The Pine Barrens Tree Frog and the Flood.

[Tcg]

.
The Pine Barrens tree frog is well known in southern New Jersey and a few southeastern states.



This frog is tiny at about 1 - 1 1/2 inches long. If there were a global flood that killed all land animals except the few that were in Noah's ark, an ark that came aground in what is now called Turkey, how did this tiny frog find it's way to southern New Jersey?


Tcg

[1213]

...Frogs do not live under water...

Wikipedia disagrees you. But, maybe you know better.

Torpor
During extreme conditions, some frogs enter a state of torpor and remain inactive for months. In colder regions, many species of frog hibernate in winter. Those that live on land such as the American toad (Bufo americanus) dig a burrow and make a hibernaculum in which to lie dormant. Others, less proficient at digging, find a crevice or bury themselves in dead leaves. Aquatic species such as the American bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) normally sink to the bottom of the pond where they lie, semi-immersed in mud but still able to access the oxygen dissolved in the water. Their metabolism slows down and they live on their energy reserves...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog

...when it was God's intention to kill off everything except those on the ark.

Sorry, because of what the Bible tells, I believe the flood was only to kill those on top of dry land.

[1213]

Good grief! Even the King James Phrase Book recognizes it as an idiom in Genesis and not to be taken literally as you insist on doing.
...

Sorry, I don't see any intelligent reason to think it is an idiom, especially when it could be used against the Bible.

[1213]

...
Why do you continue to resort to a Straw Man fallacy rather than present verifiable evidence to support your claims?

The point is, in some way frogs ended up to different sides of earth. Even if you would not believe in God or the great flood, there is some way how the frogs went to Australia for example. I think it is silly and stupid to think it would be only a problem for Biblical story. By what I know, those who believe in the common theory of evolution, have also explanation how frogs went to different locations. That same could be used also in the case of the flood. Unless obviously one thinks that frogs developed independently from other water creatures in those locations.

[bluegreenearth]

...
Why do you continue to resort to a Straw Man fallacy rather than present verifiable evidence to support your claims?

The point is, in some way frogs ended up to different sides of earth. Even if you would not believe in God or the great flood, there is some way how the frogs went to Australia for example. I think it is silly and stupid to think it would be only a problem for Biblical story. By what I know, those who believe in the common theory of evolution, have also explanation how frogs went to different locations. That same could be used also in the case of the flood. Unless obviously one thinks that frogs developed independently from other water creatures in those locations.

Whether you agree or disagree with the content of the video above, it took me less than 30 seconds to find this particular explanation through a Google search online. So, if you are genuinely inclined to learn about the perspectives of experts in the field of frog evolution, there appears to be no shortage of free information available which you can critically examine for yourself.

[Miles]

By what I know, those who believe in the common theory of evolution, have also explanation how frogs went to different locations. That same could be used also in the case of the flood. Unless obviously one thinks that frogs developed independently from other water creatures in those locations.

Like many animal orders, given 200 million of years of evolution frogs and toads had the opportunity to distribute themselves over a vast portion of the earth.






Particularly when one factors in the connected distribution of land 200 million years ago.


...................


.

[Tcg]

...
Why do you continue to resort to a Straw Man fallacy rather than present verifiable evidence to support your claims?

The point is, in some way frogs ended up to different sides of earth. Even if you would not believe in God or the great flood, there is some way how the frogs went to Australia for example. I think it is silly and stupid to think it would be only a problem for Biblical story.

An ad hominem doesn't help your case either.

This graphic displays the problem which is unique to the Biblical claims of a recent and global flood.



A 1 1/2 inch long frog would have a great deal of trouble crossing the North Atlantic ocean.


Tcg

[Miles]

...
Why do you continue to resort to a Straw Man fallacy rather than present verifiable evidence to support your claims?

The point is, in some way frogs ended up to different sides of earth. Even if you would not believe in God or the great flood, there is some way how the frogs went to Australia for example. I think it is silly and stupid to think it would be only a problem for Biblical story.

An ad hominem doesn't help your case either.

