Almost full-size replica of Noah's ark

[Ldlane]

 

[CrimsonChuck]

Wait a minute. Didn't I see this movie already?


Oh yeah...I actually did.

 

[Jon]

What about the unicorn?

http://www.threadless.com/submission/59202/Biblical_Disaster

 

[BamaInBham]

It's interesting that the only way you can reconcile the varied complexity of our biosphere with the shockingly limited space on the ark is by use of evolution. I'm also glad that glad Noah had room for all the fish (silicone-sealed joints ftw!), water-dwelling mammals (amazing that he could fit two blue whales in there!), and the extremeophile life at the deep-sea hydrothermal vents that depend on toxic hydrogen sulfide. (must have used a utrahyperbaric chamber heated to 400 degrees C kept at a pH of <3 to wrangle that trick!) Not to mention that he was able to congregate all kinds of plant and animal life that absolutely require various climates for survival. Each stall must have been weather-controlled, I guess?

Not using evolution, but variation within species or 'kinds' that is contained within their genetic code.

The ark did not have 'shockingly limited space' but almost twice as much as needed to house double the 18,000 species of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians living in the world today. It had 1.4 million cubit feet, equivalent to about 522 standard livestock rail cars, equivalent to about 125,000 sheep. There was more than enough space for all the animal life brought onto the ark.

Most plant life could be reestablished by the sprouting of seeds and cuttings buried beneath the surface of the ground.

 

[BamaInBham]

Even by using the "two cats" or "two dogs" approach, there is still the fact that some species aren't found at all in the Middle East.

There was most likely a uniform tropical or subtropical climate over the entire (actually some/many evolutionists agree that there was such a period, the Mesozoic Age, though of course a ridiculously long time ago)earth prior to the vast geological and climatic changes caused by the flood and attendant events. In either case, there was almost certainly miraculous intervention by God to bring the animals to the ark by 2s. Also, probably miraculous intervention whereby He caused most or all of the animals to go into hibernation for the duration of the flood.

 

[BamaInBham]

The flood was said to have killed all creatures. Only those on the Ark survived.

He said, "...to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish." That could be taken as all creatures like you said, "under heaven"; I take it to mean land creatures, "on the earth". He also said, "all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died." He makes mention of man and animals and insects and birds, but never marine life.

 

[DiamondDust]

He said, "...to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish." That could be taken as all creatures like you said, "under heaven"; I take it to mean land creatures, "on the earth". He also said, "all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died." He makes mention of man and animals and insects and birds, but never marine life.

But one talking the Bible literally could also interpret "Under heaven" and "on the earth" as simply meaning all life on Earth - whether it was on land or in the ocean.

Another practical consideration to approach is what happened to the predators, assuming the animals were in hibernation (Although the Bible makes no mention of this). They were likely to be hungry... what did they eat? The species that weren't predators were assumed to have lived to further spread their species.

 

[Bamaro]

He said, "...to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish." That could be taken as all creatures like you said, "under heaven"; I take it to mean land creatures, "on the earth". He also said, "all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died." He makes mention of man and animals and insects and birds, but never marine life.

Maybe we could get the SC to explain that like the fine, consistent job they have done with the 2nd amendment.

 

[MasterShake]

Wasn't the whole point of Noah's Arc was to basically hit the "reset" button on the world? Wasn't God a little ....ed off at humanity for our sinful ways so he had the least sinful man on the planet build an Arc with all the world's creatures that God wanted to keep and then Noah was to repopulate the planet with "good" people? If so.... Mission Unaccomplished. Maybe next time big guy.

 

[DiamondDust]

Wasn't the whole point of Noah's Arc was to basically hit the "reset" button on the world? Wasn't God a little ....ed off at humanity for our sinful ways so he had the least sinful man on the planet build an Arc with all the world's creatures that God wanted to keep and then Noah was to repopulate the planet with "good" people? If so.... Mission Unaccomplished. Maybe next time big guy.

Actually, many civilizations have a story of a great flood/deluge that is used to show how their creator, for lack of a better term, hit the reset button and allowed mankind another chance.

 

[BamaInBham]

But one talking the Bible literally could also interpret "Under heaven" and "on the earth" as simply meaning all life on Earth - whether it was on land or in the ocean.

I agree that the statement in isolation could be taken either way. I also believe that since it would be far more practical for marine life to have continued its life in the water, that that was the case.

Another practical consideration to approach is what happened to the predators, assuming the animals were in hibernation (Although the Bible makes no mention of this). They were likely to be hungry... what did they eat? The species that weren't predators were assumed to have lived to further spread their species.

All animals may have been vegetarians before the flood; men definitely were vegetarians prior, though some may have eaten meat anyway in defiance.

