A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-02-2016, 07:22 AM
A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
Anyone who knows anything about the flood myth in Genesis knows that the story is impossible for a huge number of reasons. One of them being that the story gives us the dimensions of the ark. So, given how many animals Noah was told to gather, we can figure out how much volume on average each creature would have. Not only is there not enough space for them to survive until the water abated, they wouldn't have even fit.

This is where baraminology enters in. Baraminology is basically what you get when you take a sixth-grade understanding of evolution and combine it with a literal reading of Genesis and a very rules-lawyery interpretation of its use of the word "kind". Noah had to get two (or seven) of every kind of animal. So, rather than worrying about getting two lions, tigers, lynxes, pumas, panthers, cheetahs, ocelots, and house cats (and a shit-ton of other cats I'm not thinking about off the top of my head), he'd just get to cats and call it a day. Then, after they all get off the ark, the idea is that these cats would then evolve into every other type of "cat kind" we see in the world today, 5,000 years later. Also, given how old the stories in the Bible are, this evolution would have had to occur in less than a thousand years. Seriously.

So, we start with a bastardized version of evolution that flirts with the contentious boundaries of microevolution and macroevolution (there is no difference, except in creationist's heads) that involves hyper-fast speciation, and run into a problem of "how did everything get from Mount Ararat to where it is today?". Enter in a very weird notion of how fast continental drift happened. Basically, we take a sixth-grade understanding of geology and the notion that we used to have one "super continent" (Pangaea) that eventually spread into the seven continents we have today, and assume it happened really fast. I mean, we obviously have a problem if the ark opens up on Mount Ararat, and the world is void of all animal life other than right there. Sure, they could migrate across Asia to Europe and Africa, but how are they getting to the other four continents? I've been told numerous times that the flood caused the shift in the plate tectonics to cause the continental drift, and that everyone just went for a wild ride.

So, here's my question I promised in my thread title: When did this shift happen? Did it start before or after the waters abated?

If it started before, how did anyone get to those other four continents?

If it started after, how was it "caused" by the flood?

Now, I supposed you could weasel your way into the first answer by saying that it started first, but the plates were still close enough that the water between was really shallow. You could also weasel that it started after, but was caused by the waters receding (where did they go?). Either way, the continents couldn't have gone very far by the time the ark emptied, and they would have had to clear over 99% of the total distance after the fact. Can you imagine the earthquakes the entire planet would have been experiencing during this wild ride? This whole thing is incredibly stupid. The stated belief of baraminologists is that:
  • The flood happened, as stated in Genesis.
  • The animals emptied off and started fucking like rabbits (also, the carnivores weren't eating all the other animals, somehow).
  • The animals spread all over Pangaea during this relatively brief period.
  • The current seven continents flew apart at catastrophic speeds, and no one noticed or recorded these centuries long earthquakes!
  • The animals evolved at a rate no one has ever seen!
  • This evolution suddenly fucking stopped, and has since only been observed in controlled populations of gnats and bacteria, but it otherwise just doesn't happen.
Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like RobbyPants's post
22-02-2016, 08:18 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?

It doesn't stand up to scrutiny but it's not designed to. What it is designed to do is to make Christees feel that there's a very clever bunch of people somewhere who are on God's side, and are capable of arguing with the heathen and unspeakable devil-worshipping scientists, who are no doubt very *sincere* but nevertheless *deluded*. These God-scientists are very wonderful people and have proven that the ark and everything happened *exactly* as described in the Bible. All the rantings of the Dawkinses of this fallen world merely prove that when devil-scientists are beaten they are sore losers.

If any of the Christees who so blithely accept this drivel bother to look into it the whole house of cards collapses but that's OK because a. few do so b. they can be discounted as having been deluded by the devil.

Ka-ching.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like morondog's post
22-02-2016, 08:34 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 08:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  It doesn't stand up to scrutiny but it's not designed to. What it is designed to do is to make Christees feel that there's a very clever bunch of people somewhere who are on God's side, and are capable of arguing with the heathen and unspeakable devil-worshipping scientists, who are no doubt very *sincere* but nevertheless *deluded*. These God-scientists are very wonderful people and have proven that the ark and everything happened *exactly* as described in the Bible. All the rantings of the Dawkinses of this fallen world merely prove that when devil-scientists are beaten they are sore losers.

Yeah, but their arguments can be proven wrong by anyone who's gotten past the sixth grade. Don't you think it'd hurt their morale to constantly be told they're stupid by a bunch of 13-year-olds?

I know, I know, they'll just dismiss them as having a materialistic bias. I've run into this before. Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 08:41 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Anyone who knows anything about the flood myth in Genesis knows that the story is impossible for a huge number of reasons. One of them being that the story gives us the dimensions of the ark. So, given how many animals Noah was told to gather, we can figure out how much volume on average each creature would have. Not only is there not enough space for them to survive until the water abated, they wouldn't have even fit.

