A Universal Flood

[Christian]

Can someone give me the top ten reasons why a universal flood could not happen?

Can someone gime me the top ten reasons why the ark part could not happen (all the animals in the ark)?

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Christian
Can someone give me the top ten reasons why a universal flood could not happen?
I'm not certain it could not happen. However, if you refer to the Biblical flood, I have read that the volume of water described falling in the amount of time allowed would have eroded the world smooth, as well as killing everything. I don't see why nine more reasons are necessary.

Can someone gime me the top ten reasons why the ark part could not happen (all the animals in the ark)?
The top reason is lack of available space in the ark as defined Biblically. Again, I don't see what good nine more reasons would be.

[Skeptical Greg]

Never mind.. I see the Marquis has covered it...



Take particular note of the fact that ten reasons are completely unnecessary..

[Christian]

Originally posted by Diogenes
Touched upon by the Marquis, but..


Why ten ? How about 1 ?

The flood..

Not enough water..


The ark.

Not enough room.

Sorry, I'm doing some research. I would need a little more than this. A link would be nice.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Ask, and it shall be given unto you.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

ETA: I must know why you seem to think it requires more than one reason?

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by Christian
Sorry, I'm doing some research. I would need a little more than this. A link would be nice. Perhaps your research will uncover a link or two. Perhaps your sense of logic will make a link unnecessary..

[Psiload]

Originally posted by Christian
Sorry, I'm doing some research. I would need a little more than this. A link would be nice.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Talk Origins... killing mosquitos with sledge hammers since 1998.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Christian
Can someone give me the top ten reasons why a universal flood could not happen?I assume you mean "global" flood, not "universal"? A universal flood could not happen for several reasons that I can think of off the top of my head, but lack of that much water is one.
Can someone gime me the top ten reasons why the ark part could not happen (all the animals in the ark)? Aside from Marquis de Carabas's point about the Biblical dimensions not allowing room for two of every animal, there is also the consideration of fact of transportating animals from the great distances from parts of the planet that were, by all evidence, unknown to the people of Noah's time and location.

There is also the problem that a single male-female pair is insufficent for sustaining a species. Especially given that many animals are carnivors and the selection of prey would be limited to those animals in the Ark.

[Psiload]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Ask, and it shall be given unto you.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

ETA: I must know why you seem to think it requires more than one reason? Dang... beat me by four minutes. Yer purty quick on the draw, pardner.

[El Greco]

Can someone give me the top ten reasons why the fish would need an ark to survive a universal flood ?

[Christian]

Originally posted by Upchurch
I assume you mean "global" flood, not "universal"? A universal flood could not happen for several reasons that I can think of off the top of my head, but lack of that much water is one.
Aside from Marquis de Carabas's point about the Biblical dimensions not allowing room for two of every animal, there is also the consideration of fact of transportating animals from the great distances from parts of the planet that were, by all evidence, unknown to the people of Noah's time and location.

Yes, in Spanish we say universal when meaning global in relation to the flood.

There is also the problem that a single male-female pair is insufficent for sustaining a species. Especially given that many animals are carnivors and the selection of prey would be limited to those animals in the Ark.


I would consider this one on the top ten. Thanks Upchurch.

[Christian]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Ask, and it shall be given unto you.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

ETA: I must know why you seem to think it requires more than one reason?

Thanks for the link, I will sort the top ten from here.

[Ossai]

Christian
Another site with a number of reasons.

The Whole Silly Flood Story (http://members.aol.com/darrwin/flood.htm)

Oh and the base site Things Creationists Hate (http://members.aol.com/darrwin/things.htm)is also good.

Ossai

[Christian]

Originally posted by Ossai
Christian
Another site with a number of reasons.

The Whole Silly Flood Story (http://members.aol.com/darrwin/flood.htm)

Oh and the base site Things Creationists Hate (http://members.aol.com/darrwin/things.htm)is also good.

Ossai

Ossai, are you sure about those links?

[Ipecac]

One of the most interesting things to me is that the story of the flood is one of multiple FAILURES on god's part.

First, he created mankind to live in paradise. He obviously failed there and within a short time decided he needed to destroy nearly everyone and start over.

Second, he brought the flood to wipe out wickedness in the world. He obviously failed at that as well.

So just why is it that Christians love this story so much?

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Ipecac

So just why is it that Christians love this story so much?
Wanton destruction of fornicators, drunkards, idolaters and homoseckshuls.

