Posted on 03/28/2002 11:30:11 AM PST by afuturegovernor
So... who's the one with no intellectual curiosity again? I have an eyewitness account, with (as you helpfully demonstrated) an eminently credible structure. You have... assumptions. So, tell me again...who's not curious?
Dan
...and will accuse everyone else of being lazy and foolish. But then, the Emperor's degrees of confidence and clothedness never have been in synch, have they?
Dan
To gain knowledge, "Dataman." That's the purpose of asking questions in science...to gain knowledge.
You appear to think you know the 10 "kinds of dog" that were present at the time of Christ, and the 5 "kinds of dog" that were present at the time the Ark was allegedly built. I'm asking you what they were, so I'll know what you think YOU know.
Simple question. Will you answer it?
I assume you grant the fact that the ark was 3x larger than needed.
Not a good assumption. I can't make ANY assessment about whether or not the alleged ark was large enough, until I find out how many animals were allegedly on board. All I know is that there were allegedly two of every "kind" of animal. But since BS isn't real science, "kind" doesn't have any scientific definition. In real science, we have, "kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, variety/breed."
If you or Dan would say, "kind means species" or "kind means genus" or "kind means variety/breed" I might then be able to estimate the number living things involved. (At least if you could ALSO tell me whether you think that animals that SCIENCE knows were long extinct 4000 years ago were also on the ark...e.g., dinosaurs.)
So again: What were the 10 "kinds" of dog around at the time of Christ, and the 5 "kinds" of dog around at the time of the alleged building of the ark (which I ASSUME we agree was approximately 4000 years ago)?
building of the ark (which I ASSUME we agree was approximately 4000 years ago)?
Your assumption is incorrect. Consult a reference book to discover when the flood took place. By 2000 BC we are already to the time of Abram.
You appear to think you know the 10 "kinds of dog" that were present at the time of Christ, and the 5 "kinds of dog" that were present at the time the Ark was allegedly built. I'm asking you what they were, so I'll know what you think YOU know.
There were only a few kinds of dogs. Fossil remains of the early Bronze Age, 6500 years ago; make it possible to identify 5 major groups of early dogs
There happen to be several places where this information can be found. Here is the source for the quote: http://www.chuckiii.com/Reports/Anthropology/Domestication_of_the_Dog.shtml
But since BS isn't real science, "kind" doesn't have any scientific definition. In real science, we have, "kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, variety/breed."
Maybe you haven't thought of this before, but exactly what was the taxonomy before the current system? Do your own homework to discover the answer. Do you think there was no method of classifying animals before the current phylogenic system?
:-/ *I* can't possibly "research" what I'm asking you! I'm asking you what YOU know...or to be more accurate, what you think you know. You said there were 10 "kinds" of dogs at the time of Christ, and 5 "kinds" of dogs at the time of the Flood. You obviously wouldn't have said this, unless you thought you knew it. I can't research to find out what *you* think you know.
There were only a few kinds of dogs. Fossil remains of the early Bronze Age, 6500 years ago; make it possible to identify 5 major groups of early dogs.
Heh, heh, heh! Dataman, Irish Archbishop James Ussher calculated that CREATION occurred in 4004 BC! Are you saying the good Archbishop was WRONG? ;-)
Dates of Creation and the Flood
Your nonsensical (which some witnesses call "science") website about the dogs of the Bronze Age is saying that there was a BRONZE AGE almost 2500 years before Adam was even created!!! :-)
In your opinion, who is wrong? Archbishop James Ussher, who calculated that Creation occurred in 4004 BC? Or the website that you found that talks about an early Bronze Age in 6500 BC?
I would never "dismiss" them. I might "refute" them. Big difference.
Rather than deny the secular source, you ask me to defend a person's chronology.
I didn't ask you to "defend" (or refute) anything. I asked you which source you THOUGHT was correct (that the world started circa 4004 BC, or that the early Bronze Age was occurring in 6500 BC). As a matter of fact, you could have easily said you thought both were wrong, and gave your own thoughts on what dogs were available circa the alleged time of alleged Noah. That's telling, as is your excuse for not researching.
Once again, this was something for which is was NOT possible for me to do research...I was asking for what YOU thought you knew.
I prefer to deal with thinkers.
No one on this site thinks more than I do. (Some may think as much, no one thinks more.)
Goodbye.
Yes, if you can't stand the heat, you should probably stay out of the kitchen.
And Bumper hornberger is running for the Senate fromn Va as an independent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.