“When you hear hoofbeats,
Think horses, not zebras.”
That’s what the doctors say
They mean think of obvious diseases
Before the obscure ones
But my life has been a testament… 229 more words
Yellowstone National Park 03/04/15 bosemandailychronicle.com: by Laura Lundquist – Southwestern Montana is no stranger to wildlife diseases, but so far, it hasn’t had to confront… 778 more words
The return of chronic wasting disease in domestic elk after a 13-year hiatus won’t impact Alberta’s beef, pork, poultry and dairy industries, says the province’s chief veterinarian. 753 more words
BANFF — Parks Canada plans to capture and collar several wolves in Banff to get information on what the packs are up to.
The plan is to fit two wolves from each of three packs — the Bow Valley, Red Deer and Fairholme packs — with high-tech GPS collars this winter to get information for four different research projects. 852 more words
Life is incredibly diverse. Millions of species fill the seas, land and skies of our little planet. It seems as if there is no end to the discovery of new animals, plants and other life forms. 2,455 more words
- Yes, biodiversity is a problem for any young-earth supposition. The simple fact of extensive extinction is a horrible problem for YEC. The population estimates are absolutely impossible in the time frame of only several hundred years. It is impossible to reconcile the stated basis of YEC claims with the reality of only 1 in 1000 species surviving on earth to modern times. (The ark was supposed to save them all. Why let 99.9% die off shortly thereafter?) Not only are the South American ungulate species problematic for YEC all by themselves, there is the further fact that the majority of ungulate species are clean. Accordingly, there were not just a single pair of each of these different ungulates on the ark, but seven pairs, making it that much more remarkable that they all died out. (Seven mating pairs gives much better odds of surviving than only a single pair.) Note, contrary to YEC assumptions and rationalizations, the bible explicitly defines kinds in Leviticus 11 (and elsewhere). Kinds of ravens; kinds of hawks; at least three locust/grasshoppers, each specified after its kinds, and beetles after their kinds (though the word might have been another set of locust type insects). Kinds is not genera or family, but species, or from Leviticus (and the bird list is reiterated in Deuteronomy), we must allow subspecies, by the modern definition. By the way, what bird or insect of any kind goes about on four feet? (Four, not six, not two--four. Leviticus 11:20, אַרְבַּ֑ע, not to mention bats listed with the birds.) Using the biblical definition of "kinds", there would have been many thousands of clean ungulates on Noah's ark. Further, you mention the birds. The bible doesn't delineate what birds are clean, but rather gives an explicit (though hard to define) list of unclean birds. Accordingly, it is reasonable to assume from the express statements in the bible all the extinct birds were clean, including the enormous flightless birds. Thousands of those too on the ark. A side note on clean: given the many generations Noah preceded Moses, what's up with "clean" anyway?