[Ossai]

Christian
Ossai, are you sure about those links?
While the information presented is in a slightly humorous form, the information presented can be checked for accuracy. Did you have a problem with a specific point made?

I just checked the links again – it seems to be hit or miss as to whether or not they load. If that is the problem, wait a few minutes and try again.

Try copying and pasting it directly: http://members.aol.com/darrwin/things.htm


You can also try
http://www.holysmoke.org/thought.htm

Ossai

[Psi Baba]

On the idea of carnivores, lions, for example, eat on average 8 to 9 kg of meat per day, but can eat up to 25 kg (females) or 43 kg (males). Here are some more examples of the food needs of other carnivores:
Bobcat -- 40 lbs/week
Cougar or Leopard -- 100-150 lbs/week
Lion or Tiger -- 200-250 lbs/week
Fox -- 25 lbs/week
Coyote -- 25 lbs/week
Bear -- 100 lbs/week
One animal refuge that keeps 40 large carnivores states that it goes through 10,000 pounds of meat per month, so for every 40 carnivores on the ark, Noah would have needed about 12,500 pound of meat for the trip. If he had 100 carnivores, he needed over 31,000 pounds of meat.

Because refrigeration technology in Noah's time would have been a bit inadequte for the job, the best way to keep that much meat fresh would be to keep it "on the hoof," which means they would have had to have literally herds of game animals (plus smaller animals, such as rodents, etc., for the smaller carnivores) just to provide food! So now you've got to have tons of grain to feed not ony the Representative Pairs of herbivores, but to keep the food animals alive as long as they're needed.

Let's not even get into whether Noah took animals by kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, or species. If the anti-evolutionists are correct, then all the species already existed, right? Global species estimates range from 2 million to 100 million species. Ten million is probably nearer the mark. Only 1.4 million species have been named. Of these, approximately 250,000 are plants and 750,000 are insects. Yes, we can rule out birds (can we?) and aquatic creatures, but that still leaves millions of species of land animals.

What about dinosaurs?

As anyone with so much as half a ganglion bundle can see, the logistics of the whole thing quickly approach the absurd.


11th Commandment (the one we never hear about): Thou Shalt Not Think About This Stuff.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Psi Baba
-snip-
Yes, we can rule out birds (can we?) and aquatic creatures,
-snip-
If we can assume that all the birds can land occasionally on the ark, I guess we can omit them. However, except for those that feed off fish (and see below), Noah might need to keep some food around for them.

Aquatic creatures have their own problems, though. If the entire world is covered with water, and all the water is mixed together, nobody's going to be loving their pH levels. Depending upon the rapidity and drasticness of the level change as the world floods, it could be fatal to a great many species. Don't be so sure Noah didn't require a whole wing of aquaria on his (increasingly absurd) dinghy.

[seayakin]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
If we can assume that all the birds can land occasionally on the ark, I guess we can omit them. However, except for those that feed off fish (and see below), Noah might need to keep some food around for them.

Aquatic creatures have their own problems, though. If the entire world is covered with water, and all the water is mixed together, nobody's going to be loving their pH levels. Depending upon the rapidity and drasticness of the level change as the world floods, it could be fatal to a great many species. Don't be so sure Noah didn't require a whole wing of aquaria on his (increasingly absurd) dinghy.

Maybe it wasn't an ark at all but he was a Time Lord with a Tardis, maybe he was Rassillon himself. :o

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by seayakin
Maybe it wasn't an ark at all but he was a Time Lord with a Tardis, maybe he was Rassillon himself. :o
That's no more illogical than any other explanation I've heard. ;)

[ReFLeX]

Why do we still have the Ebola virus? Did Noah bring that too? Or any infectious bacteria for that matter...

[Dr Adequate]

Hello again Christian.

By a fortunate coincidence, we were just chatting to a YEC about this. After nine pages, here's my list of some of the questions he hadn't answered. I've edited them, as some were specific to particular mechanisms he put forward for the Flood.

The original thread is here (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54554&perpage=40&pagenumber=9) --- if Nick returns, you may care to sit in on the argument.

---

D : LIFE ON THE ARK

(1) Many fish species are quite delicate when it comes to water Ph, salinity, temperature and oxygen levels. How they survived the deluge? Did Noah have tanks in the Ark? (He would need tanks for fresh water and saltwater fish, since the deluge waters must have completely messed up the subaquatic environment.)

