Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cadovax!keithd
From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Re: Isolation and Unique Species
Message-ID: <622@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 16-May-85 13:29:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: cadovax.622
Posted: Thu May 16 13:29:21 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 24-May-85 13:02:01 EDT
References: <217@ihnet.UUCP> <3570013@csd2.UUCP>
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 29

[.............]

I thought we might add a few questions for the 'Ark' theory:

1.  What did the carnivores eat after leaving the ark?

2.  For that matter, what did the vegetarians eat if plants were
    preserved as seeds and hadn't grown to be edible yet?

3.  Do you really expect anyone to believe (without any evidence)
    that all the animals migrated to the different continents?
    This implies that the penguins swam to the pole, kangaroos,
    koalas, etc. swam to Australia.  And, why are there no kangaroos
    or many other Austrailian animals elsewhere?  Did all the kangaroos
    swim over as a group?  Or maybe the first two did their swim before
    they had any offspring?

4.  Why are creationists seemingly unfamiliar with previous (pre-evolution)
    creationist work on the Ark theory?  (Athanasius Kircher (late 1600's)
    Carl Linnaeus (late 1700's), Eberhard Zimmermann (late 1700's), 
    Philip Sclater (mid 1800's), Edward Forbes (mid 1800's))  Most of these
    pre-evolutionary creationists have already wandered through all the dead
    ends of the Ark theory over a century ago, yet modern creationists seem
    to be exploring them anew, seemingly unaware of previous research in
    this area.

Keith Doyle
#  {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd