The fossil record shows there never was evolution.

[genuineoriginal]

I was asking you about your position based on what you have said about sufficient change. Your definition is so vague that it is nearly useless.

My definition was quite clear, you only think it is not because of your preconceived notions about evolution.

Does not seem to be true for the great apes including humans. The tree has branched considerably from the original "kind" into chimps and apes and orangutans and humans.

Chimps, apes, orangutans, and humans are all different kinds.
There is no common ancestor among them.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Yes, your strawman is grossly oversimplified.
:thumb:

Now if you want to talk about the animals that died in the first tsunami being buried first and the animals that died in the second tsunami being buried on top of them, we may have something to discuss.

A goal post move. Always a good tactic when confronted with the failure of your argument.

Want to talk tsunamis? Fine, lets. We'll start with a few basic questions.

How far apart in time were the two tsunamis?

How far apart are the two tsunamis?

When animals are drowned, how does the size and mass of that animal effect how it sinks to the bottom?

Does the size of the animal killed by the tsunami have any correlation to how far out to sea the carcass is dragged?

Does predation effect how carcasses are deposited on the ocean floor?

If the tsunami drains through a relatively small channel such that bodies are concentrated at an obstruction, what kind of distribution of animals would be reasonable expected to collect there?

We'll start there and see where we go. Should be fun.

 

[CabinetMaker]

My definition was quite clear, you only think it is not because of your preconceived notions about evolution.

No, it is not. Your definition is extremely self serving.

Chimps, apes, orangutans, and humans are all different kinds.
There is no common ancestor among them.

They are now but Stripe's theory that everything descended from a master kind would tend to indicate that the family hominidae do have a common ancestor.

 

[genuineoriginal]

A goal post move. Always a good tactic when confronted with the failure of your argument.

Is that why you did it?

Want to talk tsunamis? Fine, lets. We'll start with a few basic questions.

How far apart in time were the two tsunamis?

How far apart are the two tsunamis?

When animals are drowned, how does the size and mass of that animal effect how it sinks to the bottom?

Does the size of the animal killed by the tsunami have any correlation to how far out to sea the carcass is dragged?

Does predation effect how carcasses are deposited on the ocean floor?

If the tsunami drains through a relatively small channel such that bodies are concentrated at an obstruction, what kind of distribution of animals would be reasonable expected to collect there?

We'll start there and see where we go. Should be fun.

This article speaks about the impact of a single asteroid.
The flood was the result of multiple impacts.

_____
Effects of an Asteroid Impact on Earth
Tsunami

The oceans cover about 75% of the Earth's surface, so it is likely the asteroid will hit an ocean. The amount of water in the ocean is nowhere near large enough to "cushion" the asteroid. The asteroid will push the water aside and hit the ocean floor to create a large crater. The water pushed aside will form a huge tidal wave, a tsunami. The tidal wave height in meters =10.9 × (distance from impact in kilometers)-0.717 × (energy of impact in megatons TNT)0.495. What this means is that a 10-km asteroid hitting any deep point in the Pacific (the largest ocean) produces a megatsunami along the entire Pacific Rim.
Some values for the height of the tsunami at different distances from the impact site are given in the following table. The heights are given for the two typical asteroids, a 10-kilometer and a 1-kilometer asteroid.

Distance (in km)	10 km asteroid	1 km asteroid
300	1.3 km	42 m
1000	540 m	18 m
3000	250 m	8 m
10000	100 m	3 m

The steam blasts from the water at the crater site rushing back over the hot crater floor will also produce tsunamis following the initial impact tsunami and crustal shifting as a result of the initial impact would produce other tsunamis---a complex train of tsunamis would be created from the initial impact (something not usually shown in disaster movies).​

Notice that there is a complex train of tsunamis that are created from each impact.
Each tsunami in the train would hit the land from different directions and with different force, making most of your questions irrelevant.

You are also assuming that none of the animals are buried on land and all of them are dragged out to sea and buried.

 

[Jose Fly]

Where did you get the idea that anything less than the evolution of an entire new family counts?
A fly is a fly is a fly.
All flies are flies.

So it's just something you made up.

All flies are part of the fly kind.

And how did you establish that?

If you prove that a fly can evolve into some new kind, which is not a fly, then you can prove evolution.
Anything less only proves that DNA allows for adaptation without true speciation.

You're not making any sense. "Speciation" is the evolution of a new species, but here you're saying it's not speciation until a new family has been produced.

We now have a new way of identifying things like this, called DNA.

What do you look at in the DNA to determine what is and isn't descended from a common ancestor population?

The mule is sterile, an "evolutionary dead end", because of the differences in the chromosomes, which shows that the horse and donkey came from different ancestors.

Does that mean "different numbers of chromosomes" is the criterion for "kinds"? IOW, does every population that has different numbers of chromosomes = a different "kind"? And conversely, does every population that has the same number of chromosomes = the same "kind"?

 

[Jose Fly]

Is this what you consider rational discussion? A series of ad hominem comments followed by deliberately evasive response and completely ignoring the universally accepted definition of "theory" and "scientific process" used be all legitimate scientists around the world.

Welcome to Stripe world. :banana:

 

[Jose Fly]

Chimps, apes, orangutans, and humans are all different kinds.
There is no common ancestor among them.

How did you determine that?

 

[CabinetMaker]

This article speaks about the impact of a single asteroid.
The flood was the result of multiple impacts.

_____
Effects of an Asteroid Impact on Earth
Tsunami

The oceans cover about 75% of the Earth's surface, so it is likely the asteroid will hit an ocean. The amount of water in the ocean is nowhere near large enough to "cushion" the asteroid. The asteroid will push the water aside and hit the ocean floor to create a large crater. The water pushed aside will form a huge tidal wave, a tsunami. The tidal wave height in meters =10.9 × (distance from impact in kilometers)-0.717 × (energy of impact in megatons TNT)0.495. What this means is that a 10-km asteroid hitting any deep point in the Pacific (the largest ocean) produces a megatsunami along the entire Pacific Rim.
Some values for the height of the tsunami at different distances from the impact site are given in the following table. The heights are given for the two typical asteroids, a 10-kilometer and a 1-kilometer asteroid.

Distance (in km)	10 km asteroid	1 km asteroid
300	1.3 km	42 m
1000	540 m	18 m
3000	250 m	8 m
10000	100 m	3 m

The steam blasts from the water at the crater site rushing back over the hot crater floor will also produce tsunamis following the initial impact tsunami and crustal shifting as a result of the initial impact would produce other tsunamis---a complex train of tsunamis would be created from the initial impact (something not usually shown in disaster movies).​

This is rather a large step away from a biblical understand of the Great Flood, is it not? Its a fine article on the impact of asteroids but the Great Flood does not talk about asteroid impacts. Or Tsunamis.

Notice that there is a complex train of tsunamis that are created from each impact.
Each tsunami in the train would hit the land from different directions and with different force, making most of your questions irrelevant.

Only the first two, the rest remain valid.

You are also assuming that none of the animals are buried on land and all of them are dragged out to sea and buried.

a) I made no assumptions about how all the animals died, I asked specific questions about the ones washed out to sea.
b)How is does an animal that dies on land get buried by sediment in sufficient quantity for fossilization?

 

[genuineoriginal]

You're not making any sense. "Speciation" is the evolution of a new species, but here you're saying it's not speciation until a new family has been produced.

I am making sense, but you can't understand it because you are fixated on the paradigm of the theory of evolution.

"Speciation" is not precise enough to be a useful term for what we are talking about, which is why I mentioned "true speciation".
The theory of evolution claims that new families are descended from the same common ancestor.
Until you can prove that this is a fact, none of the minor changes that you call "speciation" will prove anything.

 

[Jose Fly]

GO,

You ignored just about everything I posted to you. So let's try again...

How did you establish that there is a "fly kind"?

What do you look at in DNA to determine what is and isn't descended from a common ancestor population?

Does different numbers of chromosomes = different "kinds"?

Does the same number of chromosomes = the same "kind"?

How did you determine that chimps, apes, orangutans, and humans are all different kinds?

"Speciation" is not precise enough to be a useful term for what we are talking about, which is why I mentioned "true speciation".

And you just made that up, correct?

The theory of evolution claims that new families are descended from the same common ancestor.
Until you can prove that this is a fact, none of the minor changes that you call "speciation" will prove anything.

Could we use the same methods (that you have yet to describe) that you use to conclude that "flies" are all descended from a common ancestor population?

 

[genuineoriginal]

This is rather a large step away from a biblical understand of the Great Flood, is it not? Its a fine article on the impact of asteroids but the Great Flood does not talk about asteroid impacts. Or Tsunamis.

When Genesis was written, the word for tsunami is the same word we have translated as flood.
The source of the flood was not just rainfall.

