Search results

You know those cartoons where prison inmates are digging themselves out, and at the end of a long tunnel they go upwards, and suddenly the tunnel springs a leak and they hit the ocean? Yeah, turns out those are pretty accurate, in theory if not scale. Sediment is not wet the whole way down...

Once again, for very simple minds, mud is a size of sediment. Mud doesn't have to be wet to be mud. Lol. EDIT: And in this context, mud is analogous to silt, and is used synonymously. Technically, the size "mud" includes silt, and then clay, and then colloid (in order of decreasing size).

Hahahahahaha. You just lost all credibility, my friend.

Yeah, and that's pretty true. Civilisation seems to need interaction and competition to go forward - which is why in 40,000 years the Aborigines didn't change much.

QFT. And again, QFT. It shits me off when people go "oh we need to increase immigration and the birth rate because omg we need more people." No.

Peh, all of phylogeny is erratic anyway :p

What, so that makes it right? "Oh, it's God's law that he can commit genocide, so it's all good?" Translate that to "Oh, it's man's law that you can commit genocide, so it's all good" and see if it still makes sense.

Believe in a God because He's real? How can you say that without anything backing you up? Replace "God" with "anal-probe-dealing aliens" and what you just said makes no sense. And no, there isn't anything that proves that any gods do not exist - and nothing to prove that they do. On balance...

Pretty much, yeah. *shrug* I just go by what I was taught, and verts/inverts is a pretty deeply-ingrained distinction in biology/zoology.

What? Notrly - close, but so are hemichordates, so whatevs. I mean it gets complicated for something like a lancelets (and other proto/cephalochordates) but if one must draw an arbitrary dividing line, it might as well be verts/inverts.

Why not divide them verts/inverts? How would you divide them? And you did see the "..and this doesn't include all animal groups" in my post, right? Down there, at the bottom?:p EDIT: And it's phyla :p

Well. It's likely that they contributed to the extinctions of the Australian megafauna (though not certain), so I wouldn't say completely sustainable.

Did you know that we know more about the surface of Mars than we do about our own sea floor?

I very much doubt that the millions of children and babies killed in the flood could be counted as "sinful". The fact that you glorify this story sickens me. It's just a story, thank frak, but it's a disgusting one.

If you want a crazy number, there are more than 300,000 species known to science of beetles. And that goes up every day :p

Are you for real?

And you count yourself as such a biblical expert that you're qualified to make that distinction, right? And it's not a story of destroying the sinful - it's a story of the genocide of more than 20 million people (est. population). If it even occured, which there is no proof whatsoever that it...

So God somehow broke the laws of physics and stuffed a higher volume of animals into the ark than there was volume in the ark (and we have the dimensions of the ark). Right.

Tchah! Stop right there. Animals: estimated 3-30 million species | |--Invertebrates: 97% of all known species | `--+--Sponges: 10,000 species | |--Cnidarians: 8,000-9,000 species | |--Molluscs: 100,000 species | |--Platyhelminths: 13,000 species | |--Nematodes...

Ah! And there it is. "We don't know how it would have been done, in fact it's impossible, so to make the story true: God did it!" Even God could not have fit every species of animal on the ark. That is a fact. And what about the plants?