This is where baraminology enters in. Baraminology is basically what you get when you take a sixth-grade understanding of evolution and combine it with a literal reading of Genesis and a very rules-lawyery interpretation of its use of the word "kind". Noah had to get two (or seven) of every kind of animal. So, rather than worrying about getting two lions, tigers, lynxes, pumas, panthers, cheetahs, ocelots, and house cats (and a shit-ton of other cats I'm not thinking about off the top of my head), he'd just get to cats and call it a day. Then, after they all get off the ark, the idea is that these cats would then evolve into every other type of "cat kind" we see in the world today, 5,000 years later. Also, given how old the stories in the Bible are, this evolution would have had to occur in less than a thousand years. Seriously.

So, we start with a bastardized version of evolution that flirts with the contentious boundaries of microevolution and macroevolution (there is no difference, except in creationist's heads) that involves hyper-fast speciation, and run into a problem of "how did everything get from Mount Ararat to where it is today?". Enter in a very weird notion of how fast continental drift happened. Basically, we take a sixth-grade understanding of geology and the notion that we used to have one "super continent" (Pangaea) that eventually spread into the seven continents we have today, and assume it happened really fast. I mean, we obviously have a problem if the ark opens up on Mount Ararat, and the world is void of all animal life other than right there. Sure, they could migrate across Asia to Europe and Africa, but how are they getting to the other four continents? I've been told numerous times that the flood caused the shift in the plate tectonics to cause the continental drift, and that everyone just went for a wild ride.

So, here's my question I promised in my thread title: When did this shift happen? Did it start before or after the waters abated?

If it started before, how did anyone get to those other four continents?

If it started after, how was it "caused" by the flood?

Now, I supposed you could weasel your way into the first answer by saying that it started first, but the plates were still close enough that the water between was really shallow. You could also weasel that it started after, but was caused by the waters receding (where did they go?). Either way, the continents couldn't have gone very far by the time the ark emptied, and they would have had to clear over 99% of the total distance after the fact. Can you imagine the earthquakes the entire planet would have been experiencing during this wild ride? This whole thing is incredibly stupid. The stated belief of baraminologists is that:
  • The flood happened, as stated in Genesis.
  • The animals emptied off and started fucking like rabbits (also, the carnivores weren't eating all the other animals, somehow).
  • The animals spread all over Pangaea during this relatively brief period.
  • The current seven continents flew apart at catastrophic speeds, and no one noticed or recorded these centuries long earthquakes!
  • The animals evolved at a rate no one has ever seen!
  • This evolution suddenly fucking stopped, and has since only been observed in controlled populations of gnats and bacteria, but it otherwise just doesn't happen.
Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?


I can't WAIT to see Q weigh in on this....... Popcorn

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 08:56 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 08:34 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 08:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  It doesn't stand up to scrutiny but it's not designed to. What it is designed to do is to make Christees feel that there's a very clever bunch of people somewhere who are on God's side, and are capable of arguing with the heathen and unspeakable devil-worshipping scientists, who are no doubt very *sincere* but nevertheless *deluded*. These God-scientists are very wonderful people and have proven that the ark and everything happened *exactly* as described in the Bible. All the rantings of the Dawkinses of this fallen world merely prove that when devil-scientists are beaten they are sore losers.

Yeah, but their arguments can be proven wrong by anyone who's gotten past the sixth grade. Don't you think it'd hurt their morale to constantly be told they're stupid by a bunch of 13-year-olds?

I know, I know, they'll just dismiss them as having a materialistic bias. I've run into this before. Weeping

Are you saying that all those pastors with beautiful wives and fast cars are *wrong*???

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
22-02-2016, 09:14 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
I love it that you brought up baraminology, it wasn’t until I saw these “trees of life” that I finally understood wtf these idiots were talking about and how they think evolution of "kinds” has manifested itself.

In a nut shell, envision instead of the one tree of life growing and branching out depicting the evolutionary path every species on earth has taken, a forest of trees each one depicting a different “kind” and from there evolving into seperate species of the same “kind”.

[Image: orchard-tree.gif]

Like you say Robby, this is a total misunderstanding of the real world.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
22-02-2016, 09:16 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 08:56 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 08:34 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Yeah, but their arguments can be proven wrong by anyone who's gotten past the sixth grade. Don't you think it'd hurt their morale to constantly be told they're stupid by a bunch of 13-year-olds?

I know, I know, they'll just dismiss them as having a materialistic bias. I've run into this before. Weeping

Are you saying that all those pastors with beautiful wives and fast cars are *wrong*???

Laugh out load Especially the ones with beautiful wives and fast cars.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 09:21 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?

Like babes in the woods.

[Image: BabesIntheWood.jpg]

[Image: bc-mystery-babesXXnw1.JPG]

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2016, 09:34 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
You seem to be under the assumption that they think about their faith and compare their beliefs to reality. Cognitive dissonance is more than just a good band name. The trick is to build thick, high walls to compartmentalize religious beliefs where they can be forever isolated from the systematic application of logical thought.

and then get Mexico to pay for them

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like unfogged's post
22-02-2016, 09:44 AM
RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
(22-02-2016 09:21 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Does this really help the creationist sleep better at night?

Like babes in the woods.

Ah, yes. Surrounded by wolves, completely unprotected against the elements, and with a snowball's chance in Hell of surviving until morning.

Startlingly apt analogy, really.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: