Posted on 06/02/2009 5:35:46 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
In a world full of death and suffering, some creatures are known to be fierce carnivores (meat eaters). In fact, the perception of animals eating other animals is seen as normal in todays secular, evolution-influenced society. But was it always like that?...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
So are you being testy, sarcastic, rude, funny - what?
Maintaining population levels implies death. The article said at the beginning of creation there was no death. If there was no death, why would maintaining population levels be necessary?
Or what if fertility was shut down completely?
Then there would be no reproduction. If death existed without fertility, you would have extinction in short order.
Why do you assume unlimited fecundity? Even evos maintain that systems can regulate themselves.
true but death and decay are requirements for regulated systems. The article said at the beginning of creation, there was no death.
ping
Not sure - could be any of those, I suppose. I couldn’t quite believe this was serious - so many things to be concerned about, and anyone would worry whether an animal was vegetarian?? Geez, find something important to worry about.
I admit that was a poor example. What I'm trying to convey is that if there was stasis before the Fall then most of the rules we see now didn't apply. If there was no death then there was obviously no need to regulate population levels since they would be the same at all times.
Thanks for the ping!
Some will snatch a dead fish from time to time, but overall they are almost completely vegetarian “birds of prey.” It just goes to show you can’t always judge a bird by its beak, a spider by its venom, or a lion by its fangs.
OK, who's buying? Step right up.
Uh, vegetarians don't eat meat.
No. It was your "why not?"
As a species they are almost completely vegetarian...and many of these birds may be on a full veggie diet.
Is that ‘almost’ as in ‘almost pregnant’?
The author offers no evidence that the spider in question was ever carnivorous. The author's own link says the vultures "feed on Raphia and Elaeis palm fruit but will also take invertebrates, fish and carrion;" the author adds the phrase "on occasion" to make it sound like it doesn't do it very often, but that's an unsupported implication. The author also makes it sound like it's really hard to tell a pacu from a piranha, requiring a close examination of "slight differences" in their teeth, which is likewise deceptive: according to Wikipedia
piranha have pointed, razor-sharp teeth in a pronounced underbite, whereas pacu have squarer, straighter teeth in a less severe underbite, or a slight overbite. Additionally, full-grown pacu are much larger than piranha, reaching up to 60 pounds in weight, in the wild.One of the lions was raised vegetarian by a human for unknown reasons; the other lived about a third of the normal lion life span.
Somehow I'm not impressed.
I think with this one you’ve gone “a bridge too far” in your creationist campaign.
Well, yeah in a way. But speculation can be useful because it can better fill out a vision which can lead to hope and a strengthening of faith. But you're right in that speculation and conjecture shouldn't be taught as doctrine.
Not according to what I'm reading. From the author's own source:
these birds feed on Raphia and Elaeis palm fruit but will also take invertebrates, fish and carrion. When feeding on palm fruit they hang upside down below the fruit, pull it off the tree with their beaks and then hold it in their feet to eat it. Interestingly they have started to use a similar technique for taking carrion at game lodges. At Samburu Lodge the staff bait a branch to attract Leopard, they hang a goat haunch below an angled branch and the Leopards lie along the branch and haul the haunch up to feed on. The Palm-nut Vultures have developed the habit of hanging below the branch, using their palm fruit technique to enable them to pull off strips of meat.From here:"Sometimes also small birds and mammals, lizards, crabs, molluscs and locusts (grasshoppers), frogs and carrion."
And another source: "Unlike other vultures, the palm nut vulture often catches live prey---both on land and from the water. On several occasions I have seen them grabbing fish with their feet from the lake surface and then carrying the fish to a tree or to the lake shore to feed on it."
That's an awful lot of flesh for an "almost completely vegetarian" species.
how many?
Sorry but I have to answer this. What you are proposing is silly. What would happen in that case would be a population build up of all species until saturation was reached and then people and animals would have to quit. With no death there would be no frequency, no self regulating system to maintain population levels, no death means just that, no death, ever. All reproduction would have to stop and then all the animals and people would live forever population rates staying the same, never again reproducing. No regulation, but stagnation and I do not believe any creator would make something that stagnated and stayed the same forever.
Think about it, without death, no reproduction is possible, because no regulation would be possible, and that would not apply to plants if people were eating them, new plants would have to grow. Unless people wouldn't have to eat, with no death why bother eating? What's the point, you can't die, so why do you have to eat?
I’m sure that whole going blind from lack of taurine thing is just a small inconvenience for the cat right? Right??
Just the "bad hunters"
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.