Noahs Ark, has it been found?

[XPCportables]

Dinosaurs are also in the Bible. There are several descriptions in the book of Job that illustrate large animals 'eating like oxen'. In one part, there is a named animal (can't believe I forgot what it was) that is actually a dinosaur, so dinosaurs existed in biblical times. The Bible also determines the world's age to be 6000 years old at least, so dinosaurs could have theoretically existed 6000 years ago.

Behemoth, and laviathen, no Disney did not make that up for their movie Atlantis.

[Triton]

In biology, evolution is the measurable change in the heritable traits (allele frequency) of a population over successive generations. Evolution is ultimately the source of the vast diversity of the biological world. Over time, it may result in the origin of new species (speciation). Contemporary species are related to each other through common descent, products of evolution and speciation over billions of years. The phylogenetic tree on the right represents these relationships for the three major domains of life.

The modern understanding of evolution is based on the theory of natural selection, which was first set out in a joint 1858 paper by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace and popularized in Darwin's 1859 book The Origin of Species.

Natural selection is the process by which individual organisms with favorable traits are more likely to survive and reproduce. Natural selection works on the whole individual, but only the heritable component of a trait will be passed on to the offspring, with the result that favorable, heritable traits become more common in the next generation. Given enough time, this passive process can result in adaptations and speciation.

In the 1930s, scientists combined Darwinian natural selection with the theory of Mendelian heredity to create the modern evolutionary synthesis, also known as Neo-Darwinism. The modern synthesis describes evolution as a change in the frequency of alleles within a population from one generation to the next. The mechanisms that produce these changes are the basic mechanisms of population genetics: natural selection and genetic drift acting on genetic variation created by mutation, genetic recombination and gene flow.[1] This theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, relating directly to topics such as the origin of antibiotic resistance in bacteria, eusociality in insects, and the staggering biodiversity of the living world.

Because of its potential implications for the origins of humankind, the evolutionary theory has been at the center of many social and religious controversies since it was first introduced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution# ... _evolution
i am of the opinion that this whole argument evolution vs creation is pointless and retarded, were HERE who the hell cares weather it be by design or incedent, i would be more concerned about whats GOING TO HAPPEN to us than what may or may not have. if your curious i belive in evolution and that earth is in fact 4.7 million years old, any argument to the contrary will be heard, though about and discarded as idiotic. from what i have read about this subject (and i have read a lot) some creationists (and this was "proved" by a creationist "scientist") think that the earth is only 6200 years old. i like the bible, its a good STORY and should be respected as such, the bible is just like any other book, its been edited and changed over the years and stuff that was cannonical isnt and vice versa, like the books of , Deuteronomy is one example (left out of the bible) i have more stuff to say on this subject but im to lazy to type it
[/url]

[Sparkfist]

Guys if you want to make the argument of Creationism vs Evolution, go somewhere else. Evolution is a proven fact, however it has not been proven what we evolved from. Further Creationism is something that should only be taught in churches, chatholic schools or in the family, this is neither of those three.

Now I think it's only fair to tell you guys to either get back on topic, which is about Noah's Ark, or this thread can be closed.

[Triton]

to get back on topic, i saw a special on the history channel or discovery or somehting like that about this whole thing explaining how the nile flooded really huge a long time ago. something like that i cant remember

[teraflop122]

Yeah, massive floods do have a bad tendency to happen, don't they? In uncountable years, when the barrier between the Pacific Ocean and Death Valley is breached, an enormous flood may result. Was it the act of a god?

The Nile caused some pretty large floods. The Mississipi used to cause rather huge floods. That river in China that they just recently dammed up used to kill thousands of peasants on a yearly basis.

By the way, evolution is the continuous change of living things as a result of the interactions between genetic mutations within them and the environment. Having these distinct species names is rather misleading, because all creatures everywhere are always participating in evolution. Humans may be the only exception, as we now have ways to prevent any environment from adversely effecting us.

During the industrial revolution in England, a type of butterfly existed with brightly colored wings. These colors allowed it to blend well with the environment. These butterflies also sometimes produced mutated offspring with darkened wings. These offspring were killed off by predators to quickly to reproduce in substantial numbers. However, the environment soon changed. Soot from countless steam driven factories blackened large swaths of land. Suddenly, the mutated black butterflies had the advantage, and the white butterflies began to die off.

That is survival of the fittest, as observed and recorded by hundreds of people during that time period. The event requires no leaps of faith. Mutations occur all the time, but it is when the environment changes to favor the mutations that a species supposedly "evolves."

Argon-Argon dating can be used to find the dates of materials a few thousand years old. Unfortunately, the margin of error is also often a few thousand years ~_~

Radiocarbon dating is usable back to about 50,000 years, again with a few hundred or thousands of years error. 1000 years isn't quite so important out of 50,000, though, is it?

Uranium Thorium dating can be used to date objects back between a couple years and 700,000 years.

Uranium-Lead dating is used on objects older than 1 million years. Of course a few century margin of error exists, but what is 100 years out of 1000000?

Lead-Lead dating involves the measurement of three different isotopes of lead from Earth and meteorites. This dating method is used to determine ages in billions of years.

Now, with Lead-Lead dating the margin of error is around 1%. Pretty small, eh? NO! A 3 billion year old reading has a margin of error of 30 million years! So, say Mr. Creationism grabs a shell off the beach and dates it. The date comes back as 10000 years old. He grabs a recently-dead whale bone and gets 433920 years. He grabs the skull of his brother and gets 242 years. Of course he will claim this as a reason to fight against scientific observations which do not correlate with his own beliefs, but in reality he is merely dismissing the margin of error as a factor in order to skew the data. All of those seemingly obscure age results are well within the margin of error of a dating method involving billions of years.

