Genetically and anatomically similar leopards and jaguars are found in Africa/Asia and South America respectively, but not in between (except as fossils).
Raccoons are found in North and South America, but (until recently introduced) not in Europe or Asia.
Marsupials are the dominant mammal group in Australia, and are found in smaller diversity in South America, and one species in North America.
The distribution of all of these critters makes sense according to the theory of evolution, and evidence from paleontology, plate tectonics, and radiometric dating, but if you reject those theories, how do you explain why these creatures are found where they are, and not evenly distributed from some starting point (i.e. Garden of Eden or Noah's ark's landing site)?
2007-03-05 06:36:25 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
First, let me say I believe in Evolution. I don't think any Creationists are going to consider your argument very convincing. This is because they will undoubtedly come back with a comment like, "God can choose to put animals wherever he wants. The distribution is the way it is because thats what he wanted."
The problem with arguing against an all-mighty being is that every response will just be the normal, "Because he wanted it that way", which is very similar to a parent's response to a child's question when they don't know the answer, "Because I said so!".
2007-03-05 06:44:31 · answer #1 · answered by Greenio 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
PLEASE! there is MICRO evolution and MACRO evolution! One is "evolution" interior of a species (the place DNA can blend) and the different isn't a hazard! the place do you think of Darwin's 13 finches got here from? A turtle? all of them got here FROM an undemanding FINCH! God created each and every residing element with DNA. it rather is this DNA that grants a species it fairly is definitive character. If the DNA will greater healthful - you will get a "new" species. it rather is not MACRO-EVOLUTION! it fairly is nevertheless the comparable plant/animal "drifting" to different character features. Noah replaced into meant to maintain the worldwide interior the ark. All he had to do replaced into get the two salamanders on board. 2 - that's all. for the reason that then, those 2 have micro-developed to offer 2 hundred distinctive "species" of salamanders. what's the undertaking right here? And the place does the Bible say that God fastened them constantly? it fairly is does not say that everywhere. It says "each and each unto it fairly is very own variety". Salamanders beget salamanders. Finches beget finches. Mosquitoes make greater mosquitoes. yet wheat won't be able to make CORN besides you look at it.
2016-09-30 05:53:01 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Funny thing, I could have imagined a creationist ansling the same question, just as confidently, of an evolutionist.
It would be quite a coincidence for the same evolutinary process to have repeated itself identically and almost simultaneously in different parts of the globe. So both evolutionists and creationists believe in the migration of the species.
Both evolutionists and creationists believe there have been movement of the continents since the beginning. It's just the timing that is the issue of disagreement. (And most creationists have quite a bit of flexibility about the timing).
2007-03-05 06:43:19 · answer #3 · answered by Mr Ed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since all of the continents were once connected, migration took place. Besides, radiometric dating methods just don't work
According to “radiometric dating”, the Grand Canyon is upside down!
2007-03-05 06:45:49 · answer #4 · answered by stpolycarp77 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think they think Noah actually went around redistributing the animals where he got them. which is insane, of course. i continue to believe the theory of a global flood should be attacked relentlessly, as it is the pinnacle of christian ignorance. a growing number of christians don't even believe it, they make a decent biblical case for a local flood instead.
CATCH UP LITERALISTS!
2007-03-05 06:44:54 · answer #5 · answered by ajj085 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Try reading the Bible or researching it out." Sorry, it isn't in there, the writers had no clue about the Western Hemisphere.
the "spacific" answer doesn't explain anything. The raccoons used their legs to walk to north America? ALL OF THEM?
Willy, they were all in the same place after the "flood".
Mr Ed, I assure you we have much better answers. Things evolve differently in different ecosystems. They adapt to their environment.
2007-03-05 06:41:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
as Noah was circling the globe in his arch he got annoyed with some of the animals and started throwing them overboard two by two!
2007-03-05 08:19:26 · answer #7 · answered by Alley C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why did you forget the Australian Playtypus? Are you another 'faulty member of the humanoid race'?
2007-03-05 06:47:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read the bible and also its not only animals but if you look around you will see people as well
2007-03-05 06:42:35 · answer #9 · answered by Y_aurora 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Um, I don't think that we disagree with microevolution. We disagree with spontaneous existence.
2007-03-05 06:48:10 · answer #10 · answered by girlpreacher 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