Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Marsupials
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2137 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 20 of 25 (648308)
01-14-2012 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Chuck77
01-14-2012 1:41 AM


A few problems
"After the Flood, the marsupials left the Ark and dispersed around the world. They could have dispersed before many of the other mammalian varieties. They occupied various niches around the world, but were eventually driven off by competition in Europe, Africa, and Asia. Finally, they ended up establishing themselves in more distant (vis--vis the Middle East) regions. As ocean levels rose at the end of the Ice Age, land bridges were eliminated and the migrant marsupials were stuck where they were.10 There’s also evidence suggesting that human travellers introduced some of the marsupials to distant lands, which can explain conundrums of very similar marsupials in different parts of the world.11"
A few problems:
--There is no evidence for a flood.
--There is no evidence for an ark.
--There is a lack of marsupial fossils in recent times in Europe, Africa, and Asia.
--The flood is supposed to have occurred some 4,350 years ago, while the most recent ice age faded away well over 12,000 years ago.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Chuck77, posted 01-14-2012 1:41 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2137 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 24 of 25 (648331)
01-14-2012 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Buzsaw
01-14-2012 3:56 PM


Re: Chuck Weasels Out of Debate Again
Buz, debates of this type are no problem if you can cite evidence that can't be disproved.
If the evidence one is citing is easily disproved, it doesn't matter how much one believes in it--it won't take you far.
Unfortunately that's where creationists generally run into problems. It is not very wise or very productive to tell a working scientist that he is wrong based on something one has seen on a creationist website; this is especially true when one has no personal knowledge of that particular field.
Yet this is what we so often see in these debates.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Buzsaw, posted 01-14-2012 3:56 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024