Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2014, 04:48 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
I didn't know, either, but that seemed like a ridiculously testable claim, so I looked it up!

We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 05:35 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(06-02-2014 04:48 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I didn't know, either, but that seemed like a ridiculously testable claim, so I looked it up!

We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.

Who needs prayer when you have google?

Religion is the frozen thought of man out of which they build temples.
~Jiddu Krishnamurti
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Im_Ryan's post
06-02-2014, 06:54 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(06-02-2014 11:11 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 08:32 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  There are two types of fish. They're fresh water and salt water fish.

(04-02-2014 02:21 AM)Cleanholio Wrote:  It probably doesn't help creationists that 75% of the existing saltwater fish species on Earth actually evolved from freshwater species...

There are fresh water and salt water fish now because the are bodies of water with fresh water and some with salt water, but that might not have been the case before the flood. We have no way of knowing whether the oceans were salty then. If they weren't then all existing saltwater fish evolved from freshwater fish. In using the word "evolved" I am not denying creation. There is more than one kind of evolution.

http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v1i4f.htm

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...3/genetics

There was no flood. And evolution is evolution, the distinction is just silly. "Macroevoltion" is "microevolution" over a long time span.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 07:16 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(06-02-2014 06:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 11:11 AM)theophilus Wrote:  There are fresh water and salt water fish now because the are bodies of water with fresh water and some with salt water, but that might not have been the case before the flood. We have no way of knowing whether the oceans were salty then. If they weren't then all existing saltwater fish evolved from freshwater fish. In using the word "evolved" I am not denying creation. There is more than one kind of evolution.

http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v1i4f.htm

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...3/genetics

There was no flood. And evolution is evolution, the distinction is just silly. "Macroevoltion" is "microevolution" over a long time span.

Yes I know there is not flood however the flood is what they like to most after jesus,hell,and the end times prophecy. So if you show problems with the flood they will have to run to magic. Second they do that then they'll show the bible(or quran) is not scientific and will have no choice but to sit and wait for its fall.

[Image: get_some_by_addmedia-d78ip4k.gif] All request for metazoa info and my larger projects should be sent PM
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2014, 09:34 AM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(06-02-2014 04:48 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.

If the earth was really billions of years old there would be more salt in the oceans than there is.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...4/sea-salt

I do not suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2014, 10:14 AM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(07-02-2014 09:34 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 04:48 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.

If the earth was really billions of years old there would be more salt in the oceans than there is.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...4/sea-salt

It is important to site peer-reviewed papers when looking for credible sources and to check those sources.

The Andrew Snelling that wrote this is trying to pass himself off as A. A. Snelling, an actual scientist. Talk about being deceitful!

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/realsnelling.htm

"Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.” ~ Ambrose Bierce
“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 in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
07-02-2014, 10:49 AM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(07-02-2014 10:14 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(07-02-2014 09:34 AM)theophilus Wrote:  If the earth was really billions of years old there would be more salt in the oceans than there is.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...4/sea-salt

It is important to site peer-reviewed papers when looking for credible sources and to check those sources.

The Andrew Snelling that wrote this is trying to pass himself off as A. A. Snelling, an actual scientist. Talk about being deceitful!

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/realsnelling.htm

Uh oh, naughty naughty!

Religion is the frozen thought of man out of which they build temples.
~Jiddu Krishnamurti
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2014, 01:17 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(07-02-2014 09:34 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 04:48 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.

If the earth was really billions of years old there would be more salt in the oceans than there is.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...4/sea-salt

Gave you websites you still go to answers in genesis. First it depends on the reigon. Salinity is lower at the equator then the poles due to percipitation. Also salinity can increase and decrease http://www2.vernier.com/sample_labs/ESI-...linity.pdf . This is like the human population claim, you guys only consider the increase factors instead of the decrease ones.

[Image: get_some_by_addmedia-d78ip4k.gif] All request for metazoa info and my larger projects should be sent PM
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2014, 01:39 PM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2014 02:04 PM by RobbyPants.)
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
(07-02-2014 09:34 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 04:48 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  We went from "who knows if the oceans were salty!?" to knowing with a 30 second Google search.

If the earth was really billions of years old there would be more salt in the oceans than there is.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...4/sea-salt

Funny. That was addressed in the first link that I gave.

If YHWH wanted me to take him seriously, he wouldn't have made himself non-falsifiable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2014, 07:15 PM
RE: Noah's Flood vs Aquatic Fauna
I've long thought about this. Its not a problem that's immediately apparent to believers.

As the OP says, there are salt water fish, and fresh water fish... Not to mention creatures that require shallow water. Creatures that live on the sea bed, close to the shore... Like coral reefs.

Considering that to completely flood the planet, you'd end up with an ocean about 14 miles deep at its deepest point.

I'm afraid Nemo would be fucked.

The stars are matter, we are matter... but it doesn't matter. - Captain Beefheart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Sam's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: