Posted on 07/25/2003 7:32:42 PM PDT by ckilmer
My theory is that Noah prefered to take the 2 foot beavers into his ark, instead of the 6 foot variety, they would take up less space and less food.
Although it is not necessary to believe that Noah had dinosaurs on the ark, the flood theory would certainly explain why all the dinosaurs died out in one generation.
Besides satisfying why the little dinosaurs did not survive with the big ones, you also have to account for everything else that did survive. Eg, crocidiles,turtles, and ants and cockaroaches, etc which everyone agrees were concurrent with the dinosaurs.
Again, the flood theory holds up. After the flood, only those reptiles who "hid" their eggs(by burying them ) e.g. crocidiles would survive, because the mammels let loose from the ark would quickly eat up any dinosaur eggs lying around on top of the ground- thus all dinosaurs which layed eggs on top of the ground died out in one generation - didnt matter if they were big dinosaurs or little ones.
The meteor theory which said that big dinosaurs could not find food, does not account for why the little dinosaurs which required very little food also died out. A world wide disaster which resulted in little vegetation does not explain why tiny dinosaurs survived.
As far as why we think the earth "appears" to be so old, is because you cant make a mountain in one day, and make it look like it is one day old.
One single minute after a mountain was made, it "looked" a billion years old, not a day. One second minute after Adam was made he looked like a 30 year old male, not a one second old male. There is no way to make a 30 year old male appear to be only one second old.
It has been calculated by many scientists how much deposits we have in the ocean and how deep the sediment is. We also have calcuated how much deposits are run off into the ocean each year. From that we can calculate how long the oceans have been around by adding up the yearly deposit runoff until we get the total deposits in the ocean.
Nearly all minerals and deposits calculations add up to between 5000 and 10000 years of runoff.
What actually happened, says that all the little mammels lived, all the little male animals got to mate with the female animals, and all the big mammels eventually died out, regardless of food source or living conditions - that is contrary to the obvious in who survives and who doesnt when brute force determines who takes over making the dam and who gets to mate with female beavers.
Burrow and den dwellers are acustomed to low oxygen levels. It's possible 6 ft beavers denned in more open areas, while their 2 ft cousins denned in a more familliar enclosed lodge.
I find it fascinating that the North American cows (bison) and the goats (deer and antelope) survived where the camel and horse did not.
I'm guessing here. Camel and horse are almost exclusively flatlanders - low altitude. Goats deer and antelope also dwell in mountains - high altitude. If there is a drop in oxygen levels the high altitude critters could move down hill to an area with higher partial pressure of oxygen. Flatlanders are stuck, no place to go to get enough air, they can't run far, think clearly, etc...
Horses can out run bison today.
In short bursts. I *think* a bison can run a horse into the ground in the long haul.
The difference between being a sprinter and a marathon runner. Perhaps this difference in "wind" goes with an ability to surive a lower oxygen level.
That's three testable hypothesis. Do bison roam the hills? Can a bison out marathon a horse? -and- Can marathoners get by with less oxygen than sprinters?
Interesting. I dont think horses and cows would be taken equally by predetors. Although a bull cow is very dangerous, I would think the horse would survive over cows, horses are faster than cows, smarter than cows, have more herd/protection instinct, and are good fighters. The horses' demise must have been because of a preference of horse meat over cow meat, or else by a disease that affected horses and not cattle.
Humans have more endurance than any mammal alive.
Maybe a better question would be: "What would kill all the 6 foot beavers, and not kill all of the 2 foot beavers?"
It's a subtle difference, but the these beds of frozen animals contain many species that are not extinct. In other words, the disaster affected all species but did not make them all extinct.
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.