Noah's Ark

ckoh1965

Spirituality

31 Oct '06 14:32

telerion
True X X Xian
The Lord's Army
Joined
18 Jul '04
Moves
8353
06 Nov '06 22:261 edit
Originally posted by XanthosNZ
And here it goes again. Dr. Dino isn't a doctor (well not if the word has any meaning), a PhD from a diploma mill in Christian Education (you can read a discussion of his 'dissertation' here: http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm). He isn't credible. Not even to other creationists.
He's also a tax cheat.
If you are good.html

It basically explains exactly what Dr. Dino is wrong in every meaningful way.
That reminds me. Last Friday Kent Hovind was convicted on 55 counts of tax fraud. His wife was convicted on only slightly fewer counts. Just a little update.

Edit: "Diploma mill" overstates the quality of his education. His "university" was a small house.

Here's a great photo.

http://homepage.mac.com/lpetrich/Creationism/PatriotUniversity.jpg
XanthosNZ
Cancerous Bus Crash
p^2.sin(phi)
Joined
06 Sep '04
Moves
25076
07 Nov '06 00:59
Originally posted by telerion
That reminds me. Last Friday Kent Hovind was convicted on 55 counts of tax fraud. His wife was convicted on only slightly fewer counts. Just a little update.

Edit: "Diploma mill" overstates the quality of his education. His "university" was a small house.

Here's a great photo.

http://homepage.mac.com/lpetrich/Creationism/PatriotUniversity.jpg
How could they convict him? As he said, he pays tax to no one but God just as it says in the Bible.

15Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, 20and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
21"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
22When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

Oh wait.
FreakyKBH
Unknown Territories
Joined
05 Dec '05
Moves
20408
07 Nov '06 01:00
Originally posted by XanthosNZ
How could they convict him? As he said, he pays tax to no one but God just as it says in the Bible.

15Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Y ...[text shortened]... n they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

Oh wait.
Sounds like someone's got a jones for Hovind.
ckoh1965
Joined
11 Jul '06
Moves
2753
07 Nov '06 01:00
Originally posted by Coach Pre
Hi.
If you can make the time. Go to drdino.com
click on downloads, and then click on "Dinosaurs and the Bible".

He has a lot of info on the Ark. It may be interesting to you.
Thank you, Coach, for the website. I've scanned through on some portions of the articles, but I'm not so impressed. I'm not trying to deny truth, but I think some of the explanations found in the article are just illogical.

For one thing, I don't believe that 'many' animals hibernate during bad weather, and certainly not for almost a year. Unless, of course, if the animals are made to hibernate by magical means.

That explanation about the continents separating after the flood is also not so convincing to me. Apparently, that is the explanation of the animals finding their separate ways and then multiplied again after that. I suppose that is also the explanation on how humans reproduced to the present population? That explanation doesn't address the problem of the many races in the world today. In the other thread someone suggested that the difference in skin colour, for example, could be explained by the environment.

Thus the Africans have black skin because of the hot sunny weather etc. But if that is indeed the case, then how can we explain an African who's the descendent of several generations after arriving in, say, USA or some other colder climate? His skin colour has not changed to white even though those other white people around him remain white throughout that same duration? Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that the skin colour hasn't much to do with the environment in this case. Which can only mean one thing: We are not all the descendents of Noah and his immediate family members.

If indeed there was a great flood in the past, there must have been many more survivors. But that would mean the account given in the bible was inaccurate. And if the is one inaccuracy, then it is possible that there are other inaccuracies!
telerion
True X X Xian
The Lord's Army
Joined
18 Jul '04
Moves
8353
07 Nov '06 05:29
Originally posted by ckoh1965
Thank you, Coach, for the website. I've scanned through on some portions of the articles, but I'm not so impressed. I'm not trying to deny truth, but I think some of the explanations found in the article are just illogical.

For one thing, I don't believe that 'many' animals hibernate during bad weather, and certainly not for almost a year. Unless, of cou ...[text shortened]... e. And if the is one inaccuracy, then it is possible that there are other inaccuracies!
Even the other wild 'n wooly creationists distance themselves from Kent Hovind.
scottishinnz
Kichigai!
Osaka
Joined
27 Apr '05
Moves
8592
07 Nov '06 06:48
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Scottishinnz has inferred that the DNA in question doesn't allow for the variations we see today, nor does it allow for man to have descended from (ultimately) two people. Unless he meant something different?
Indeed. Mitochondrial DNA is different to most other DNA since it is passed from mother to offsrping through the egg. Any mitochondia in a male do not get passed on (sperm are too small to contain mitochondria). Mitochondrial DNA do not suffer recombination either. This makes them an excellent system for studying human evolution. If you look at the mitochondrial DNA of a significant cross section of the public, and feed the sequences into a cladistic analysis we find that every person currently alive can trace ancestry to one of seven women (the technique can work out when the last common ancestor that had two female offspring). If I remember rightly, the "youngest" of the women came in at around 7,500 years ago, and the "oldest" around 40,000 years ago. For more specific details read "The seven daughters of Eve" by Bryan Sykes.

http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Daughters-Eve-Bryan-Sykes/dp/0393323145/sr=8-1/qid=1162881361/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-7374095-8148854?ie=UTF8&s=books
XanthosNZ
Cancerous Bus Crash
p^2.sin(phi)
Joined
06 Sep '04
Moves
25076
07 Nov '06 06:55
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Sounds like someone's got a jones for Hovind.
Or perhaps I just find it hilarious that a guy who claims to be such a fervent Christian appears to have never actually read the Bible. Of course it's hilarious in the same way as watching the retarded kid from next door fall off his bike.
twhitehead
Cape Town
Joined
14 Apr '05
Moves
52945
07 Nov '06 07:38
Originally posted by scottishinnz
.....every person currently alive can trace ancestry to one of seven women ....
Actually it is only Europeans that it talks about.
I wonder if his work ever underwent the peer review process because I saw a number of flaws in the articles I read about it. First of all his sample was far too small for him to make broad statements about "Europeans".
ckoh1965
Joined
11 Jul '06
Moves
2753
07 Nov '06 07:58
Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it is only Europeans that it talks about.
I wonder if his work ever underwent the peer review process because I saw a number of flaws in the articles I read about it. First of all his sample was far too small for him to make broad statements about "Europeans".
But are you at least convinced of the possibility that the earth is more than 40,000 years old?
aardvarkhome
Meddling with things
Joined
04 Aug '04
Moves
58590
07 Nov '06 08:10
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
There are many resources available that can provide account information of the even the smallest details of the Flood. While the details have never been challenged, the 'forest for the trees' concept is one to keep in mind.

While the details have never been challenged......I've just wet myself laughing
XanthosNZ
Cancerous Bus Crash
p^2.sin(phi)
Joined
06 Sep '04
Moves
25076
07 Nov '06 08:18
Originally posted by ckoh1965
But are you at least convinced of the possibility that the earth is more than 40,000 years old?
twhitehead has been in these threads for a while and he's most definately NOT a creationist.
twhitehead
Cape Town
Joined
14 Apr '05
Moves
52945
07 Nov '06 08:44
Originally posted by ckoh1965
But are you at least convinced of the possibility that the earth is more than 40,000 years old?
I am not a creationist and know that the earth is more than 40,000 years old.
Interestingly I had heard about the 7 mothers article before on these forums except in that case it was being presented by someone who thought it was evidence for Noahs ark. (He somehow found 7 women in the story). However he forgot that the 7 women were supposed to be not closely related and that the article is only about Europeans not the whole worlds population.
I am a strong supporter of science and the scientific process, but part of that process is criticizing scientific work.
I personally think that a claim that all "Europeans" are descended from 7 women is a nice headline grabbing title but bad science. First of all there is no strict definition of what Europeans are and so no broad statements claiming completeness can be made. Are there no Europeans whose maternal line started in China for example?
scottishinnz
Kichigai!
Osaka
Joined
27 Apr '05
Moves
8592
07 Nov '06 08:45
Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it is only Europeans that it talks about.
I wonder if his work ever underwent the peer review process because I saw a number of flaws in the articles I read about it. First of all his sample was far too small for him to make broad statements about "Europeans".
Indeed, sorry about that. I meant to change it to Europeans, but it gave me the slip. Irrespective of whether it was 7 or 70, it was more than 2 and certainly more than 4,000 years ago.
ckoh1965
Joined
11 Jul '06
Moves
2753
07 Nov '06 08:59
Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not a creationist and know that the earth is more than 40,000 years old.
Interestingly I had heard about the 7 mothers article before on these forums except in that case it was being presented by someone who thought it was evidence for Noahs ark. (He somehow found 7 women in the story). However he forgot that the 7 women were supposed to be not clos ...[text shortened]... leteness can be made. Are there no Europeans whose maternal line started in China for example?
Please excuse me. I thought when you said there were 'flaws' in the article, you were implying that that article was (totally) wrong. So I asked if you're at least convinced on the age of the earth.
XanthosNZ
Cancerous Bus Crash
p^2.sin(phi)
Joined
06 Sep '04
Moves
25076
07 Nov '06 09:41
Originally posted by ckoh1965
Please excuse me. I thought when you said there were 'flaws' in the article, you were implying that that article was (totally) wrong. So I asked if you're at least convinced on the age of the earth.
I've had similar thoughts about the 7 daughters of Eve research and I've discussed it (briefly) with scott.
Bryson in A Brief History of Nearly Everything talks with experts who discount the research as following a road from Paris and taking a random turn at every intersection, eventually ending up in Rome and therefore assuming that every road leads to Rome. An interesting analogy but wrong it seems.

But of course thinking a scientific paper is flawed doesn't have anything to do with knowing the age of the Earth (unless the scientific paper is about the age of the Earth).