Animal Migration from Noahs Ark?

by cornish 7 Replies latest jw friends

  • cornish

    What do you think of the item below I was e-mailed?

    How did Various Animals get from the Ark to Isolated Places such as

    There is no doubt that the whole issue of post-Flood animal migration
    patterns presents some tough problems and research challenges to the
    Biblical creation model. There are severe practical limitations on our
    attempts to understand the hows and whys of something which happened
    was not recorded in detail, and cannot be repeated.

    Let's begin by reaffirming that God's Word does indeed reveal, in the
    plainest possible terms, that the whole globe was inundated with a
    watery cataclysm. The only survivors were the inhabitants of the Ark,
    included at least one breeding pair of every kind of land-dwelling,
    air-breathing creature.

    Any difficulties in our ability to explain every single situation in
    must therefore be a reflection of our limited understanding. When
    erupted in 1883, the island remnant remained lifeless for some years,
    was eventually colonized by a surprising variety of creatures,
    including not
    only insects and earthworms, but birds, lizards, snakes and even a few
    mammals. (See figure 119) One would not have expected some of this
    surprising array of creatures to have been able to cross the ocean as
    obviously did. Even though these were in the main smaller than some of
    creatures we will discuss here, it usefully illustrates the limits of
    our a
    priori imaginings on such things.

    For the most part, the animals of Noah's day were faced with far fewer
    apparently insuperable difficulties. The Ararat region is more or less
    mathematical centre of the earth's land-masses. {1}

    Evolutionary anthropologists themselves have no difficulty in
    that men and animals were once freely able to cross the Bering Strait,
    separates Asia and the Americas. In fact, before the idea of
    drift became popular, evolutionists taught and believed that a lowering
    the sea level during an ice age (with more water locked up at the
    would mean that there were land bridges enabling dry-land passage from
    Europe most of the way to Australasia, for example. (See figure 118)

    The existence of some deep-water stretches along this route is
    with this explanation; evolutionist geologists themselves believe there
    been major tectonic upheavals, accompanied by substantial rising and
    of sea-floors, in the time-period which they themselves associate with
    ice age. For instance, parts of California are believed to have been
    many thousands of feet from what was the sea-floor during this ice age
    period, {2} which they term Pleistocene (one of the most recent of the
    supposed geological time periods). In the same way, other dry-land
    including parts of these land bridges, fell to become submerged at
    the same time. Most Pleistocene sediments are regarded by creationist
    geologists as post-Flood, the period in which these major migrations
    have taken place.

    There is a widespread, but mistaken, belief that marsupials are found
    in Australia, thus supporting the idea that they must have evolved
    Live marsupials are found also in America, for instance, and fossil
    marsupials even in Europe. The recent discovery of a fossil platypus
    in South America stunned the scientific community. {3} Therefore, in
    evolutionary terms, since they are all believed to have come from a
    ancestor, migration between Australia and other areas must have been

    Creationists generally believe there was one great Ice Age after, and
    as a
    consequence of, the Flood. {4} This made it possible for animals to
    over land-bridges for centuries. Those creationists who do accept some
    of continental break-up after the Flood {5} often believe this to have
    in the days of Peleg. This again would mean several centuries for
    animals to
    disperse, in this instance without the necessity of land-bridges.

    How did animals make the long journey? Even though there have been
    reports of individual animals making startling journeys of thousands of
    miles, such abilities are not even necessary. A very small number of
    were released in Australia by early settlers. Wild rabbits are now
    found at
    the very opposite corner (in fact, every corner) of this vast
    Does that mean that an individual rabbit had to be capable of crossing
    whole of Australia? Of course not. Creation speakers are often asked
    mockingly, "Did the kangaroo hop all the way to Australia?" We see by
    rabbit example that this is a somewhat foolish question. However, let
    answer it, anyway.

    Did the Kangaroo Hop all the Way to Australia?

    Populations of animals may have had centuries to migrate, relatively
    over many generations.

    Incidentally, the opposite question (also common), as to whether the
    kangaroos hopped all the way from Australia to the Ark, is also easily
    answered. The continents we now have, with their load of
    sedimentary rock, are not the same as whatever continents there may
    been in the pre-Flood world. We also have no information as to how
    were distributed. Kangaroos (as is true for any other creature) may not
    been on any isolated land-mass. (See figure 120)

    In fact, #Ge 1:9 suggests that there may have been only one land-mass.
    the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and
    the dry land appear".) For all we know, kangaroos might have been
    within a stone's throw of Noah while he was building the Ark.