(2) How did Noah manage to maintain the environment on the arc for those creatures that live in low-pressure sub-zero environments and those that live in high-pressure high-temperature environments?

(3) Every modern disease of animals must have come on the Ark, including of course diseases that affect humans. The Ark must therefore have been loaded with bubonic plague, cholera, polio, typhus, typhoid, sleeping sickness, leprosy, syphillis, smallpox, measles, malaria... How did Noah and his family survive?

(4) How many different species did Noah take onto the Ark?


E : GEOLOGY AND THE FLOOD

(1) We have not recognized a worldwide flood deposit (in contrast to the recognized Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary). Where in the geologic column should we expect to find it (i.e., how old would it be)? If it would be 6,000 to 10,000 years old, there certainly should be evidence; heck, we have evidence of all sorts of regional depositional events that occurred during this time frame.

(2) How do YECs explain that layers supposedly deposited during the deluge can be tilted, faulted, folded, buried underneath kilometres of rock (including massive volcanics) or uplifited miles high?

(3) Since YECs claim that sedimentary rocks were formed by sediments deposited during the deluge, diagenesis and lithification must be quite fast, after a couple of thousand tears. Why don´t we see sediments say, deposited by the time of the pharaos, that became rock? Why does loose mud deposited at the bottom of a water body not become rock almost instantly?

(4) Are we to believe that there were igneous intrusions during the Deluge, forming nice tablular dikes in the sediment that was being swirled around, or that stratal deformations characteristic of consolidated rocks formed while the sediments were still being deposited?

(5) How do YECs explain metasedimentary rocks?

(6) Where are the all the tuff, ignimbrite, lava and lahar layers associated with the eruptions that caused or helped to cause the deluge [according to the hypothetical "steam from eruptions" mechanism for the Flood]? (Note that all of them must have the same age!)

...

(9) If fossilised creatures were all killed in a global flood, why are 90% of all fossils marine life? Wouldn't land animals be worse affected?

(10) Why are human remains never found in the same strata as dinosaur fossils?

(11) Can you explain the unique fossils of Antarctica in terms of YEC geology?

...


F : AFTER THE FLOOD --- DISPERSION AND BIOGEOGRAPHY

(1) How did the plants survive the Flood / their seeds survive to germinate?

(2) After disembarking from the Ark how did the plant-eaters survive until the plants had grown out again, and how did the predators survive until the prey had multiplied?

(3) "Conservation biologists now calculate as a rough rule of thumb that unless a wild population contains around five hundred individuals, it is liable to go extinct, sooner or later. Yet even five hundred is only enough to allow the population to tick over... five hundred, then, is a very conservative figure." How does this square with the story of the Ark?

(4) If only two of each unclean land mammal was taken into the Ark, but there were eight humans, of which at least six formed breeding pairs, then we ought to find higher genetic diversity in humans than in unclean beasts, and we should also expect the most genetically diverse mammals to be whales, which would not have undergone the same (impossible) population bottleneck. But this is not what we find when we study genetics. Why do you think this is?

(5) The Great Pyramid shows no evidence at all of ever having been submerged. Therefore, it must be of post-Flood construction. But it is so old that it must have been constructed within a few hundred years, at most, of the Flood. How was that pyramid built by so few people?

(6) [AiG] explain the distribution of the world's fauna, and that of Australia in particular, by ascribing them to human pastoralists. Australia is home to dozens of unique species of venomous snake. Can you explain how and why anyone would herd these creatures to Australia from Turkey (without, you notice, losing any on the way --- Australian snakes are unique to Australia) and why they didn't, instead, take any domesticated meat animals such as sheep, goats, or cattle? Which humans would be dumb enough to carry polar bears to the Arctic? Tigers to Sumatra? Komodo dragons to Komodo? Crocodiles to Florida? Army ants to Brazil?

---

I hope this helps. I haven't bothered to sort this list into a "top ten", because there may well be other objections I don't know about. And it omits, of course, the number 1 argument --- we know what actually happened. We know the real history of life on Earth, and it isn't what you find in Genesis. In the same way, if someone claims that during the seventeenth century Europe was ruled by giant purple lizards, we can disprove this without finding any faults or fallacies in that proposition itself --- it is sufficient to look at the real history of seventeenth century Europe and its dynasties.

