By the way, whales have vestigial hip bones-left over from when their ancestors used to walk on land.
Did NOAH take WHALES into the ARK?
by african GB Member 35 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
recovering
lol the noah story just does not make sense from a logistical standpoint . for example 1 elephant alone eats 300 to 600 lbs of food a day.
you are talking tons of food for just 1 animal
-
Morgana
...and even today, it happens that about 1 in 500 whales grows atavistic hind legs.
-
SacrificialLoon
"transparent aluminum"
Ha! That was my first thought too.
There be whales here!
-
villabolo
For those interested in the Creationism/ID debate I highly recommend the book Science and Earth History by Arthur Strahler.
-
sir82
*** is [1969] p. 42 Was There an Earth-Wide Flood ***
Also, investigation reveals that, of some 3,000 "species" of land mammals classified by zoologists, only about 300 include any that are larger than a horse, whereas some 2,200 are no larger than a rabbit. Marine mammals such as the huge whales and dolphins would be no problem, as they would have remained outside the ark. So Noah had relatively few large animals to care for.
However, he apparently had several hundred thousand species of beetles to care for, not to mention other insects.
-
viva
The WTB&TS repeatedly show thier ignorance on this subject. There are nearly 60,000 species of vertibrate animals described. There are over 1.2 million species of invertibrate animals, nearly 300,000 species of plants, and nearly 30,000 species classified as "other" (fungi, lichens, brown algaes, etc.). So the total number of described species is nearly 1.6 million, and we all know there are more yet to be discovered. [Edit: These are old numbers, no doubt higher now]
There is a chance that some of the plants may survive immersion in water for that long, not many though. And there would not be a seperation of saltwater/fresh water (there may be some gradation, but it would mix) and very few fishes have a tollerance range that would allow them to survive.
If you look simply at the number of species, you know the myth of the flood is false. The arc wasn't even very big, although well beyond the capability of its purported builders.
I have argued this with several JWs, and they claim that the species "diversified" after the flood, which for one thing calls on evolution. That could easily be disproved looking at DNA/RNA.
I can show you 15,000 year old deposits from a small stream, yet a global flood didn't leave any evidence? It still shocks me that anyone can believe this.
-
parakeet
"transparent aluminum"
SacrificialLoon: "Ha! That was my first thought too.....There be whales here!"
Ole Scottie knew his stuff, didn't he? RIP, Scottie.
-
villabolo
Hi there sir82. Thanks for bring up the fact that Jehovah has a fondness for beetles. Creationists however do not claim that every single species that exists today was brought into the ark or that they even existed back then during the flood.
They claim that the Bible word for "kind" refers to a basic representative of the animal in question. Example: One dog kind that later, after it's released from the ark, becomes the a wide assortment of species such as wolves, coyotes etc. That's evolution in the real world but in the Creationist world it's just variety (otherwise how do they explain a thousand and one breeds of dogs) and they set arbitrary limits on that.
As far as the capacity of the ark don't, for the sake of argument, underestimate what it could hold. Nor underestimate human ingenuity as far as maintaining that zoo. I acknowlege it's absurd but Noah did have, if I recall correctly, 120 years to figure it out.
The really devastating counteraguments are with the time frame involved after the flood. These counterarguments unfortunately are wasted on most people because they don't have the intelligence to visualize a handful of animals reproducing and spreading throughout the earth in the time frame allowed.
As far as the fresh water/ salt water issue is concerned just fantasize that Jehovah made the water canopy out of salt water. Nevertheless, such a flood would destroy aquatic ecosystems, but most JWs can't visualize or understand that.
If you're going to argue with anyone over creationism/ID it's best to keep the arguments simple. Vestigial organs, like that whales hipbone or the horses extra toe, make for a good argument.
-
avishai
Right. Like how the hell did all the marsupials end up in australia.