http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/ap_on_sc/biggest_bug_ever
2007-11-21 01:42:05 · 14 answers · asked by I'm an Atheist 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Dude that's cool...
2007-11-21 01:47:06 · answer #1 · answered by The Mad Padishah 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Bible mentions some horrible scorpions that sting mankind for months, but the scarry thing is gene manipulation can create 8 ft. scorpions again. Jesus said, "the latter days will be as it was in the days of Noah."
It is amazing how the sea in these latter days is offering up these enormous sea creatures.
Oh, sea creatures were not on Noah's Ark they were in the water.
2007-11-21 02:01:56 · answer #2 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What a bullshit, how ought to you suspect this? hundreds of folk each and every twelve months circulate pilgrimage to Mount Ararat, such countless scholars researched at Mount Ararat. and that they on no account observed remainings of Noah's Arc? i'm going to allow you to comprehend the place you will discover somewhat bit Noah's Arc stay. interior the museum of Echmiadzin Cathedral, its in Armenia. This piece of wood grow to be discovered lower back in 5th century, and that's a factor of everlasting exhibition at this museum. So what a sensation waw....Turkish PR.
2016-12-16 15:12:57 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yup pretty neat. Although it says it was a sea scorpion so it probably wasn't in the ark. If God shut the mouths of the lions for Daniel I am sure he shut the mouths of the animals on the ark. I imagine the worst part of the ark would be the smell.
2007-11-21 01:52:30 · answer #4 · answered by linnea13 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to that it was a sea creature, meaning it wasn't on the ark, assuming the creature existed of course.
Reply to creatrix: Carbon 14 dating could not account for such dates of millions of years; its limit is 50,000. And to say they dated the fossils by the strata is somewhat circular reasoning considering they do the same for strata, judging its age based on its fossils.
2007-11-21 01:51:40 · answer #5 · answered by w2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't help wondering how they determined that it wasn't one of those things with disproportionately huge claws (like a fiddle crab). Granted, it would still be bigger than anything I'd like to to tangle with.
And it would explain that "don't eat the crawly things in the sea" proclaimation a bit (ew... but maybe with some metled butter....).
Edit: answer to below: What about radioisotope dating, then?
Edit: John, probably a combination of sedimentary strata and carbon-14 decay rates.
2007-11-21 01:49:46 · answer #6 · answered by ZombieTrix 2012 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Wonder how they know its 390 million years old?
I'll bet not a one of you evolutionist even knows.
2007-11-21 01:50:30 · answer #7 · answered by Higgy Baby 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's why they were gone way before Noah's time.
2007-11-21 01:54:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I caught that critter in my net right after I got to hell off from Mt Ararat
2007-11-21 01:48:51 · answer #9 · answered by ha_mer 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Creationists are soon going to start asking for transitional 4-foot scorpions.
2007-11-21 01:47:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Yuck! No thank you man...Maybe he (ahem) 'accidentally' left the giant bugs off lol
2007-11-21 01:48:06 · answer #11 · answered by Daewen 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