Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fish Studies Answer Flood Question
ICR ^ | March 9, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

Posted on 03/09/2009 9:18:57 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Fish Studies Answer Flood Question

by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

According to the Bible, the world before Noah’s Flood, including the oceans, must have been idyllic. That was destroyed by the year-long global deluge, during which the earth’s land mass broke into continents, massive amounts of sediment were deposited and then partially eroded, and new and perhaps deeper oceans became more salty from continental runoff. If this historical picture is accurate, then at least one area of confusion needs to be addressed: How did “saltwater fish” live through all that?...

(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: a; adaptation; agriculture; bible; blacksalmon; cataclysm; cobia; continents; creation; degeneration; department; devolution; evolution; extinct; fossils; geneticrobustness; intelligentdesign; kingfish; noahsflood; pompano; salinity; sediment; tolerance

1 posted on 03/09/2009 9:18:58 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

2 posted on 03/09/2009 9:20:54 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Good post!

Excerpt:

The United States Department of Agriculture has been conducting research to enable populations of saltwater pompano and cobia—also known as black kingfish or black salmon—to thrive inland in fresher waters.2 Remarkably, pompano have been raised successfully in water with five parts salt per thousand, quite a bit less than the ocean’s ever-increasing salt concentration of 35 parts per thousand.3

The ability of pompano to adapt to such a different salinity so quickly—being modern products of thousands of pompano generations that lived exclusively in salty seas—shows a fraction of the biological flexibility that many fish at the time of the Flood must have had. This flexibility allowed those fish and other sea creatures to survive the cataclysm and to adapt to new environments after the Flood.


3 posted on 03/09/2009 9:26:08 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Thank you :o)

All the best—GGG


4 posted on 03/09/2009 9:27:54 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

ICHTHYS reigns!


5 posted on 03/09/2009 9:32:44 AM PDT by woollyone (I believe God created me- you believe you're related to monkeys. Of course I laughed at you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Teh Stupid is strong in this one.


6 posted on 03/09/2009 9:34:38 AM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Year-long”...? What happened to 40 days and 40 nights? Also, where does the Bible call post-Eden Earth “idyllic” or suggest that the continents were fused until the flood?!


7 posted on 03/09/2009 9:35:17 AM PDT by pgyanke (You have no "rights" that require an involuntary burden on another person. Period. - MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The global judgement that the catastrophists envision to account for all the geological evidence of a much older world would have generated sufficient heat to cook every fish in the ocean. So God not only preserved Noah and his family, He also miraculously preserved all the fish species he wanted to survive (but for some reason He hated trilobites).


8 posted on 03/09/2009 9:35:29 AM PDT by Philo-Junius (One precedent creates another. They soon accumulate and constitute law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
In total disclosure I do not buy evolution, but I do not by the young earth's explanation of orgins either. I always laugh when young earthers, to fit a young earth view, have to create more evolution in animals than even Darwin did. Here is an example from the article:

Those (FISH) that survived must have had inherent abilities to quickly adapt to rapid changes in salt concentration, among other factors. Millennia have elapsed since the flood, and since genetic robustness diminishes with time, it is likely that many fish that today have narrow salinity tolerances came from ancestors that had broader potential in that area..

This theory require a rapid speciation that even Darwin could not dream of. Yet no evidence to back this up in DNA or genetic studies. At least evolution postulate "junk DNA", not stories about fish in restaurants.

9 posted on 03/09/2009 9:35:54 AM PDT by 11th Commandment (United States is a NOW a Terrorist Nation- we export abortion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
"the world before Noah’s Flood, including the oceans, must have been idyllic"

it was so idyllic that the flood was necessary.

10 posted on 03/09/2009 9:39:27 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment
I always laugh when young earthers, to fit a young earth view, have to create more evolution in animals than even Darwin did.

Forget the salt. Young Earthers promote rapid and massive movements of the continents. Yet that much seafloor volcanic activity would have poached the salmon.

11 posted on 03/09/2009 9:45:20 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment

==This theory require a rapid speciation that even Darwin could not dream of. Yet no evidence to back this up in DNA or genetic studies. At least evolution postulate “junk DNA”, not stories about fish in restaurants.

