Just read about new wooly mammoth discovery

[Brainstormy]

in Siberia, and because I'm just a glutton for punishment, I guess, I started pondering, and then went looking, for the creationist take. I was unsure about whether, in the literalist paradigm, mammoths came BEFORE or AFTER the ark, etc., Seems some of them are a little fuzzy, too, but the concensus seems to be that the ice age was "after." I even read that the great flood was the perfect explanation for an Ice Age, tho I found no one sympathizing with the long, dreary walk the critters made from the Middle East. And with all that hair!

Here's one opinion:
"I would say the Ice age was in the years following the flood. I don't know if that was 1 year later or 10. This awaits more research. But animals multiply quickly. Also Noah took 7 of some animals on the ark. If this were the case with the mammoth, they would reach larger numbers even quicker. A recent program by Michael Oard seems to suggest the mammoth population would have been hundreds of thousands before the they perished in the "ice age".

The writer adds, "Unlike the children’s movie "Ice Age" the humans that lived at the time of the Ice age could speak and were not primitive in any sense. Man could talk since the day he was created (Day 6)."

So that's good to know. But in my humble opinion, the whole subject "awaits more research."

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/mammoth.html

[Mr.Bill]

1. Hilarious that some one thinks the ice age came

in "one or ten years."

[Brainstormy]

2. I know!

I nearly choked! but it was wise of him not to go out on a limb.

[defacto7]

3. awaits more research? That's really what they do want to do.

Great... let's research a big zero! Now that's a really good use for science dollars. Research a myth to prove it fits into science, if they can't make it fit... then change the definition of science, but certainly we can't change the myth.

Blisteringly stupid.

Thanks Brainstormy.

[Curmudgeoness]

4. How can anyone take these people seriously?

I often wonder if THEY take themselves seriously. Well, I am not surprised that some (?) of them are a little fuzzy.

Don't you just love that this one opinion says that Noah took seven of some animals on the ark??? Where did that come from???? And of all the species to suggest that he took "extras", I find it hard to believe that mammoths would be one of them. No one has been able to figure out how the hell he fit all the animals on as it is, counting only one pair of each. And that doesn't include all the different dinosaurs that had to be on the ark with him.....since they had to be there too, right?

"Animals multiply quickly"???? Well, I guess if we are talking about fruit flies or cockroaches, I can agree. But I would expect that a Wooly Mammoth would not be so quick....if we compare it to an elephant, it takes 22 months gestation, and 4-5 years for the mother to become pregnant again. Not all that quickly! But I am sure that god had a way to deal with this.

It is all too much for me to comprehend. My brain hurts.

[frogmarch]

5. When I was a

fossil preparator and cleaned and preserved mammoth bones, I'd guess that about 85% of tourists visiting the site, an Ice Age sinkhole that had trapped mammoths, said something on the order of "Well, if that ain't ev'dence of The Flood, I dunno whut is."

I remember one of them telling me I looked like a fine, upstanding Christian lady, and then going on about The Flood.
Me: What flood?
Him: You know - the ark!
Me: Ark?
Him: Noah's ark, for Pete's sake!
Me: Noah?
Him: Noah in the Bible!
Me: Bible?

He gave me a shooing motion with his hand and walked away, obviously disgusted. Made my day.

[WovenGems]

6. Conundrum

The problem is there wasn't just one "ice age". And the good news is that will be another. How you ask with global warming? Greenland melting will flood the north Atlantic with fresh water. This will interrupt the Gulf Stream system plunging the north into cold air. Ain't science grand?