So none of those population bottlenecks date to about 4500 years ago and no animals or plants that I am aware of show any population bottleneck about 4500 years ago, which is rather instructive don't you think?
Who says?
No, hence my question. So what did they not include?
What they did include is a much shorter list, and if you can't figure it out by my comment that they didn't need two wolves and two foxes, just one pair of canine [canidae] kind then I'm afraid I can't help you because you're just too stupid to teach.
If I wanted anything it would be to see a robust definition of 'kind' that didn't vary with the changing needs of religious orthodoxy.
Family
I see no logical reason, no valid argument, for it to mean anything else.
I think it means that you'd have a hard time getting 1000 species of bat from a pair of 'bat-kind'.
Then the Lord said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen
that you
are righteous before Me in this generation. You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that
are unclean, a male and his female; also seven each of birds of the air, male and female, to keep the species alive on the face of all the earth. For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made.”
-Genesis 7:1-4
While bats may be unclean they were counted among the birds as seen in Leviticus 11:13-19; so that was seven of each kind.
You are aware that dog breeds are all subspecies of the gray wolf and interfertile?
So?
So some of the amphibia were on the Ark contrary to your previous exclusion of them? Or was it just a pair of 'amphibian-kind'?
I didn't exclude amphibians from being on the ark; I said they didn't need to be on the ark if they could survive in the water.
Amphibian is not a kind; it's a class.
Some evidence would serve to validate this hypothesis. how many extinct species became extinct before the flood, how many during and how many after?
How should I know?
Deus ex machina: something or someone highly unlikely (i.e. not foreshadowed) that arrives just in time to resolve an otherwise insurmountable difficulty. In other words, a made-up device to get out of an impossible situation.
Or literally: "god from the machine."
But to claim God is not even foreshadowed in this event is disingenuous. He is there from the beginning; He is known to be responsible for the flood. Why would He not be responsible for the preservation of the animals He wanted preserved?
The Ark legend and global flood myth are both logically incoherent and lacking in substantive evidence. The post-flood evolutionary rates handwaved around by creationists that fly in the face of anything proposed by the evolutionary biologists whose ideas they find so threatening, for example.
How is it logically incoherent? Saying it is doesn't explain how it is.
Try being honest for a change.