The reason Darwin could not dream of such rapid adaptation and speciation is because he put on the materialist straightjacket of random changes plus natural selection. We now know, via the “new biology” (which includes the field of epigenetics), that many organism have the capacity to adapt on-the-fly. From a creationist perspective, this means that God frontloaded his creatures with the capacity to adapt to a variety of environmental conditions.


12 posted on 03/09/2009 9:46:11 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment

==At least evolution postulate “junk DNA”

Which, along with Darwin’s so-called Tree of Life, is on the way out the scientific window.


13 posted on 03/09/2009 9:47:55 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

While “creation research” stuff is fun to read, this movement has become it’s own religeon. It’s purpose is to prove God by natural evidence.
A person either takes God at His Word by faith, or chooses a god of his own design, in this case creationism.


14 posted on 03/09/2009 9:49:47 AM PDT by WestwardHo (Whom the god would destroy, they first drive mad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

>>What happened to 40 days and 40 nights?<<

This is not directed at you, but I am using your comment as a springboard.

It is amazing how many of those who condemn the teachings of Christianity from what they see as an “I studied Christianity and know that it is silly” viewpoint when, in fact, they have a “vacation bible school” understanding of it.

Your comment is the type one of these may make. Anyone who actually studied (or even read with average reading comprehension) the Bible account of Noah would know that 40 days was how long it rained, not how long he was actually “at sea”, which was significantly longer.

C. S. Lewis once commented (and I paraphrase) that Bible detractors often put up a childes perspective of the bible against an adults perspective on that teaching to which they are comparing it. Not surprisingly, the Bible then comes up lacking.


15 posted on 03/09/2009 9:53:50 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WestwardHo

==A person either takes God at His Word by faith, or chooses a god of his own design, in this case creationism.

The Bible is filled with historical references and invites the believer and unbeliever alike to check them out. Indeed, the first historical reference in the Bible is Genesis 1:1!


16 posted on 03/09/2009 9:59:12 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


17 posted on 03/09/2009 10:14:07 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I stand by my orginal statement.
God has said, “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof, the world and they that dwell therein.
Who shall ascend unto the hill of the Lord, or who shall stand in His holy place? He that has clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up his soul to vanity nor sworn deceitfully.”
This is Psalm 24. It speaks to God the creator of earth and
the owner of what He has made, God the creator and owner of salvation.
If I have to accept He is my creator, I have to accept His ownership and authority over me.
I have observed creation research progress from providing interesting observations to becoming religeous apologists.
Creation is not the end all of who God is and His purpose for us.
God the creator is rejected because His ownership and authority is rejected.


18 posted on 03/09/2009 10:28:26 AM PDT by WestwardHo (Whom the god would destroy, they first drive mad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
So please, teach we poor "vacation bible school" ignorati.

What is the specific scriptural support for "the year-long global deluge, during which the earth’s land mass broke into continents, massive amounts of sediment were deposited and then partially eroded, and new and perhaps deeper oceans became more salty from continental runoff."

19 posted on 03/09/2009 11:01:22 AM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
C. S. Lewis once commented (and I paraphrase) that Bible detractors often put up a childes perspective of the bible against an adults perspective on that teaching to which they are comparing it. Not surprisingly, the Bible then comes up lacking.

To borrow your statement: this isn't directed at you, but I'm using it as a springboard. Lewis's statement also applies to evolution detractors, who often seem to be stuck on Mr. Garrison's (South Park) idea of how it's supposed to happen rather than a true understanding of the theory. Not surprisingly, the theory then looks ridiculous to them.

20 posted on 03/09/2009 11:13:39 AM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

My response is not to that comment.


21 posted on 03/09/2009 11:13:56 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical

Yeah, I agree.


22 posted on 03/09/2009 11:14:29 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

My response was to the “what happened to the 40 days and 40 nights?” comment, which is why I quoted it in that response.


23 posted on 03/09/2009 11:15:57 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke; RobRoy
“Year-long”...? What happened to 40 days and 40 nights?

There's an old joke about a pioneer who claimed he could count in Indian. When pressed for proof he said, "One, two, three, many."

Same with the Middle Eastern myths. "Forty" was the equivalent to "many". Ali Baba and the 40 thieves, rained for 40 days/nights, Moses on Mount Sinai for 40 days/nights, Elijah fed by ravens for 40 days, Jesus fasted for 40 days, and was seen 40 days after his resurrection, etc.

