How did animal get to isolated places after the flood?

I guess I knew this. What probably makes it most shocking is that I used to believe it! That's not what I meant. An omnivore is not a partial carnivore because there is no such thing as a partial carnivore. You can't partially ONLY eat meat, and when I originally posted about carnivores, I was referring to obligate carnivores.Edited by SR71, : No reason given.Edited by SR71, : No reason given.

(I know you're playing, but I will continue to reply) That still doesn't answer our issue of space in the ark. What evidence is there for this claim? Let's compare it to evidence AGAINST this claim.Edited by SR71, : No reason given.

Well, you replied to yourself for me. I must say, you're very convincing. How could I have been so obviously wrong? Edited by SR71, : these quote tags are killing meEdited by SR71, : this is getting irritating. fixed.

quote:

---

Isn't that basically what I said?

---

You also said,

quote:

---

The point is, if it is possible, it can happen. You, or every scientist in the world just may have not thought of a way yet.

---

Given the topic, it is not unreasonable to think that you are trying to say that because deer swam 600 feet across the Arthur Kill, that many animals swam across vast open sea to their final locations after the flood.Considering everyone else's responses to you, I think that's what we all thought you meant.

quote:

---

I am not convinced that they evolved that way, or were just designed to do become that.

---

Why couldn't they evolve that way?Is there any evidence whatsoever that they were "designed to become that"?

quote:

---

Anyone think that after a flood, that many things would be floating around. Why Here in my lake, we have floating islands, that shift, and sometimes break free, and float the distance of the lake. These islands have a life of there own, and if one was big enough, could probably support the life of a deer for a year, no doubt.

---

Yes, possibly, on lovely, calm lake waters. However, the 40 days and nights of torrential rains all over the whole earth would have beat such delicate islands to death. Also, the waves would finish off anything left.

quote:

---

Again, my point is anything is possible.

---

It's what is probable that must be considered, not only what is "possible".

Of course it is a God thing, how else could it have happened?That is the difference between then and now. Back then you had to go to a temple to experience God, or God would show up during special occasions. After Jesus came, the Temple is now us. God dwells within us.2 very distinct different ways of this world existing with God. So to me, anything that had happened in the OT is hard for us to imagine, and all of those stories were God stories.I don't need to know if they happened or not to believe in God. If God exists, then there is a possibility that these stories did indeed happen.Whenever I discuss these stories in this forum, thats all I am doing is discussing them, I am not taking a position in the discussion. My only position is that I believe in God by faith, and a little more. The bible helped me find God, or helped God find me, so I won't count it out completely, even though I have a hard time imagining these types of things happening, i.e. floods, towers of fire, etc. Because in my life, I have yet to witness a supernatural event, that could not be explained away by some other line of reasoning. Like Jesus said, "your faith healed you." There have been huge changes in my life, both pyhsical and mental, and maybe all of them can be explained away individually, but when you add them all together, the odds of them all happening become like the number .99999999999 to infinity, eventually it becomes 1.

quote:

---

There have been huge changes in my life, both pyhsical and mental, and maybe all of them can be explained away individually, but when you add them all together, the odds of them all happening become like the number .99999999999 to infinity, eventually it becomes 1.

---

Nope.The odds of that particular sperm and that particular egg coming together and forming you or me or anybody else on the planet are also incredible.The odds that this has happened billion upon billions of times are truly staggering.But the odds of something happening, rather than any specific thing, are very, very good.The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Thanks for the welcome, Archer. I think you've got it about right there, so far as it goes, although the whole story is maybe a bit more complicated. What I find astonishing, though, is that there are actually people with genuine science qualifications who are fervent young-earthers. There are young earth geologists and (my favourite oxymoron) young earth paleontologists.I think that these people must be so good at deluding themselves that we're almost talking about mental illness here. It's getting a bit like the flat earth society, which still exists, as you probably know. It's one thing having no education and no real understanding of the evidence. But being a working geologist, say for an oil company, and still managing to believe that this planet is less than 10,000 years old just means living in a constant state of self-deception. It really shows the grip that religion can have on people in a way which is, to me, quite spectacular.It's weird!

But the food was hyper-macro dehydrated. A whole barn full of hay bales was reduced to the size of a sugar cube.Remember we got 40 days of rain out of the moisture in the food that was to go on board. That is a lot of food. I'd say that the claim was self-evident and fully supported by the evidence. All of the kinds that were on the Ark still exist today. Since no more than seven of any kind (excluding the human kind) were taken onboard and in many cases only two of a kind, and every kind listed still exists today, it is obvious that there were no carnivores on the Ark.Today we see herbivores, omnivores and carnivores. Unless you are going to invoke magic, something I have not done, the omnivores and carnivores must have evolved from the herbivores.There is yet more evidence of the Flood.Consider Gopherwood.Before the Flood it was so common that it could be used to build a vessel as large as the Ark, yet today, it exists no where. There is not one single Gopherwood tree left.Why?Because they were felled to build the Ark and the saplings that were left did not survive the Flood.If the Flood never happened, if the Ark was not built, where are the Gopherwood Forests I ask you?Just answer that!Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Are you sure that's kosher?

Yes. It was simply a step in processing and as long as both the dehydration and rehydration are done under the supervision of a Rabbi, it is Kosher.That does not address though the overwhelming evidence of the missing Gopherwood Forests.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Y'all down there in Texas know how to respect the word of a genuine preacher, so listen to old Adam Clark. Plenty of cypress trees around today.(Of topic: P.S. Thanks for the welcome that you put in my experimental thread the other day, jar. I didn't thank you there because it would bump up a useless thread in the "all topics" list!)

Simply a case of denial.In addition, what he proposes is Just a Theory and we need to Preach the Controversy.The FACT remains, there are no more Gopherwood Forests and folk like Adam Clark are just trying to handwave the evidence away.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Nothing wrong with denial from a YEC point of view. Everything you need to know about Gopher Wood can be found in the link below. It finishes with the priceless conclusion: GOPHER WOODWhat is it? - ChristianAnswers.Net