    It may be asked, if creatures were migrating to Australia over a long
    (which journey would have included such places as Indonesia,
    presumably) why
    do we not find their fossils en route in such countries? Fossilization
    is a
    rare event, requiring, as a rule, sudden burial to prevent
    Lions lived in Palestine until relatively recent times. Not
    surprisingly, we
    do not find lion fossils in Palestine, yet this doesn't prevent us
    the many historical reports of their presence. The millions of bison
    once roamed the United States of America have left virtually no
    fossils. So
    why should it be a surprise that small populations, presumably under
    migration pressure from competitors and/or predators, and thus living
    only one area for a few generations at most, should leave no fossils?
    Another issue is the question of why certain animals (and plants) are
    uniquely found in only one place. Why is species x found only in
    And species y only in the Seychelles? Many times, questions on this are
    phrased to indicate that the questioner believes that this means that
    species y headed only in that one direction, and never migrated
    else. But this is not so, of course. All that the present situation
    indicates is that these are now the only places where x or y still

    The ancestors of present-day kangaroos may have established daughter
    populations in different parts of the world, which subsequently became
    extinct. Perhaps only those marsupials that reached Australia ahead of
    placental mammals (we are not suggesting anything other than random
    processes in choice of destination), to be subsequently isolated from
    of the latter, have been able to survive and prosper.

    Palm Valley in Central Australia is host to a unique species of palms,
    Livingstonia mariae, found nowhere else in the world (Figure 1) (See
    121). Does this necessarily mean that the seeds for this species
    only to this one little spot? Not at all. Current models of post-Flood
    climate indicate that the world is much drier now than it was in the
    post-Flood centuries. Evolutionists themselves agree that in recent
    (by evolutionary standards), the Sahara was lush and green, and Central
    Australia had a moist, tropical climate. For all we know, the
    mariae palm may have been widespread over much of Australia, and
    even in other places which are now dry, such as parts of Africa.

    The palm has survived in Palm Valley because there it happens to be
    protected from the drying out which affected the rest of its vast
    surrounds. Everywhere else, it happened to die out.

    Incidentally, this concept of changing vegetation with changing climate
    should be kept in mind when considering post-Flood animal migration.
    Especially because of the objections (and caricatures) which may be
    presented. For instance, how could creatures that today need a
    environment, trudge across millions of acres of parched desert on the
    way to
    where they now live? The answer is that the desert simply wasn't

  • rhett

    Me thinks its a load of crap. As I've said I don't even know how many times, instead of looking at the world around you and trying to make it fit into what is said in a book that's thousands of years old its easier and makes more sense to look at the world around you and let it be however it is without making it fit into any preconceived notion.

    Back down the bullies to the back of the bus
    Its time for them to be scared of us

  • avengers

    Now I understand. Too bad there weren't any dinosaurs in those days. That would have really been a problem for Noah. Man, I bet he shoveled a bunch of shit in those days.

  • AlanF

    This little ditty is so chock full of falsehoods that it's not worth trying debunking. Anyone who is so stupid as to write such things in the first place is surely incapable of understanding the facts if presented.


  • funkyderek

    The audience the above text is designed to reach is the lazy fundamentalist. Because it is almost impossible to believe something like the biblical flood account without asking some questions, articles like this purport to answer those questions. They'll never convince anyone who doesn't already believe, they serve only to reassure those who already believe that someone somewhere has an explanation to uncomfortable facts that won't shatter their worldview, even if they can't understand it.

    Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. - Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

  • gravedancer

    Noah's Ark was bullshit - thats easily provable.

    Next time you cut and paste stuff....why not say where from though? Or provide a link so we can see it in a readable format?

  • Geordie

    How did Noah manage to convince the Lemming's not to just commit suicide?

    Where did Noah see his first Penguin?

    How did Noah manage to catch a breeding pair of Polar Bair's?

    Why would anyone want to catch a Puff-Adder?

    How many breeds of animal did Noah sacrifice to keep the carnivores alive?(the Unicorn? a couple of Dragons maybe?)

    Was Noah a vegitarian?

  • cornish

    Unfortunately I dont know the source of the info,I can try to find out though,as I said it was e mailed from a friend who is definately not a creationist or fundie but was sent to him by another friend who is one and probrably trying to convince him,we both left the JWs about the same time and one of the first doubts we both had about the issue of a literal flood was the fact that somehow practically all of the marsupial breeds that left the ark in Turkey ended up in Australia barring one or two breeds that live in South America,which would more support the continental drift than the flood account to me,and seems to suggest that they were related in their ancestorship.

Share this