24 posted on 03/09/2009 11:59:40 AM PDT by Oatka ("A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." –Bertrand de Jouvenel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

If sea levels rose to cover mountains in 40 days and the continents split apart as a result, the salinity of the water for fish would be the least of their problems.

BTW, what does the R stand for in ICR? It says ‘Research’ on the website that’s gotta be a typo. They seem to spend all their time waiting for someone else to do some real science before drawing wild and unsubstantiated conclusions from it.

If they spent a fraction of the time actually doing what they claim to do instead of yelling from the bleachers, maybe they could put some evidence together to account for continents moving 5,000 kilometers in a few months or the claim that T.Rex, lions and sharks weren’t carnivorous to begin with.

But I shouldn’t hold my breathe, right?


25 posted on 03/09/2009 4:26:39 PM PDT by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Evolution in Your Face
by Patrick Huyghe
Omni
Lake Victoria, Africa's largest lake, is home to more than 300 species of cichlids. These fish, which are popular in aquariums, are deep-bodied and have one nostril, rather than the usual two, on each side of the head. Seismic profiles and cores of the lake taken by a team headed by Thomas C. Johnson of the University of Minnesota, reveal that the lake dried up completely about 12,400 years ago. This means that the rate of speciation of cichlid fishes has been extremely rapid: something on average of one new species every 40 years!
The Origin of the Oceans
by Immanuel Velikovsky
It must have been at the very beginning of my occupation with the problems later developed in my books and in not yet published manuscripts, that I came upon the question of the origin of salts in seas and oceans. The common salt is a substantial ingredient of the oceanic content, or, said differently, the water of the oceans and seas contains a substantial solution of NaCl, or sodium chloride. Even though our blood and tissues abound in sodium chloride, man and animals are not adapted to drink salty water, and life on land could develop only thanks to the evaporation of the water from the surface of seas and oceans, or to distillation -- the evaporating water is free from salts. Falling as rain or snow or dew, it feeds underground sources and also glaciers, and through them the brooks and rivers and lakes, and is delivered to our use usually through concrete tubes and metal pipes.

Of the salts of the seas sodium chloride is by far the most abundant. The provenance of it is, however, a riddle. It was, and still is, assumed that the salts in the oceans originated mainly through importation from land, having been dissolved from rocks by flowing rivulets and rivers, themselves fed by underground sources, and the same process working on the rocks of the seabed. Terrestrial formations are rich in sodium, and in eons of time, it is assumed, the sodium washed out of the rocks supplied its content to the oceans; the seas evaporate and the concentration of these salts grows. But the rocks are by far not so rich in chlorine, and hence the problem -- from where did chlorine come to contribute its abundance to oceanic water?
On Saturn and the Flood
by Immanuel Velikovsky
With the end of the seven days of light the Earth became enveloped in waters of cosmic origin, whether coming directly from Saturn -- and Saturn is known to contain water -- or formed from clouds of hydrogen gas ejected by the nova, which combined, by means of powerful electrical discharges, with the Earth's own free oxygen. There are definite indications of a drastic drop in the atmospheric oxygen at the time of the Deluge -- the survivors of the catastrophe are said in several sources to have been unable to light fires. The Midrashim and other ancient sources describe the waters of the Flood as being warm; in addition the waters may have been rich in chlorine, an element which in combination with sodium forms common salt. Marine geologists are unable to trace the origin of the huge amounts of chlorine locked in the salt of the Earth's oceans, the Earth's own rocks being rather poor in this element and incapable of supplying it in the needed quantities. Chlorine may thus be of extraneous origin; being a very active element...
Hydrogen and Oxygen
by Immanuel Velikovsky
According to rabbinical sources, before the Deluge man was vegetarian; but the post-diluvian population did not continue the vegetarian habits of the "sinful" population of the earth. The Talmud and the Midrashim narrate that after the Deluge a carnivorous instinct was awakened in animal and man, and everyone had the impulse to bite.

26 posted on 03/09/2009 7:40:10 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
...how it's supposed to happen rather than a true understanding of the theory. Not surprisingly, the theory then looks ridiculous to them.

It looks so ridiculous to normal people that the cultists rely on the courts to enforce their views so it won't look so ridiculous.

27 posted on 03/09/2009 7:40:27 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing---Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson