Wouldn't the predators on the ark have eaten everything by the time the 40 days was over?
Vegetation used as food is loosely classed by its "quality." This term denotes not only the food value, but the ease with which that value may be extracted. The highest quality vegetation is the fruit, seeds, and in some cases roots and tubers of the plant. Next comes the leaves and then comes the stems and stalks.
The problem for an herbivore is that high quality vegetation is seasonal. Strict herbivores must be able to subsist on lower quality vegetation for a sizable part of the year.
When an herbivore consumes leaves, stems and stalks, it must be able to rupture the cell walls. The cell walls of plant tissue are fairly rigid structures reinforced by cellulose. Cellulose is a polymeric carbohydrate which is not directly digestable by any animal life on earth.
What is required to do this?
The teeth of a strict herbivore are very different than ours. We have brachydont or "Low crowned" teeth Our teeth are fully encased in enamel. Strict herbivores have hypsodont or "High crowned" teeth.
With high crowned teeth, the enamel ends in numerous sharp ridges for an effect similar to a kitchen grater:
Additionally, strict herbivores have long rows of these teeth with at least 3 molars and 3 molar-form premolars:
Because the teeth of strict herbivores are subject to rapid wear from silica particles that cling at or near the base of stalks, these teeth grow continuously throughout the life of the animal. These are called "Ever growing" teeth.
Chewing alone is not enough though. From the termite to the elephant, strict herbivores have special chambers in their digestive apparatus where the bacteria necessary to break down cellulose can flourish. Horses have enlarged hind-guts. Cattle and other ruminants have multi-chambered stomachs.
A ruminant will swallow its food into the rumen, which is the first chamber of its multi-chambered stomach. Food floating in the rumen will be regurgitated and chewed again. This will continue until the chemical and mechanical breakdown reaches the point where the food sinks in the rumen and can be passed onto the next chambers.
Carnivores have a very different set of tasks to perform. Carnivores essentially swallow their food whole and therefore have no need whatsoever to grind it. But since animal tissue is highly elastic, a carnivore needs to be able to cut it into pieces small enough to swallow.
This is done by specialized pairs of teeth called carnassials, which are pre-molars with elongated interlocking cusps that do not directly occlude. Instead, they shear past each other like scissors.
You can also see in the example above that the carnassials are the last pair of cheek teeth. The animal has no grinding teeth at all and wouldn't be able to use them even if it did because the interlocking action prevents the lateral motion of the jaw necessary for grinding.
You can easily see that difference in real life by watching a cow and a dog chew. The cow's mandible moves from side to side; the dog's mandible moves only up and down.
Strict carnivores do not have high crowned teeth. They do not have evergrowing teeth. They do not have multi-chambered stomachs or enlarged hind-guts. Strict carnivores cannot deal with cellulose -- It causes severe gastric upset. No member of the cat family can synthesize taurine, an essential amino acid that is not found in vegetation.
Can a lion subsist on straw? Not even cattle can do that. Straw is the biologically inactive, dried out stems of grass plants. Any farm boy can tell you the difference between hay and straw. The former is food, the latter is bedding and sometimes, filler. Even with fresh grass and hay, a lion has neither the teeth to start the process nor the specialized digestion to finish it.
Silly TD, always has to ruin people's emotional attachment to ancient myths by posting facts.
Heck, I go more than 3 days without water.
Really? It's not in the food you eat either?
You can go 3 days eating beef jerky & dried fruit, drinking nothing at all, without any problem whatsoever?
Lesson learned, trying to make a cohesive logical answer on a purposed question concerning a ancient mythological story
is a useless folly, unless you use the same imagination that created the original story in the first place.
Um, seriously, though, perhaps even religious persons can see that the flood is totally preposterous. It's a story, LOL. ;D
The somewhat missed and important fact regarding this story is why it was told in the first place.
The answer to that is to was told to bring desirable relevance to the select worshiped god of the ancient Judeans/Hebrews ( Yahweh )
These and other ancient civilizations had circumvented many stories of their gods of whom they has praised and worshiped, noting great things
these would do for these people or to the ones who were opposed to their civilization as a possible threat.
Another worthy question could be presented as to why would Yahweh destroy all of humanity and all living things just have it all return
to the previous state prior to the flood ! It was told as precarious warning to all or any who would not worship their great god Yahweh.
Sort like keeping the flock in check by use of fear as a controlling mechanism , this same applied use of fear works for the WTS. in keeping
its flock in check. Armageddon is coming soon, you will be judged on your devotion to Jehovah and his chosen publishing house.
Can a lion subsist on straw? Not even cattle can do that. Straw is the biologically inactive, dried out stems of grass plants. Any farm boy can tell you the difference between hay and straw.
First, the verse doesn't indicate that straw is ALL they will eat, but that lions will eat it... just as bulls will. I think the real translation is "fodder"... which IS chopped straw, in many cases.
Quick question: if what some of you believe as to what animals did eat and will eat is true... wouldn't that mean that they were "always" pretty much as they are NOW... lions... starting OUT as lions (versus evolving from something else)... and thus eating meat from day one (as opposed to something else)... and thus carnivores from day one... (as opposed to evolving into the carnivores they are now)? Or is it possible that the ancestor "kind" (phylus/family/genus)... were in fact herbivores... and due to changes in diet (from plants to meat)... their teeth evolved to accomodate their new cuisine? I mean, if I understand how some explain evolution... it sounds like that is what would have occurred.
I get that some believe the process to have take a great long time. I'm not asking (or opining) as to that, here.
But I ask this because it seems to ME, given the "slow" process of evolution (as some say it is)... that were wouldn't have been much "meat" for ANY animal, starting off. Unless (1) they ate their own kind, of course... which it seems would do quite some damage to the original species, or (2) entire herds/schools, etc, "evolved" all at once (you know, one day creeping salamander-like creatures, then the next day, POOF!, every one in the brood changed... together... all at once).
If carnivores started out as carnivores... and they weren't eating each other... what were they eating?
BTW, given what man can "engineer" as to the plant world, today... what he may yet do in the future... and the promise that the earth will no longer be "cursed"... why COULDN'T whatever vegetation that might exist at that time... due to hand of the Most Holy One of Israel... be sufficient? For ALL life forms?
Again, peace to you all!
A slave of Christ,
STOP and consider:
We live in modern times. A sci-fi writer today would have a HIGH-TECH forcefield bubble instead of an analogue wooden box!
Jehovah would use a sudden burst of neutrons and all offending species would drop where they stand.
But--the O.T. was written in an analogue world by low-tech writers whose poverty of imagination was limited severely!
So, the ONLY way a Supreme Being could preserve good humans and a few species of animals would be to construct a floating vessel!
The anemic nature of this story makes H.G.Welles appear to be a genius!
Back in Eden you have God walking around in the breezy part of the day, fer goodness sakes! Very analogue!