might take some googling, but I'd be very interested as to whether groups from Central Asia, or the American Great Plains, had a world-flood myth as well. That would be particularly interesting, since one can so easily say "everyone in the world," when in fact one is talking about "every coastal culture in one region."

Myths get bigger like the game "telephone," no argument there. But you can in fact study whether they seem indigenous to a culture, or borrowed, like the Noah story (that one just comes with so many "tells" that it makes a particularly vivid example.) What do you expect, though? Jews came from Iraq before Egypt or Israel. Or Abraham did at least.

Right, enough for now.

PFnV

 

[reflexblue]

Or, it was the eruption of Thera, now Santorini. Or, not. Love that show though, although I missed that one.

My thought is that everybody having a flood myth dating from the same time is one thing, everybody having a flood myth in general is another.

And "everybody has a flood myth" could be a pretty loose description; if a people has a story that the crops were all drowned out one year because the river rose too high, that's a flood myth. It's even a disasterous one. And if I'm trying to sell "everybody has a flood myth," I definitely count it.

Regardless, I know that stories of floods are pretty widespread, so open-minded on that one.

PFnV

On more thing on the asteroid, the team from JPL working in conjunction with others calculated that an asteroid traveling at 35,000 mph hitting the open ocean 13,000 feet deep would have created a series of tsunamis, the first almost a thousand feet in hight. Now that would be a killer to say the least.

Anyways check this out,its a synopsis of "The Universe" version. Heres a sample.

In an article in the NYTimes on Nov 14, scientist Dallas Abbott has identified the site of a large asteroid impact crater (the Burckle Crater) off of the island of Madagascar that struck the earth around 2800 BC. This asteroid landed in the seabed, and sent a 600-900 foot high wall of water - a megatsunami - around the Indian Ocean, impacting land as far away as Australia, and crashing onto the coast of Africa, up the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, and quite possibly into the Mediterranean Sea as well.



http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=700005302