Why the story of Noah's ark is scientifically impossible: Minimum Viable Population

by ILoveTTATT2 28 Replies latest jw friends

  • ttdtt

    Yea that and about 1000 other reasons:)

  • Heaven

    TheOldHippie said: Insects survived outside of the ark, the water was full of debris of rotting trees, plants, corpses etc., so they had lots to thrive on. Fish and water mammals survived outside too.

    So are you saying there were no insects taken aboard the ark? Or do you have a comprehensive list of those that were versus those that were not. Because Earthworms wouldn't survive if they weren't taken aboard the ark. There are many soil species that when exposed to air, or salt water or too much water, die.

    How did fresh water fish and mammals survive in salt water?

  • pale.emperor

    Not to mention those poor animals having to survive in little cages or pens on their feets all the time in the ark.

    PETA would have a field day.

  • never a jw
    never a jw

    When lion and lioness are released from the ark, they are going to have to wait for a long while, years before they eat their first meal. Their prey can't be eaten until their cubs are old enough to survive on their own and reproduce. Or perhaps, the lions did eat something that obviously went extinct the moment they ate them. What about tigers...and pumas...and cheetahs...

  • Divergent

    How did the kangaroos go to Australia? The same way that they went to the Middle East to board the ark!

  • TD

    Yes. We've driven enough species to the brink of extinction and brought them back via captive breeding projects to understand this. With higher mammals, the absolute minimum number of individuals for a viable breeding group is right around 75 and even then, the resultant genetic bottle-neck is easily identifiable for all time to come.

    Humans are less tolerant to inbreeding than any other mammal, which is why we have such strong aversions to it. It's why so many elaborate social customs sprang up among small tribes to preserve genetic diversity. Indigenous peoples of Australia divided tribes up into moieties and marriages that did not cross moiety lines were absolutely taboo. Indigenous people in North America kidnapped or bartered for brides from other tribes. Depending upon how friendly the other tribe was, this could be a real honest-to-goodness kidnapping or it could be merely a formality where young women went to a prearranged spot and waited to be "kidnapped." Primitive people with no knowledge of genetics didn't sit down and plan this out. The cold, hard fact is that tribes that didn't practice at least a limited form of exogamy eventually died out.

  • ILoveTTATT2
    If you need a viable population of some thousands, how come it has been possible to re-establish animal populations based on only a handfull of individuals? In many cases, they have managed to gather the 2, 3 4 or so living individuals of a kind, make them mate and after a few years they have been successfully re-introduced on their island or in their region and now are as safe as any animal population can be these days.
    Uh... no.

    First of all, there are very few examples of this. It is rare, but possible, in cases of extreme luck, to get a bottleneck that narrow and still have the population rebound. I read about two examples:

    Cheetahs and elephant seals. In the case of elephant seals, the numbers were down to around 20, and now they are around 30,000. Cheetahs are pretty much identical genetically, and they went through an extreme bottleneck around 10,000 years ago.

    But they are not "as safe as any animal population can be these days". Genetically speaking, they are at a very high risk. One disease for which they are all susceptible and they die out.

    So my point stands, most species need a minimum viable population that is in the hundreds to thousands of individuals to survive.

    Two individuals is just not possible without sky-daddy magic.

  • truth_b_known

    Friends -

    The fairy tale story of a global flood, Noah, and the ark were the foundation of my exit from the evil empire. The animal portion is just part of it.

    • Where did all the water go?
    • In order for the highest mountain top to be covered by water, the Earth's mass would change its orbit.
    • All fresh water sources would mix with salt water and kill off freshwater fish.
    • Did Egyptians have SCUBA gear? They were actively building pyramids during the global flood.

    If I just have to have "faith" to believe, I don't want to have faith. If a magical invisible man has the power to solve all these issues, why cause a global flood to begin with? Why not just send angels to kill the wicked?

  • problemaddict 2
    problemaddict 2

    In the face of even the most basic arguments regarding Noahs ark, the elders that fancy themselves smart will give the most incredible answers for these things. Go ahead......ask......it's a riot.

    In the end however, you have to accept that not only did God do all of these things outside of the realm of his natural laws for the sake of tjis lesson, but also that he drowned millions of people/families, and animals to hit the reset button, using the same corrupted genetic material. After all that, he his evidence of it.....just hid it. Even though he doesn't even mention dinosaurs, but he left all sorts of evidence of those.

    I'll say it again......I can't believe I used to believe this stuff!

  • TheOldHippie

    Dear Heaven,

    "Or do you have a comprehensive list of those that were versus those that were not. Because Earthworms wouldn't survive if they weren't taken aboard the ark. "

    How on Earth could I be in possession of a somprehensive list of hundreds of thousands of insect species and their whereabouts during the flood? I think Earthworms and others would have plenty of food and survival opportunities outside the ark. I did not say none were inside, I said they survived well outside - as far as I can think of. Why or how could I make out a comprehensive list?

Share this