Creationists: A problem with Noah's Ark?

Your reasoning is absolutely sound. I'm surprised I never thought of this.

Brilliant.

Oh, and God just took care of it. Uh huh.

Interesting question. I had never thought of it that way before. Before answering your question let me make one thing clear. This life is all about the choices we make. I know there are difficulties in the Evolution model too but that does not stop people from accepting the theory, right? What we need to accept is that nobody has all the answers. We are just left with choices, nothing else.

There were two sources of the Flood water - rain and the "fountains of the deep" (Gen. 7:11). Water is believed to have shot up from below the surface of the earth. We know rain is freshwater and, most probably, underground water is also freshwater. But given the volume of salt water there is in the oceans, any chemical disturbances are diluted to be negligible. Freshwater fish are considered to be more robust to water conditions. Saltwater fish are not this adaptable because they have lived in the sea that doesn't change much in terms of water quality. That should take care of the fishes.

The broader question is, Did the Biblical Flood really happen? To the Bible-believer that should not be a problem since Jesus and His disciples talked about it some 2500 years after the Flood. To the scientifically-minded there are the fossils and the different layers of earth's strata. How are the fossils formed? If something dies today, does it form a fossil? No, it just decays. The most common way something turns into a fossil is by its rapid burial. And we find fossils all over the world. Even on the mountain tops fossils of sea creatures can be found. That only goes to show that there was a worldwide catastrophe in the past. You cannot explain the different layers of the earth the way science tries to do it. The layers would not have flat tops if each layer represents the earth's surface at a particular time in earth's history. Erosion would make it jagged, not flat. Only quick formation of the layers would make them flat pointing to the worldwide Flood.

Again, it's all about choices. Nobody, I repeat, nobody has all the answers. It's about how you choose.

For more information you can watch the video at -amazingdiscoveries.org>Media>Beginnings>Video -Genesis Conflict> Universal Flood.

Have you seen the documentation around the flood actually being rather small geographically speaking but to those all those many years ago it must have truly seemed like the whole world flooded (as their "whole world" did)?

I think that rather explains some of it.

From a geographical perspective, I believe part of what gives the ocean it's salt is the minerals and such that the water picks up as it makes it's way down the various streams and rivers into the ocean. I cannot recall the rate at which this occurs or how much this is replaced back by rain water that picks up sediments but it is a thing to look into just from a scientific perspective.

Now A.R.T lets use our heads here OK?

First, I do believe in the Ark, and the flood

I know that you may not. As for the animals that went on? a few breading pair of each, could after a very long time have generated the huge expanse of variety that we now have. Even your evolution teaches that, we just differ on how long it took

As to the fish. You are right the salt water and the fresh water pose a problem, but can you not say basically the same thing about the last Ice age?

We know or so they claim that during the last Ice age, Ice came down from the North and covered all of Canada, Maine, NY, all the way down into PA and maybe they say even as far south as DC. Well that would mean all the rivers, lakes, streams etc. there would have been frozen solid. No fish, or life, but with in 10,000 years we see life everywhere. Also when that Ice which they claim was several miles thick melted that water flooded the oceans. right? So even though I can not give you an exact explanation, I think both should agree that there are wide area's to play with here, that both science and faith can not explain.

Good question anyway.

First, Creationists do allow for the proven law of adaptations as that would be the only way to explain the division of the races after the flood since it was only noah and his descendants that survived. So, that answers the size problem. As far as tigers eating antelopes... Noah didn't "gather" the animals, the bible says God caused 2 of every animal to come to the arc. If God can cause 2 of every animal to come to the arc I think God could also satiate and desire of the animal for food. I realize the goddidit answer is not popular, but you in your summery already allowed for God to 1.speak verbally to a particular person. 2. Gather animals. 3. Provide a massive amount of Rain. It would seem that one more Goddidit wouldn't hurt.

Noah had an aquarium on the ark, by the way,I don't believe this or the whole flood myth. I was just trying to come up with a plausible irrational defense

Free, there never WAS such a flood. No flood, no need for an Ark. No need for one, then none existed. It is ALL false. Were you paying not attention to my answer of last night?? LOL

Brightest Blessings,

Raji the Green Witch

I don't know how sensitive all saltwater fish are to freshwater. I don't know just how "VERY different" they are internally. I'm not a marine biologist. I've certainly cut open plenty of both kinds of fish. They're not all that different-looking. Anyway, minor adaptations are not automatically classified as "macro evolution" for one thing.

I caught a 7 foot shark deep sea fishing once. It lived in my bathtub for days until my dad got it cut up.

The thing is, you cannot put a greater burden of proof on Creationists than the one you put on evolution. I think this is what you are doing.

AND - seven continents of animals - somehow hundreds of land animals had to get across oceans so they could be saved from a flood!

To your point as well - the drinking water scenario for the flood is totally untenable even if there was drinkable water for all those thousands of creatures!

Then there is climate sensitivities, ten of thousands of species of bees that need whole hives to survive and flowers to get nourishment from - O yeah - all the vegetation dies (or most) hmmmm.... You'd think THAT might have showed up in the natural record!

What a joke that people even argue about the silliness and impossibility of the Noah story.

You're also neglecting the fact that the ark was not even large enough to hold the necessary food to feed all of the animals along for the ride.

You're over-examining this. Noah never existed. The flood never happened.

You make a valid observation.

In truth, there is no REAL evidence that supports a global flood.

The one you're going to get here is this: "It was metaphorical and only flooded the Middle East because that was the known world at that time." But then I'd have to ask why there are fish in the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, as well as in Egypt, the Mediterranean and other parts of the known world at that time.