Insects and the Flood

[TheSword]

On 10/29/2015, 12:28:47, Critical Mass said:

What about viruses? Are they a proof of evolution? Seems new ones are popping up all the time.

First, show me an example of proof that a virus spontaneously arose in a controlled environment and was definitely not a discovery of an already existing virus.

Second, viruses are not living cells. It cannot reproduce itself without the presence of an actual living cell and has no source of power/energy.

Third, since it is not a living creature in the way that bacteria, mammals, fish, or birds are, it presents to problem from a creationist/biblical perspective because God has not precluded Himself from introducing new viruses. In fact, it makes more sense that a plethora of new viruses would have been introduced as a judgment upon sinful man.

[Critical Mass]

51 minutes ago, TheSword said:

First, show me an example of proof that a virus spontaneously arose in a controlled environment and was definitely not a discovery of an already existing virus.

Second, viruses are not living cells. It cannot reproduce itself without the presence of an actual living cell and has no source of power/energy.

Third, since it is not a living creature in the way that bacteria, mammals, fish, or birds are, it presents to problem from a creationist/biblical perspective because God has not precluded Himself from introducing new viruses. In fact, it makes more sense that a plethora of new viruses would have been introduced as a judgment upon sinful man.

Calm down, bud. I didn't say they were proof of evolution I just asked if they could be argument for the theory. I really don't have a great understanding about viruses. I didn't realize they weren't considered living organisms.  I would think that even though they can't reproduce on their own the fact that they seek to survive by injecting its RNA in to another host would qualify it as a form of life. Parasites like tapeworms don't reproduce without a host either but are considered life.

So viruses are an evidence of God's judgement?

[TheSword]

1 hour ago, Critical Mass said:

Calm down, bud. I didn't say they were proof of evolution I just asked if they could be argument for the theory. I really don't have a great understanding about viruses. I didn't realize they weren't considered living organisms.  I would think that even though they can't reproduce on their own the fact that they seek to survive by injecting its RNA in to another host would qualify it as a form of life. Parasites like tapeworms don't reproduce without a host either but are considered life.

So viruses are an evidence of God's judgement?

I'm perfectly calm. I'm truly sorry if my post came across otherwise.

On viruses being evidence of God's judgment, I would have to give an emphatic yes, and here's why. Due to the inherent destructive nature of a virus (particularly on mankind, though I know there are viruses that affect non-humans), I cannot fathom a way in which it can be considered a part of a "very good" creation (Gen 1:31). Therefore, viruses must have been introduced after God had concluded His creative activity. The most logical place for their introduction would be sometime after the Fall when man was then decreed to die. If God could have introduced a virus after Creation week, then there is no reason He could not have done it anytime until now or anytime after.

[robycop3]

   There were quite a few sea creatures that survived the flood, though many perished from the mixing of salt & fresh water. One well-known example is the coelacanth fish.

[DaveW]

Last post was 2015.......

[Jim_Alaska]

8 hours ago, DaveW said:

Last post was 2015.......

Which simply means that the thread is stagnant and some of the participants may not even be members or even visit the board any more.

[Ukulelemike]

Indeed, many sea creatures survived because they remained in their element. It is possible there may be other survivors we don't even know about-I think we may know 50% of what is in the oceans. Consider its only recently that we obtained photographic evidence of one of the larger sea animals, the giant squid, because they tend to remain deep. What else is lurking down there? I have heard of instances of very large great white sharks that are tagged, suddenly disappearing off the radar, as though something much bigger made a quick lunch of them. 

[Alan]

Good post.

6 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Indeed, many sea creatures survived because they remained in their element. It is possible there may be other survivors we don't even know about-I think we may know 50% of what is in the oceans. Consider its only recently that we obtained photographic evidence of one of the larger sea animals, the giant squid, because they tend to remain deep. What else is lurking down there? I have heard of instances of very large great white sharks that are tagged, suddenly disappearing off the radar, as though something much bigger made a quick lunch of them. 

 

As man's technology advances, and his ability to go to the great depths of the oceans of the world, man will discover hidden creatures, plants, resources, etc... not previously known to mankind.

[heartstrings]

Insects......If only Brother Noah had SWATTED them two mosquitoes.