Genesis 7:10-11 10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.​

You may have been taught that the waters gradually rose until the surface of the earth was covered, but that is not the way the account is written.

Genesis 7:18-20 18 And the waters prevailed (גָּבַר gâbar H1396), and were increased (רָבָה râbâh H7235) greatly (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966) upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed (גָּבַר gâbar H1396) exceedingly (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966)(מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966) upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail (גָּבַר gâbar H1396); and the mountains were covered.​

The waters were strong, mighty, and powerful (גָּבַר gâbar H1396)
The waters were great and numerous (רָבָה râbâh H7235)
The waters were with speed and much force (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966)

It is a great description for multiple tsunamis washing over all the land, over and over.

a) I made no assumptions about how all the animals died, I asked specific questions about the ones washed out to sea.
b)How is does an animal that dies on land get buried by sediment in sufficient quantity for fossilization?

There will be some animals that will get washed out to sea, but that would be a smaller number than the ones buried on land.

The tsunamis would carry oceanic sand that would bury the animals on land.
The asteroid impacts would cause earthquakes in addition to the tsunamis, which would result in landslides that would bury the animals on land.
The water soaked land would produce mudslides and more landslides that would bury the animals on land.

We are talking about a catastrophe of biblical (worldwide) proportions, after all.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Could we use the same methods (that you have yet to describe) that you use to conclude that "flies" are all descended from a common ancestor population?

I wouldn't claim that all flies are descended from a common ancestor population.

There most likely were many kinds of flies that served as the ancestor populations.

But, we were talking about how the experiments attempting to speciate fruit flies never produced anything other than fruit flies.

 

[Jose Fly]

I wouldn't claim that all flies are descended from a common ancestor population.

There most likely were many kinds of flies that served as the ancestor populations.

Based on what?

But, we were talking about how the experiments attempting to speciate fruit flies never produced anything other than fruit flies.

Which you said didn't count as speciation because a new "kind" wasn't produced, so again you're not making sense.

And are you just going to ignore everything else in my last post?

 

[CabinetMaker]

When Genesis was written, the word for tsunami is the same word we have translated as flood.
The source of the flood was not just rainfall.

Genesis 7:10-11 10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.​

You may have been taught that the waters gradually rose until the surface of the earth was covered, but that is not the way the account is written.

Genesis 7:18-20 18 And the waters prevailed (גָּבַר gâbar H1396), and were increased (רָבָה râbâh H7235) greatly (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966) upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed (גָּבַר gâbar H1396) exceedingly (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966)(מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966) upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail (גָּבַר gâbar H1396); and the mountains were covered.​

The waters were strong, mighty, and powerful (גָּבַר gâbar H1396)
The waters were great and numerous (רָבָה râbâh H7235)
The waters were with speed and much force (מְאֹד mᵉʼôd H3966)

Stripe, Hank Brown and others make much of the fonts of the deep opening up. Thoughts?

It is a great description for multiple tsunamis washing over all the land, over and over.

There will be some animals that will get washed out to sea, but that would be a smaller number than the ones buried on land.

The tsunamis would carry oceanic sand that would bury the animals on land.

Why has this not been observed in recent tsunamis?

The asteroid impacts would cause earthquakes in addition to the tsunamis, which would result in landslides that would bury the animals on land.

Would animals buried in a land slide create fossils?

The water soaked land would produce mudslides and more landslides that would bury the animals on land.

If there is enough water to great sufficient quantities of mud to cause mudslides, why wouldn't those waters take the carcasses with them as they recede?

We are talking about a catastrophe of biblical (worldwide) proportions, after all.

Yes, we are. Still, tsunamis obey the laws of physics and water that is moving picks things up and moves them This can range from sediment to boulders. The suspended materials only drop out when the velocity of the water slows to the point where it can no longer keep the material in suspension.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Based on what?

We have horse flies, house flies, fruit flies, and more.
It is quite likely that there were multiple kinds of flies created instead of a single one that diverged into the multiple types we find nowadays.

And are you just going to ignore everything else in my last post?

You appear to be asking me to create a full featured Creationist taxonomy to replace the current evolutionist taxonomy.
This Creationist taxonomy would need to precisely define "kind" and trace each of the currently named species and breeds of organisms to the originating kind.
It would also have to explain the mechanism of cross-breeding two different kinds.

This is too great a task to do in a couple of minutes on an internet forum.

But, maybe you were only asking about chimps, gorillas, orangutans, and humans.

Humans have 46 chromosomes, chimps, gorillas, orangutans have 48.
The number of chromosomes is only one factor to consider, the other major factor is the chromosomal similarity and disparity.
There is some chromosomal similarity between chimps, gorillas, orangutans, and humans, but there is sufficient chromosomal disparity to warrant calling these four different kinds.

 

[Jonahdog]

But, we were talking about how the experiments attempting to speciate fruit flies never produced anything other than fruit flies.

Please provide a citation to experiments to attempt to speciate fruit flies. Thanks

 

[Sonnet]

You live in the UK. I know there are universities there. find the closest one with a geology department. Go there. Have someone explain this to you.
You'll feel much better.

Explain what?

 

[Jose Fly]

We have horse flies, house flies, fruit flies, and more.
It is quite likely that there were multiple kinds of flies created instead of a single one that diverged into the multiple types we find nowadays.

Based on what?

You appear to be asking me to create a full featured Creationist taxonomy to replace the current evolutionist taxonomy.

You've made very specific claims about what are and what aren't different "kinds", for example, your claim above about different "fly kinds", or your claim that chimps, apes, orangutans, and humans are all different "kinds". My questions are directly related to those claims.

Also you seemed to claim that different chromosome numbers = different "kinds", so I've asked if that's true, and if the converse is also true, i.e., the same number of chromosomes = the same "kind".

You also claimed that we can look at DNA to determine what is and isn't descended from a common ancestor population, so I asked you to specify what in DNA you think we should look at.

So as you can see, I'm not asking you for a "a full featured Creationist taxonomy" at all. Now how about actually answering?

Humans have 46 chromosomes, chimps, gorillas, orangutans have 48.
The number of chromosomes is only one factor to consider,

Does different chromosome numbers always = different "kinds"?

the other major factor is the chromosomal similarity and disparity.
There is some chromosomal similarity between chimps, gorillas, orangutans, and humans, but there is sufficient chromosomal disparity to warrant calling these four different kinds.

What type of similarities and disparities are you talking about?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Stripe, Hank Brown and others make much of the fonts of the deep opening up. Thoughts?

I don't accept the hydroplate theory, but think that the comet/asteroid theory of the flood is a good explanation.
The Hebrew word translated as "deep" is תְּהוֹם tᵉhôwm, which has a primary definition of a surging mass of water.
This is a tsunami caused by the comet/asteroid impacts (multiple) that happened at the time of the flood.

Why has this not been observed in recent tsunamis?

It has.
https://www.usgs.gov/news/new-geological-evidence-aids-tsunami-hazard-assessments-alaska-hawaii

Would animals buried in a land slide create fossils?

Remember that the earth is soaked in water from the flood, so many of the dry land slides that bury animals before the tsunamis hit would turn to the mud needed to create fossils when covered by the rain water and tsunamis.

If there is enough water to great sufficient quantities of mud to cause mudslides, why wouldn't those waters take the carcasses with them as they recede?

It rained for 40 days and 40 nights, and the water soaked the soil.
The tsunamis also washed over the soil and soaked it.
The water-laden soil turned into mudslides.
Guess where the carcasses were buried?
Under the mudslides.

Yes, we are. Still, tsunamis obey the laws of physics and water that is moving picks things up and moves them This can range from sediment to boulders. The suspended materials only drop out when the velocity of the water slows to the point where it can no longer keep the material in suspension.

We are talking about a lot of water washing again and again over a land with complex topography, not a gradual rise in water level over flat land.
Each tsunami will cause something different to happen than the one before, and the water-laden soil will shift and move between one tsunami and the next.
Are you forgetting about the liquefaction of the soil and concentrating only on the water?
Are you forgetting about the multiple tsunamis coming in from different directions and with different levels of strength?
Are you forgetting what happened to the water as it passed over hills and valleys?

Remember, the waters of the flood covered the earth for a whole year, even though the rain lasted only 40 days and 40 nights.
That doesn't mean that the waters peacefully rose to a certain level in 40 days and then sunk down again a year later.

It means that there were many consecutive months when the waves of the tsunamis washed onto the land over and over like the ripples in a pond when a rock is thrown into it, and it took a year for the tsunamis to subside to a level that the ark could land instead of being pushed back and forth.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Please provide a citation to experiments to attempt to speciate fruit flies. Thanks

Already did in a prior post.