.....are you saying that T. rex is related to avians? If they brought all the dinosaurs on the Ark, even in the form of eggs......why'd they go extinct and all get deposited as fossils during the Flood? Every explanation just leads to another something to be explained away.
Yes, I discount the hatchling possibility for the flailing it is. I don't see any reasong in Genesis to believe that the animals on the Ark that were hatchlings or eggs just so happened to be the ones that are currently extinct......and why'd they go extinct if there were representatives on the Ark with which to rebuild their population. Some extinction event in known human history that only affected dinosaurs? Just a flail to attempt to claim that dinosaurs were alive 4,351 years ago.
Why do you say that?
....because the notion that the dinosaurs were already extinct at the time of the Flood flies in the face of the YEC notion that the Flood killed all the dinosaurs......which also brings in the notion of the dinosaurs not being on the Ark as they should have been...yet another twist created that must be explained away.
BTW, if you think the dinosaurs were already extinct by the time of the Flood, you are, according to the YEC crowd.....not a "real" Christian. Just ask GGG.
And the question itself shows the assumption that dinosaurs weren’t extinct at the time of the Flood.
Since a male and female dinosaur of EACH kind were not on the Ark....and God said bring 2 of every sort/kind, male and female...not 2 eggs....and Noah did as God said.....then dinosaurs could not have been alive at the time of the Flood or they would have been on the Ark and not have gone extinct in the Flood.
The correct flail would be to claim that all the dinosaurs fall into the "kind" of something that is currently alive....but that's all it is.....a flail to continue believing the fary tale of Man walking the Earth with 100+ species of large meat eating dinosaurs.
>>Many avians are determined sex by the temperature the egg is allowed to vary, IIRC. But, you’re also completely discounting the hatchling possibility.
>
>.....are you saying that T. rex is related to avians?
No, it was merely an observation that egg-laying creatures can have sex determined by external conditions.
>If they brought all the dinosaurs on the Ark, even in the form of eggs......why’d they go extinct and all get deposited as fossils during the Flood?
Your reasoning is faulty here: you’re assuming that the ones that died in the flood (unless previously extinct) are influencing those not in the flood.
>Every explanation just leads to another something to be explained away.
Really? Let me ask you this then: why is the Dodo extinct? Because of pigs that ate all their eggs. The Dodo, however had to be on the Ark, right? Then why is it extinct? (See, just because one event can cause extinction doesn’t mean it DID... likewise a significant drop in a population followed by some other, usually less significant, catastrophe could easily drop a population below its sustainment level.)
>Yes, I discount the hatchling possibility for the flailing it is. I don’t see any reasong in Genesis to believe that the animals on the Ark that were hatchlings or eggs just so happened to be the ones that are currently extinct.
Actually just because some of those went extinct doesn’t mean all of them did. Take horses, lions, rhinos, and elephants for example; they’re all large and it would have taken less space to get them as young-animals. {Hatchlings would be little different in this regard, taking the young to save space.}
>Some extinction event in known human history that only affected dinosaurs? Just a flail to attempt to claim that dinosaurs were alive 4,351 years ago.
You’re discounting the possibility that we humans WERE that “extinction event.” Take the legends of “dragons” and their slayings, for instance, those dragons could have been dinosaurs and the tales have a little truth in them... as I noted to someone else on this thread it was thought that the giant squid was a myth in modern history, but really-recent history has proven the old-sailor’s tale true [to some extent].
>>Why do you say that?
>
>....because the notion that the dinosaurs were already extinct at the time of the Flood flies in the face of the YEC notion that the Flood killed all the dinosaurs......
That doesn’t mean that they’re right about it; man could have killed all the dinos prior to the flood.
>which also brings in the notion of the dinosaurs not being on the Ark as they should have been...yet another twist created that must be explained away.
I’ve already said that, had they not been extinct they would have been on the ark; though perhaps not full-sized.
>BTW, if you think the dinosaurs were already extinct by the time of the Flood, you are, according to the YEC crowd.....not a “real” Christian. Just ask GGG.
Fortunately for me its Jesus that decides if I’m a “real” Christian or not; just ask St. John’s Revelation. (And somehow I think he’ll be a little forgiving on unorthodox viewpoints that don’t matter.)
Oh, since you brought up the numbering 2x2, there is also a a command to bring all the clean animals, and birds, in pairs of seven. (So, birds would obviously have a better chance of survival in the post-flood world considering their population was seven times that of a dino’s.)