Wouldn't the predators on the ark have eaten everything by the time the 40 days was over?

by highdose 97 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • M*A*S*H

    Errrrr Guys. This is a miracle! God just stopped the animals getting hungry and shoved a cork up their bums, simples.

    Oh wait, or.... maybe it never happened.

  • punkofnice

    I would have thought the Noah family would have scoffed the lot at family BBQ's and family study evenings!

  • Heartofaboy

    Just listen to Sylv you lot!!!

    The lord has told her & that is that.



    HE He

  • Dutch-scientist

    NASA JPL says sea level dropped 6mm in 2010 with our current climate. How many years need the ARK float on water when the water dropped on a level that is good for life?

    What kind of tide do we have with our moon forcing on Earth? Cloud production will be massive. Howmany times need Jehovah take more actions that all his species will be saved by his action?

  • highdose

    the JW's are adament i think that creation stopped when god created eve. It stopped in the first few verses of gensis.

    So we have estabilshed that the termites ( not to mention all the other wood eating bugs) would have probably eaten the ark.

    The ark would have gotten eaten by the termites

    the animals would have been eaten by eachother and the humans maybe

    the insects would have been eaten by the birds and other animals

    the humans would have lived in a damp, bacteria flooded, dark wooden box, watched as the animals ate eachother and died of old age and illness. Finaly would they themselves have survived at all? Even if they had made it to the end of the flood. The world they stepped out on would have been devoid of life. And the fellow life that stagged out of the ark with them would have been barely alive.

    The scripture of the olive tree branch carried in the doves beck is patently rubbish... are we to belive that an olive tree would have survived a year under crushing water? Or that it would have grown up in a few weeks? Olive trees are notorious for taking forever to grow! Theres no way a dove would have found anything.

  • J. Hofer
    J. Hofer

    the numbers are a little off. no way was noah 600 years old. the numbers are off by at least the factor of 10.

    so noah was in fact 60 years old and it rained for 4 days. noah started a fight with his neighbours, called them all evil and left on a little boat with two sheep. of course he was no navigator so he got lost and spent almost one month looking for land. he ate one sheep and saved the other one for the landing party (and some company).

    but stories change over time... and at the time it did sound kind of stupid to say you were out on the sea for about one month with only two sheep.

  • JustHuman14

    At that specific time, ALL the animals, they used to eat grass. They became flesh eating after the Flood!!! Actually animals became wild when Nimrod start to hunt them.....

    Hope my answer did sattisfied your question enough

  • TD

    Just as a general observation, (Not directed to or at anybody here!) it is puzzling when people (i.e. Jehovah's Witnesses) who believe in creation also believe in the antediluvian all vegetarian ecology.

    We have on one hand, animals that are perfectly adapted/designed to eat low quality vegetation. Everything, from the teeth to the jaw, to the shape of the jaw, to the articulation and musculature of the jaw, to the digestive tract and all the supporting organs are adapted/designed to break the cellulose reinforced cell walls of the structural members of plants (stems and stalks) in order to gain access to the proteins within the cell. More than that, the animal's brain, instincts, and even body shape and limbs all contribute to this purpose. This is a very, very specialized design.

    We have on the other hand, animals that are perfectly adapted/designed to eat animal tissue. Everything from the teeth, to the jaw, to the shape of the jaw, to the articulation and musculature of the jaw, to the digestive tract and all the supporting organs are adapted/designed to break down animal tissue. Proteinase and lipase activities are very vigourous. More than that, the animal's brain, instincts and even body shape and limbs all contribute to this purpose. This too is a very, very specialized design.

    For example:

    Mammalian predators have eyes that face forward because the parallax effect allows them to judge distance accurately. Mammalian grazers and browsers have eyes that face to the side because this allows them to watch for predators while they feed.

    Mammalian predators have articulated toes that end in claws which enables them to grasp prey, dig, etc. Mammalian grazers and browers usually have the center toes fused into a hoof, which enables speedy getaways.

    Mammalian predators excel at recognizing patterns. Mammalian grazers and browsers excel at recognizing movement.

    The big cats typically have 10 to 14 feet of intestine. Cats digest so little of their food that scavengers will actually eat their feces. Bovids and Cervids easily have 50 feet of intestine or more. Many grazers and browsers pelletize their feces

    In short, it's not one feature that makes an animal either a carnivore or herbivore. It's every feature working together and the fact that they are beautifully fashioned to do so. This is the very backbone of the "Design equals a designer" argument and this is nothing new. Georges Cuvier, who was one of Darwin's bitterest critics articulated this more than a century ago:

    "That the claws may be able to seize the prey, there must be a certain amount of flexibility in the toes, and of strength in the nails; and this requires a peculiar form of the bones, and a corresponding distribution of the muscles and tendons. The fore-arm must possess a certain facility in turning, whence also result certain forms of the bones of which it is made up; and these bones of the fore-arm, articulating to the humerus, cannot undergo change without corresponding changes taking place in this latter bone. The bones of the shoulder, also, require to have a certain degree of strength when the anterior extremities are to be used in seizing prey; and in this way, again, other special forms become involved." (Georges Cuvier as quoted by William Denton - Our Planet, Its Past and Future. 1869 p. 213)

    This was a direct refutation of Darwin's adaptation theory. In other words; It's not enough that an animal simply has claws. If claws are going to seize prey then everything else must also be designed around that purpose.

Share this