Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'The Philosopher' started by XxSNAPxX, Sep 8, 2009.
so with all "dogs" having one common ancestor
and all "cats" having one common ancestor
all birds, all insects, etc, the idea of "every species of animal" being in Noah's ark doesn't really sound quite so impossible,
if you've been around horse-breeders you'll know that zebras can breed with horses
if you've been around dog-breeders you'll know that dogs can breed with wolves
these things are gennerally considered "common knowledge"
and yet there are still people that refuse to accept micro-evolution as really happening just simply because it wasn't talked about in the bible
which is stupid because micro-evolution being real is really neccassary for the story of Noah's Ark to be physically possible, let alone believable
Creationism is the stupidest idea in the fucking world. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an atmosphere-wasting retard
creationism is clearly bullshit
but that doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the Old Testament is false
if you take into account the existence of micro-evolution, the whole Noah's Ark thing actually becomes believable
Really? How could Noah have rounded up two of every animal? New species are found every day, and that must have been a big fucking ship that they were on. Oh, and that ship must've had a large food supply, veterinarians, and other important people. If we couldn't even build anything like now, how could and old fucker 2000 years ago have done it? Go figure
imagine how much MORE impossible the story would have been if you ignore how much micro-evolution has happened over the last 6,000 years
Geneticists can use molecular clocks to calculate how far back in time different species diverged from their common ancestors, and it's clear that there was no global genetic bottle-necking event such as that described in the story of Noah's Ark.
Paleontologists can track the systematic morphological changes of virtually every clade of organisms, including ourselves, over 300 million years back, and the changes represented in the fossil record are identical to those represented in both embryonic development and in the molecular clocks mentions above.
Archaeologists and anthropologists have a continuous record of multiple cultures throughout the world and there was no point in time at which all of them were simultaneously flooded, nor do any of them outside of the Mediterranean region share an analogous flood myth.
Speaking to the flooding event itself, geologists are in agreement that sea water from the Mediterranean breached its sill and spilled into the Black Sea via the Bosporus Strait, resulting in a sea level rise of up to 30 meters, dramatically increasing the Black Sea's coastline. This occurred between 7,600 and 9,400 years ago, which roughly matches the hypothesized origin of the Deluge Myth.
so, in addition to "creationism" being proven bullshit, the level of water in "Noah's Flood" was extremely exaggerated
Yes, although it may not have seemed like much of an exaggeration to the people who lived there. Marine archaeologists have found what they suspect to be entire villages submerged under 30 meters of water. The inhabitants of these ancient coastal communities may have only had a few weeks, days, or even less to move out with nowhere to go. Keep in mind that a 30 meter increase in depth would add hundreds or thousands of square kilometers to the sea's coastline. These displaced villagers couldn't even settle down anywhere because as they retreated further and further inland the water's edge was literally following them.
the "exaggerated" part i was referring to was the part about Noah NEEDING to put animals on the ark because of "God" drowning ALL of the world
of course, once you take into account how mono-theism is a cult
the whole idea that all the humans ouside of the ark drowned is clearly just an idea created to make people be in awe of the "power" of "the one god", further spreading monotheism