Now, I'm relatively open about things, but I simply haven't seen any valid arguements against evolution and the 4 billion+ year old Earth. In that case, I will stick to science, which has given me medicine to stop pain, instant communication with distant loved ones, and all the modern conveniences which people today take for granted and upon which our civilization is built.

As for Noah's Ark...well... I don't think there is much more to say. I see no reason why it couldn't have existed- though it could not have carried two of every animal, of course. Is it up in Turkey? I don't know. If we did recover it, we would gain very interesting scientific insight into the cultures and building techniques of that time period. Eh?

[XPCportables]

Guys if you want to make the argument of Creationism vs Evolution, go somewhere else. Evolution is a proven fact, however it has not been proven what we evolved from. Further Creationism is something that should only be taught in churches, chatholic schools or in the family, this is neither of those three.

Now I think it's only fair to tell you guys to either get back on topic, which is about Noah's Ark, or this thread can be closed.

I'm not going to post in this thread again but, evolution is a proven fact? since when? I though that, according to the scientific method, before anything can be called a "fact" that it must be Observed(Scientific fact) written about, by a reputable source(that is backed by other sources, much like the Bible, which is backed by thousands of manuscripts which match up identically.) (Historical fact) and something else but I can't remember anyway, I don't think that anybody was there observing your "evolution", Nobody has written about it, who has observed it. The only "factual" evolution is Microevolution, evolution that occurs within the bounderies of the animal in question's own species.
Sorry, I had to post this though.

[marshallh]

Just a reminder: keep it civil and keep a clear head in this discussion, or it will be closed. It looks passable so far, but remember; all it takes is one hard-headed ignorant post and this thread is locked.

That said, I think we can keep it under control, as we did in the last religious thread.

My thoughts: there will always be people who find unexplained things about Christianity and attempt to disprove the belief. There will never be a way to externally convince someone with mere facts to become Christian. It takes faith, that's the base of the religion. I'm not saying we must overlook everything that we can't explain, but there is only so far you can go with facts and figures: each person makes their own decision about it.

[teraflop122]

Evolution is not a certain fact, but he didn't really mean it in that sense. What I think he meant to say is that evolution is a theory supported by scientific observations., while Creationism due to its very nature can not be supported by scientific observation.

The only "factual" evolution is Microevolution, evolution that occurs within the bounderies of the animal in question's own species.

I do wonder what qualifies as within the boundries of one's own species. I understand that a black butterfly is essentially the same as the white butterfly, and many of the black and white butterflies were still able to mate and therefor belonged to the same species.

When are you no longer in the same species? If you have a squirel and a second squirel with slightly more flab, they are obviously the same. When the flabless squirel fails to make a jump, while a flabby squirel is less aerodynamic and therefor falls less rapidly it survives to reproduce. Over generations, due to environmental stressors, you have a flying squirel, but it is still essentially a squirel with flab between its legs.

According to fossil records, and disregarding whether dating is in millions or thousands of years, you had old dinosaurs with scales, more recent dinausors with some feathers, and yet more recent dinausors capable of primative flight. As you travel along chronological fossil records, you end up with birds. I suppose one could argue that these creatures all arose independently and are not actually the successive forms of the same creature, if one really tried.

In the end, the theory of evolution is based in scientific observations and smaller processes known as scientifically possible. We have seen survival of the fittest, we have thousands of first-hand witnesses of genetic drift due to isolation, the engine of evolution has been directly observed, recorded, and analysed.

When all is said and done, microevolution is just a distortion of evolution caused by the way humans tend to think. We like to think in terms of leaps and bounds. You either get an A or a B on your test, an 89% or a 90%, a 4 or a 3, a pass or a fail. We ignore the inumerable points between those numbers. The genetics of life are always changing. Two creatures may or may not drift to the breaking point at which reproduction between the two becomes impossible, and they are finally "classified" as two different species, or they keep the same exact name.

I find this arguement very engaging, though I don't think it will lead anywhere quickly.

[madc0w]

I'm not going to post in this thread again but, evolution is a proven fact? since when? I though that, according to the scientific method, before anything can be called a "fact" that it must be Observed(Scientific fact) written about, by a reputable source(that is backed by other sources, much like the Bible, which is backed by thousands of manuscripts which match up identically.)

Its called a theory. Gravity is a theory also. Now do you beleive in gravity, even though it may not be fact.
THis is my stance on religion. I don't give a flying rat's arse about whether or not some old guy really had a huge boat. All I care about is living my life with rules and morales, most of which matches up to the bible. Also, I beleive the bible is just a collection of figurative stories about god that shows us how to live and that god has set all the events in the universe to happen, including the big bang and evolution. Also, I kinda doubt that its noah's arc, its probably just some ship or wood construction on a mountain.

[sam fisher]

God doesn't exist according to many scientific theories. The same ones that say you don't age backwards, morph into weird shapes and collide with each other due to gravity.

The Bibile was the Harry Potter of 2000 years ago. It just got blown out of proportion

[sniper_spike]

God doesn't exist according to many scientific theories. The same ones that say you don't age backwards, morph into weird shapes and collide with each other due to gravity.

The Bibile was the Harry Potter of 2000 years ago. It just got blown out of proportion

Haha! Thanks for the laugh there. As if multiple authors living in different times and places decided to somehow write a 1500+ page story book. XD

[sam fisher]

Ha, its possible

Its all by one author. Its just said to be written by others

[sniper_spike]

Well, of course it's technically written by God.

[sam fisher]

Or! By Hugh Laury....

[teraflop122]

God doesn't exist according to many scientific theories.

And those theories are bunk! Everyone knows that Hugh Laury wrote the bible in such a way so that its contents could never be proven or disproven ~_~