The animals' relationship to man was certainly changed after the flood, as the Lord told Noah, "...the fear of you and the terror of you shall be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. Every moving thing that is alive, shall be food for you; I give all to you, as the green plant." Of course, this had not been the case prior.

 

[DiamondDust]

I agree that the statement in isolation could be taken either way. I also believe that since it would be far more practical for marine life to have continued its life in the water, that that was the case.



All animals may have been vegetarians before the flood; men definitely were vegetarians prior, though some may have eaten meat anyway in defiance.

The animals' relationship to man was certainly changed after the flood, as the Lord told Noah, "...the fear of you and the terror of you shall be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. Every moving thing that is alive, shall be food for you; I give all to you, as the green plant." Of course, this had not been the case prior.

Ahhh... one of the Bible's great contradictions: "Every moving that this is alive, shall be food for you."

I need not go into all the dietary restrictions that are presented in the next couple of books.

 

[BamaInBham]

Actually, many civilizations have a story of a great flood/deluge that is used to show how their creator, for lack of a better term, hit the reset button and allowed mankind another chance.

You are right, in fact, civilizations from every continent. These peoples carried with them the truth of the flood, and have maintained vestiges of that truth in varying degrees in the 4+ millenia since. It is confirmation of the flood's occurrence, there are others.

 

[doctorgonzo]

I don't figure Noah had an utrahperbaric chamber on hand but he didn't have a skill saw either. I just don't get why some try so hard to discredit faith with science. Religion is about faith in things not seen....kind of like the wind. I feel it blowing but I can't see it. Maybe someone will tell me that I can't see the wind because my optical chamber is paranormal to the third degree with a hexagon flash point - 10 degrees to the south....ect. JMO

Because some people try and distort science while trying to prove scientifically that there is evidence for their faith. Great Flood believers are definitely in this category. Science starts out from an objective viewpoint and forms theories based on available evidence. Believers start from a biased viewpoint and try as hard as they can to come up with scientific evidence to prove their faith. If they can't prove it with scientific method, they just explain it away by saying that it was God's work. Anyone can have faith in whatever they want, but don't try and use pseudoscience to try and prove it.

Is the detailed record of successive fossil species, from simple to more complex, from general to special, from fish to man, entirely an artifact of Noah's Flood? Not one human being, or horse, or cow, or fox, or deer, or hippopotamus, or tortoise, or monkey, was so slow, or so stupid, or so crippled, that it lagged behind the others, and thus got caught down at the bottom of the hill. Not one! Conversely, there was not one dinosaur, or trilobite, or mammoth, that was lucky enough, or clever enough, or fast enough, to climb up to the top of the hill, and thus escape the fate of its fellows. Not one! And this is sound science?
- Michael Ruse, Darwinism Defended: A Guide to the Evolution Controversies

A flood strong enough to move all the sediments of the earth would tend to mix the different types of animals and plants into one big mishmash... The fossils are in the right order for evolution but not for hydraulic selection. The light animals refuse to stay in the shallow rocks, and the dense animals refuse to stay in the deep rocks, where they belong according to creationism. For instance, trilobites, light, fragile creatures resembling pill bugs, tend to be found only in the deepest rocks... The rocks show that each distinct species usually has its own horizon absolutely distinct from the horizons of other species of the same size, shape, and weight.
- Christopher Gregory Weber, "Common Creationist Attacks on Geology," Creation/Evolution, Issue 2, Fall 1980

Can creationists seriously believe that their Flood geology accounts for the numerous macro-evolutionary trends so well documented in the fossil record? Is it really possible that horses, humans, cows, and rats were true contemporaries of the primitive mammals known from Mesozoic deposits, but somehow only small noneutherian, apparently transitional (and small primitive eutherian mammals) managed to be buried beside the giants of the reptile world?
- Laurie R. Godfrey, Scientists Confront Creationism

We might well ask whether the impressively huge carnivorous dinosaurs and other reptiles of the Mesozoic were weaker and less agile than the sheep and other grazing mammals that lay in the Cenozoic layers above them. Were the Mesozoic fish somehow less capable of avoiding burial in the hydraulic cataclysm than the Cenozoic corals and snails that are found above them in stratigraphic succession? We must conclude that the similarity between the known distribution of fossils and the prediction of the creationist model is insufficient to provide a basis for serious comparison.
- Brian F. Glenister and Brian J. Witzke, Professors at the Dept. of Geoscience, University of Iowa

As a botanist I get extremely disgruntled when reading about Noah. You see, God appears only to be interested in animals. Noah received no instructions to take on board any plants (by plants I mean angiosperms, gymnosperms, pteridiophytes and bryophytes). Talk about shortsightedness. Could this be the root cause for Zoology always being more popular than Botany? Dear Flood supporters, pray tell how did plants survive the Flood? Waiting in anticipation.
- M. (Matto), University of Stellenbosch

God made all the animals in a single day; he could have swept them all away in the flood and re-created them in one day when they were again needed. Therefore it was an odd idea to save specimens of them for eleven months in the ark, whilst aware that eight persons could not feed or water them by any human possibility. If they were to be preserved by miracle, the ark was not necessary -- to let them swim would have answered the purpose and been more indubitably miraculous.
- Mark Twain, "God of the Bible vs. God of the Present Day"

 

[BamaInBham]

Ahhh... one of the Bible's great contradictions: "Every moving that this is alive, shall be food for you."

I need not go into all the dietary restrictions that are presented in the next couple of books.

No contradiction. That permission has been in effect until this very day for most of the world. You are referring to the Law which was given to the nation of Israel only ("He declares His words to Jacob (Israel), His statutes and ordinances to Israel. He has not dealt thus with any nation," Ps 147). That law modified Israel's diet, but certainly included meat, though only "clean" animals. Those restrictions were lifted for Israel in Acts 10, less than 1500 years later.

 

[DiamondDust]

You are right, in fact, civilizations from every continent. These peoples carried with them the truth of the flood, and have maintained vestiges of that truth in varying degrees in the 4+ millenia since. It is confirmation of the flood's occurrence, there are others.

Actually, it's not evidence of a major world-wide, life ending flood occurring. Virtually every civilization that has ever survived in this word lived near a major water supply, whether it be a river, lake, or ocean. All civilizations have myths and stories to explain the concept of an angry yet forgiving deity, and since the water supply played a major role in their lives - it is natural for that to be the center of the punishment. If the river or lake flooded or say a tsunami or hurricane hit, it was the norm of the time to consider it a supernatural event.

That being said, however, some scientists/geologists believe only something along the lines of an asteroid impacting could have caused the effects listed in all of the flood stories throughout the civilizations in the world.

 

[MasterShake]

Actually, many civilizations have a story of a great flood/deluge that is used to show how their creator, for lack of a better term, hit the reset button and allowed mankind another chance.

You're missing my point entirely.

Wasn't the whole point of Noah's Arc was to basically hit the "reset" button on the world? Wasn't God a little ....ed off at humanity for our sinful ways so he had the least sinful man on the planet build an Arc with all the world's creatures that God wanted to keep and then Noah was to repopulate the planet with "good" people? If so.... Mission Unaccomplished. Maybe next time big guy.

The world still looks equally as sinful as before. So in effect, mission unaccomplished...

 

[DiamondDust]

You're missing my point entirely.



The world still looks equally as sinful as before. So in effect, mission unaccomplished...

Yeah, I wasn't trying to prove otherwise... I was basically agreeing with you. All civilizations have the "flood and reset" story, yet things continued to operate as usual.

 

[CrimsonCT]

Not using evolution, but variation within species or 'kinds' that is contained within their genetic code.

Please go into more detail here, specifically how you believe that a single pair of dogs can differentiate into wolves (78 chromosomes), foxes (34 chromosomes), hyena (40 chromosomes), etc without referencing the concept of evolution. Note that none of those species are even in the same genus, and thus have diverged to such as extent as to prohibit interbreeding.

The ark did not have 'shockingly limited space' but almost twice as much as needed to house double the 18,000 species of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians living in the world today. It had 1.4 million cubit feet, equivalent to about 522 standard livestock rail cars, equivalent to about 125,000 sheep. There was more than enough space for all the animal life brought onto the ark.

18,000 species? Where did you get that number? Not to mention that your estimate conveniently robs the world of insects (10 million species), fungi (100,000 species), crustaceans (50,000 species), mollusks (100,000 species), and microorganisms (too many to comprehend).

All animals may have been vegetarians before the flood; men definitely were vegetarians prior, though some may have eaten meat anyway in defiance.

Where are you getting the idea that all animals were vegetarians before the flood?

 

[BamaInBham]

Because some people try and distort science while trying to prove scientifically that there is evidence for their faith. Great Flood believers are definitely in this category. Science starts out from an objective viewpoint and forms theories based on available evidence. Believers start from a biased viewpoint and try as hard as they can to come up with scientific evidence to prove their faith. If they can't prove it with scientific method, they just explain it away by saying that it was God's work. Anyone can have faith in whatever they want, but don't try and use pseudoscience to try and prove it.

You are confused. True science confirms the Bible at every turn. Science has often tried its best to refute the Bible but has frequently been shown to be ignorant or incomplete or a fraud. Lying to hide from the truth. But as has often been stated, "...men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them, for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though the knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise they became fools." Psuedo-science that tries to deny His existence or distort His nature do it because they want to continue in their sin unhindered by the thought of a God to Whom they will give an account.

It does not matter that man discovers more each passing day the incredible, spectacular and complex nature of the universe, both macro and micro, that begs for a Creator, most refuse to accept the obvious, and thereby reject the truth.