This graphic displays the problem which is unique to the Biblical claims of a recent and global flood.



A 1 1/2 inch long frog would have a great deal of trouble crossing the North Atlantic ocean.

Evidently you've never heard of the 1 1/2 inch Hebrew Boat-rowing frog: Columbus hebraice


.....................................................


.

[Tcg]

...
Why do you continue to resort to a Straw Man fallacy rather than present verifiable evidence to support your claims?

The point is, in some way frogs ended up to different sides of earth. Even if you would not believe in God or the great flood, there is some way how the frogs went to Australia for example. I think it is silly and stupid to think it would be only a problem for Biblical story.

An ad hominem doesn't help your case either.

This graphic displays the problem which is unique to the Biblical claims of a recent and global flood.



A 1 1/2 inch long frog would have a great deal of trouble crossing the North Atlantic ocean.

Evidently you've never heard of the 1 1/2 inch Hebrew Boat-rowing frog: Columbus hebraice


.....................................................


.

Well that explains how one frog got to South Jersey. As far as breeding goes...


Tcg

[brunumb]

...Frogs do not live under water...

Wikipedia disagrees you. But, maybe you know better.

Torpor
During extreme conditions, some frogs enter a state of torpor and remain inactive for months. In colder regions, many species of frog hibernate in winter. Those that live on land such as the American toad (Bufo americanus) dig a burrow and make a hibernaculum in which to lie dormant. Others, less proficient at digging, find a crevice or bury themselves in dead leaves. Aquatic species such as the American bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) normally sink to the bottom of the pond where they lie, semi-immersed in mud but still able to access the oxygen dissolved in the water. Their metabolism slows down and they live on their energy reserves...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog

Some frogs have the ability described, but clearly not all. Is it your contention that the Pine Barrens Tree Frog survived the devastating flood by hibernating in some way? The frogs had no warning so would not have been able to make preparations and suddenly go into hibernation anyway. And what about other frogs, from all over the world, that don't have that ability? You still have the problem of getting any frogs that were on the ark distributed to their specific and unique habitats after disembarking. Or, are you suggesting that all frogs survived without having to be saved by Noah?

...when it was God's intention to kill off everything except those on the ark.

Sorry, because of what the Bible tells, I believe the flood was only to kill those on top of dry land.

Your belief is not consistent with God's clearly stated intention.

[Tcg]

...Secondly, where does the Bible "tells that the flood killed all that were on top of dry land," implying "no water animals" were killed? Chapter and verse please. But before you go to the trouble of trying to find one I have a chapter and verse for you. Chapter 7 verse 4 in Genesis where god himself says:

"4 Seven days from now I will make it rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing I have made I will wipe off the face of the earth.”

...

From the face of the earth, yes, and as we can see, earth means dry land:

God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:10

Good grief! Even the King James Phrase Book recognizes it as an idiom in Genesis and not to be taken literally as you insist on doing.

“On/Off the face
of the earth”
Source: This phrase has its origins in Genesis 6:1 of the King James Version of the Bible
Meaning: existing; a phrase to emphasize something as the biggest, best, worst etc. that could possibly exist
source



.

It's quite clearly not mean to be taken this literally. However, even if one does, it does not resolve the problem. Pine Barrens Tree Frogs are primarily terrestrial after a short span as tadpoles. They live mostly on the lower branches of trees and shrubs, and quite literally on the ground hiding under leaves. The fact that the do at times enter a state of torpor doesn't resolve anything either as when they do so they again are literally on the ground under leaves.

The Pine Barrens gets its name from the fact that the soil and water in the area is highly acidic and early settlers found it hard to grow traditional crops there. The Pine Barren Tree Frogs lay their eggs in shallow pools of this low Ph water. It is thought that this provides a survival advantage because most larger frogs that would feed on these tiny frogs can't tolerate the acidic water. Even if some were able to somehow survive perhaps as long as a year of fully flooded land, the drastic change in Ph such a flood would cause would leave them with no place to breed and live.


Tcg