[Scot C. Trypal]

Originally posted by Upchurch
[B]...
Aside from Marquis de Carabas's point about the Biblical dimensions not allowing room for two of every animal

And it’s more of a tight squeeze than that:

Gen 7:2-3

Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

He had to pack in seven of the “clean� animals and seven of every bird species (that may also include bats).

[bluess]

Originally posted by Dr Adequate
Hello again Christian.

By a fortunate coincidence, we were just chatting to a YEC about this. After nine pages, here's my list of some of the questions he hadn't answered. I've edited them, as some were specific to particular mechanisms he put forward for the Flood.

...SNIP



Dr. A - as always you are a font of information. Thanks for this response, I'll try to keep some in my memory banks. I especially enjoyed the Australian venomous snake herding idea.... just when you think your job is tough!

[Ossai]

seayakin
Maybe it wasn't an ark at all but he was a Time Lord with a Tardis, maybe he was Rassillon himself. No, Dr Who (the first Doctor BTW) visited the ark. It was a giant spacecraft with animal samples (glass test tubes containing the necessary items to ‘grow’ a species). He and his (I believe 2 at the time) assistants visited it at least twice. The ship was large enough and the trip long enough that there were generations of caretakers. There were the human caretakers and a slave race they had created – conflict ensued.

Ossai

[Darat]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
And it’s more of a tight squeeze than that:

Gen 7:2-3



He had to pack in seven of the “clean� animals and seven of every bird species (that may also include bats).

But that isn't the case since it then goes on to say:

Gen 7:9 "Two of each came to Noah to the ark, male and female, as God had command Noah"

It's a bit tricky to know exactly what happened during the claimed flood since the only source of information we have is the Bible and it seems rather confused about the matter! :)

[arthwollipot]

The problems with Australian animals don't stop with the snakes. Koalas, for example, can only subsist on eucalyptus leaves. Not only would Noah have to have had a supply of fresh eucalyptus leaves on board the ark to keep them alive, there is also the problem of the koalas getting to the middle east in the first place (to board the ark) and returning to Australia afterward.

I mean, cute and cuddly koalas may be, but long-distance runners they are not.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
The top reason is lack of available space in the ark as defined Biblically. Again, I don't see what good nine more reasons would be.

Another related reason, and my favorite, is that Noah and his family would each have to host thousands of diseases in order to preserve them thru the flood. Most such germ diseases only can survive in one species, so every animal on the boat would have to be crammed with them.

Given some kill, and quickly, no animal should have survived (to say nothing about toxic overload of the body from thousands of simultaneous infections and diseases.)

The lack of any such discussions makes a joke of the whole "history". Yes, "god" could have had them host benignly, and unaware to them, but if you concede that, the entire concept of needing an ark to begin with evaporates, if god will intercede to that amount just to retrofit a child's tale to jive with real world modern science.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Oh, you silly skepticals. It amazes me the mental gymnastics you guys go through to avoid beliefing in God. Obviously, all animals started out in the Garden of Eden, so koalas and other native Austrian species didn't have to "get" to the Middle East. They were already there, and disbursed after the Grate Flood. And you know that Incontinental Drift your materialistic scientist gods are always on about? I bet the Flood happened when everything was still one big island, so it was easy for all them animals to find their way to their new homes.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by Ossai
seayakin
No, Dr Who (the first Doctor BTW) visited the ark. It was a giant spacecraft with animal samples (glass test tubes containing the necessary items to ‘grow’ a species). He and his (I believe 2 at the time) assistants visited it at least twice. The ship was large enough and the trip long enough that there were generations of caretakers. There were the human caretakers and a slave race they had created – conflict ensued.

Ossai

Speaking of the Doctor, Billie Piper may have finally knocked Nicola Bryant off as the hottest sidekick of all time. She's less pretty, but those big lips... Plus, the hooter situation is still undefined at this moment, too.

[bluess]

How can a hooter situation be undefined?

So what was Noah and his family eating while they were on the ark? And did they bring samples of every PLANT too? Or did the flood only drown animals and humans?

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by bluess

So what was Noah and his family eating while they were on the ark?
They fasted to get closer to God. For water, they just held out their cups.

And did they bring samples of every PLANT too? Or did the flood only drown animals and humans?
Oh, you can't drown, plants, silly skeptical!

[bluess]

The many houseplants I have killed would beg to differ. Probably by Ouija board - oops, that's a tool of the devil, sorry, probably by communicating to John Edwards.

Hey - how long did it take for the deserts to dry out? And did he bring every insect on board too? I'm sure the fleas and lice would have been happy, what with all those big beasties to infest.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by bluess
Hey - how long did it take for the deserts to dry out?
Not long at all. Sand used to dry quicker than it does today. Has to do with shifting magnetic fields.

And did he bring every insect on board too? I'm sure the fleas and lice would have been happy, what with all those big beasties to infest.
He didn't have to bring insects. All insects float.

[bluess]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
..Snip

He didn't have to bring insects. All insects float.

Great, now I'm never going to have a bath again. Showers only.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by seayakin
Maybe it wasn't an ark at all but he was a Time Lord with a Tardis, maybe he was Rassillon himself. :o

Oh come on! Don't be rediculous.

Dr. Who is a fanciful story made up by people looking to get some money out of it.

Ummmm.

Nevermind.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by Christian
Can someone give me the top ten reasons why a universal flood could not happen?I suspect it was probably a regional flood.

Can someone gime me the top ten reasons why the ark part could not happen (all the animals in the ark)? I see no reason why this should be taken in the literal sense. Do you? And, while it is possible that somebody built the ark and made an attempt to save all the known species -- or, those which were deemed most essential -- I doubt very much that it entailed every single species there is. That sounds just a bit too absurd don't you think?

[Scot C. Trypal]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
He didn't have to bring insects. All insects float.

Not so fast:

Gen 7:13-14
In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

Gen 7:21-22
And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Noah took every insect, and held the floaters under water.

To pack all those beasts into the ark in “the selfsame day� would seem to lead to a ridiculous rate of boarding, wouldn’t it?

Originally posted by Iacchus
I doubt very much that it entailed every single species there is. That sounds just a bit too absurd don't you think?

I'd agree but that is what the Bible says, and many want to take the Bible as literal truth.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Ow. I just banged my head something fierce as I fainted with shock. Iacchus, warn somebody next time you're going to post something rational.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
Not so fast:

Gen 7:13-14


Gen 7:21-22



Creeping things obviously refers to snakes, lizards, and talk show hosts.

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Creeping things obviously refers to snakes, lizards, and talk show hosts.

NOT http://www.sylvia.org/images/sylvia-montelsingsmall.jpg

[Scot C. Trypal]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Creeping things obviously refers to snakes, lizards, and talk show hosts.

Please, leave Oprah and Springer out of this.

Besides, insects are (arguably?) made of flesh and are part of “all that was in the dry land�, and in there "nostrils was the breath of life" (Do insects have "nostrils"?).

On the other hand, I can see your point is backed by a bit of science; an insect does weigh less than a duck.

edited for an extra t

[bluess]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
Please, leave Oprah and Springer out of this.

Besides, insects are (arguably?) made of flesh and are part of “all that was in the dry land�, and in there "nostrils was the breath of life" (Do insects have "nostrils"?).

On the other hand, I can see your point is backed by a bit of science; an insect does weight less than a duck.

Does it therefore weigh less than a witch?

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
Please, leave Oprah and Springer out of this.

Besides, insects are (arguably?) made of flesh and are part of “all that was in the dry land�, and in there "nostrils was the breath of life" (Do insects have "nostrils"?).


Insects weren't "in the dry land." Before the Flood, they lived in floating sky castles. It was in these very castles, incidentally, that God kept all the water before the Flood.

[Darat]

Originally posted by bluess
Does it therefore weigh less than a witch?

If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.

[Psiload]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Dry land is a myth.

[bluess]

Originally posted by Psiload
Dry land is a myth.

You weren't in Kansas in the '70s, obviously.

[Iacchus]

Originally posted by bluess
You weren't in Kansas in the '70s, obviously. Dust in the wind dude!

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Upchurch
I assume you mean "global" flood, not "universal"? A universal flood could not happen for several reasons that I can think of off the top of my head, but lack of that much water is one.
Aside from Marquis de Carabas's point about the Biblical dimensions not allowing room for two of every animal, there is also the consideration of fact of transportating animals from the great distances from parts of the planet that were, by all evidence, unknown to the people of Noah's time and location.

There is also the problem that a single male-female pair is insufficent for sustaining a species. Especially given that many animals are carnivors and the selection of prey would be limited to those animals in the Ark.

Also, did the bible say anything about Noah putting every species of plant on board? They too would have drowned in the flood.

[bluess]

Originally posted by c4ts
Also, did the bible say anything about Noah putting every species of plant on board? They too would have drowned in the flood.

[Marquis de Carabas mode] No, the plants (roots and all) were encased in a miraculous substance which rendered this task unnecessary. Said substance dried up with the rain.
[/Marquis de Carbas mode]

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by bluess
[Marquis de Carabas mode] No, the plants (roots and all) were encased in a miraculous substance which rendered this task unnecessary. Said substance dried up with the rain.
[/Marquis de Carbas mode]
:D If e'er I find myself out of a job, I'm going to set myself up as a Flood apologist.

[bluess]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
:D If e'er I find myself out of a job, I'm going to set myself up as a Flood apologist.

But who will feed the cat?

[Odin]

And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth [was] an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth. Gen 8:11

So the plants survived!

Originally posted by bluess
[Marquis de Carabas mode] No, the plants (roots and all) were encased in a miraculous substance which rendered this task unnecessary. Said substance dried up with the rain.
[/Marquis de Carbas mode]

Pity the animals all had to drown...

[bluess]

Originally posted by Odin
SNIP...

Pity the animals all had to drown...

Silly - Noah saved 'em all. And if we analyzed their genetic data, we'd see every single one of them has the same genetic forebears. As should we...oops.

Oh, sorry, he didn't save the unicorns. They were laughing and splashing as the rain came down.

[Scot C. Trypal]

Does it therefore weigh less than a witch?

If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.

I’m glad some here aren’t completely ignorant of science, particularly regarding this topic.

Now, Marquis de Carabas, you are up in the night. Floating sky castles!? That’s clearly ridiculous and almost unworthy of debate.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Scot C. Trypal
I’m glad some here aren’t completely ignorant of science, particularly regarding this topic.

Now, Marquis de Carabas, you are up in the night. Floating sky castles!? That’s clearly ridiculous and almost unworthy of debate.
Ah, but only "almost." Now, can you prove there were no floating sky castles? Didn't think so. Score one for God! Whoohoo!

[Darat]

Just to wrestle the thread back to being a bit less frivolous so it doesn’t end up in humour... ;)

For some reason either the flood didn’t kill the trees or olive trees can grow bloody quick:

8 Then he sent out the dove, to see if the waters had receded from the surface of the earth.
9 But she did not find a place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to him in the ark, for the waters were over the whole surface of the earth. And he reached out his hand, and he took her, and he brought her back to himself in the ark.
10 And he waited seven more days and he again sent out the dove from the ark.
11 When the dove returned to him in the evening, see!, a freshly-picked olive leaf in her beak! Then Noah knew that the waters had receded from the earth.


(Oh and whatever you do don't ask about the raven.)

[Beleth]

My favorite Flood theory is the one that says that the shoreline between present-day Djibouti and Yemen eroded enough to turn the Red Valley into... well, what it is today.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by bluess
[Marquis de Carabas mode] No, the plants (roots and all) were encased in a miraculous substance which rendered this task unnecessary. Said substance dried up with the rain.
[/Marquis de Carbas mode]

God had that stuff lying around and he made Noah build a boat and fill it with animals anyway? What a jerk!

[davefoc]

What about the problem Noah had sexing the various animals. A lot of animals don't wear neon signs indicating their sex and require special skills to distinquish the sexes.

When he was over in Australia gathering up platypi did he know to look for the poison spur to make sure he got a male?

And then there's the fun of sexing crocodiles. It seems one must actually stick one's hand inside the crocodile and feel around to determine what the sex is. Just attempting this might have gotten the whole enterprise off to a bad start in that I imagine the crocodiles are not altogether cooperative about this and they just might have eaten Noah. Of course, if he had managed to get past that initial uncomfortable stage, Noah might have made a friend for life of the lucky crocodile he was working on.

Other than the problem of sexing the animals though, the whole story seems completely plausible. Thanks to Marquis de Carabas for shooting down all of the other minor little sticking points.

[Hawk one]

Originally posted by davefoc
What about the problem Noah had sexing the various animals. A lot of animals don't wear neon signs indicating their sex and require special skills to distinquish the sexes.

When he was over in Australia gathering up platypi did he know to look for the poison spur to make sure he got a male?

And then there's the fun of sexing crocodiles. It seems one must actually stick one's hand inside the crocodile and feel around to determine what the sex is. Just attempting this might have gotten the whole enterprise off to a bad start in that I imagine the crocodiles are not altogether cooperative about this and they just might have eaten Noah. Of course, if he had managed to get past that initial uncomfortable stage, Noah might have made a friend for life of the lucky crocodile he was working on.

Other than the problem of sexing the animals though, the whole story seems completely plausible. Thanks to Marquis de Carabas for shooting down all of the other minor little sticking points.


Silly Davefoc. God just sent Steve Irvin back in time for such jobs, then sent him back(?) to our time again once he was done. I can't believe you didn't know that. :p

[davefoc]

Hawk one wrote:Silly Davefoc. God just sent Steve Irvin back in time for such jobs, then sent him back(?) to our time again once he was done. I can't believe you didn't know that

Yes, I guess that's the obvious answer, but I'm not sure that it's going to be as widely accepted by some of the nitpicking skeptics as you might think.

Is Christian going to post his top ten list as to why a universal flood could not happen? I would like to see it.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by davefoc


Is Christian going to post his top ten list as to why a universal flood could not happen? I would like to see it. Me too..

However, just one; " Not enough water .. ", would seem to stop this inquiry, dead in it's tracks..

[bluess]

Originally posted by Diogenes
Me too..

However, just one; " Not enough water .. ", would seem to stop this inquiry, dead in it's tracks..

Well, where do you think the ice caps came from? All that water had to go someplace after the flood! :D

[Marquis de Carabas]

I strongly suspect that the words "with God, all things are possible" will find their way onto the list.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
I strongly suspect that the words "with God, all things are possible" will find their way onto the list.

Thus God pointlessly murdered a worlds worth of animals, babies and non sinners, and then had Noah and family act out an artificial and needless flood story, with any reality gaps being plugged by God.

[davefoc]

Why was Noah or whoever was the original oral source of this story so sure that the flood killed everybody? Maybe there was some people that were on boats or had boats nearby so that they survived, also.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by davefoc
Why was Noah or whoever was the original oral source of this story so sure that the flood killed everybody? Maybe there was some people that were on boats or had boats nearby so that they survived, also.
Well, if God sent the flood to kill everyone not on the ark, and someone else survived, then God failed. Since God not failing (in lieu of iron chariots) is a premise, there's no reason to look for survivors; of course they all died.

[seayakin]

Regarding sexing animals etc., it seems to me many moons ago my CCD teacher said something about God granting Noah the ability to recognize things about animals and animals to recognize him as a friend (so alligators and such didn't try to eat him). Kind of like a AD&D druid spell.

On the other hand, I haven't seen an explanation yet for where the water went after. If it came from the firmament then did God create a big shop vac and suck it back up there?

[Moliere]

Originally posted by Odin
Thus God pointlessly murdered a worlds worth of animals, babies and non sinners, and then had Noah and family act out an artificial and needless flood story, with any reality gaps being plugged by God.

And god picked a real winner with Noah: Genesis 9:20-21. (Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard. He drank some of the wine and became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent.)

http://www.metroplexatheists.org/gideons.htm

[Moliere]

Originally posted by Iacchus
I see no reason why this should be taken in the literal sense. Do you? And, while it is possible that somebody built the ark and made an attempt to save all the known species -- or, those which were deemed most essential -- I doubt very much that it entailed every single species there is. That sounds just a bit too absurd don't you think?

Is there an index somewhere in the Bible that I've missed showing which parts are absurd metaphors and which parts are supposed to be taken literally? This would resolve a lot of the confusion.

[davefoc]

from this site http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp:..If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah’s day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9).18 They are the same waters!

The basic idea here is that most of the flood waters were from the existing oceans. God just raised the ocean floor to cover the mountains (and maybe lowered the mountains if there wasn't enough water) and then when he was pretty sure he'd got everybody except Noah and his group he moved all the mountains valleys back. So no need to create and then get rid of a lot of water.

[DuckTapeFileMan]

I though of a way in which the ark story could be true.

Someone, possibly called Noah, gets some idea about the end of the world and decides to build an ark, he trys very hard to get all the wood together and builds something that could be describes as a boat. He gathers a load of goats and sheep etc, it rains a bit the boat falls to bits and everyone concerned walks off very disappointed, The End.