Tweet
Yet Again...
Continued...
There are other factors that make the gathering of the animals less of a problem than is commonly supposed. The world before the flood may have consisted of just a single continent, eliminating the need for animals to cross oceans. The postulated water vapor canopy covering the earth at that time caused the whole earth to have a warm, tropical-like climate. In such a setting the different types of animals would have been more evenly distributed over the land, with each type capable of living almost anywhere. These two factors (single continent plus one climate) meant that all of the animals for the ark may have lived fairly close by.
Also, animals did not originally fear humans and only ate plants. This would have made them much easier to deal with. Both the fear of man and the allowance for animals to eat meat were introduced by God after the flood (Gen 9:2-3). Some animals may have already started to eat meat prior to the flood, as the scriptures seem to indicate that the animals had also become violent (Gen 6:11) and that God was "grieved that I have made them [men and animals]" (Gen 6:7).
Gen 6:20 states the God brought the animals to the ark. Gish speculates that the migration instinct found in some animals may have been introduced as this time. Likewise, the animals would have been easier to deal with in the ark if many of them were in a state of hibernation. Both migration and hibernation are traits used to escape difficult living conditions, which did not exist before the flood.
Building a large wooden vessel: The ark is larger than any known wooden vessel, but ancient Greeks built a ship carrying 4,000 cargo tons (Alexandris), and boats carrying 450 tons were in widespread use in 1,500 BC. The key point to remember is that the ark was not really a "boat" - it was a simple structure that merely needed to float.
Care of the animals by eight people: With the use of labor saving enclosures for feeding and waste management, Woodmorappe determines that "very many different combinations of [care] procedures would have satisfied the daily 7.2 second/animal/caretaker maximal time allotment" (p. 81), allowing 8 people to care for 16,000 animals.
Animals that eat fresh or live food, or have special diets: Noah could certainly have brought extra animals to provide some live food, and some fresh food could have been grown hydroponically (rooted in liquid nutrient solution). Many of the few animals that normally eat a specialized diet are capable of surviving on other, more common, foods in captivity.
Heat buildup and illumination in the ark: Woodmorappe shows that the presence of the slot "window" is sufficient to remove heat and provide illumination (see Chapter 5).
Wouldn't the ark have capsized in the violent waters of the flood? First, the most violent waters occur near land, and the ark was likely in deep ocean areas. Second, stability tests performed on models of the ark show that it was capable of withstanding waves up to 200 feet high, and would tend to right itself even when tilted close to 90 degrees. Also, the 6:1 ark length:width ratio is known to modern shipbuilders as a stable configuration.
The condition of the earth following the flood was much different from what it was prior to the flood. Some creationists believe that the cataclysmic events occurring at the time of the flood included the breakup of the single landmass of antediluvian times into the continents as we now know them. This theory is known as "catastrophic plate tectonics", and is basically a speeded up version of standard plate tectonics theory. The flood events would seem to provide a suitable, large-scale cause for the breakup. One of the main arguments for plate tectonics is that the existing continents seem to fit well when placed together. The main argument against plate tectonics is that we don't know what mechanism might make it work. The collision of the plates would lead to the formation of mountain ranges, probably much higher than those existing before the flood.
The removal of the protective vapor canopy above the earth would lead to the start of the hydrologic water cycle, the introduction of seasons, and climate differences between the equator and polar regions. The warmed ocean (friction from the plate movements) in conjunction with more barren land areas would lead to an ice age occurring. One result of all these changes is that some types of animals (including the dinosaurs and many others) would not have the genetic potential to adjust and became extinct.
Even the nature of the animals was now deemed to be different by God, as they were now ordained to have a fear of man and to eat meat (Gen 9:2-3).
Both plant and animal life needed to recover after the flood. Much of this life was not on the ark, so how was it able to survive?
Most of the fish died in the flood, but some fresh, brackish, and salt water individuals would survive in various pockets/gradients of water having appropriate salinity. It is a mistake to think that the flood waters would be fully mixed to a homogenous salinity state. It is also true that most fish can withstand some change in the salinity level of their water.
The waters of the flood were covered with large floating mats of vegetation stripped from the land surfaces. Some plants would continue to grow on these thick mats. Some birds, and maybe some insects, amphibians and other small creatures may also have survived on these mats. Some of the mats would wash up onto the new shorelines to reseed the land, but most were buried to form the large coal and oil deposits we now find. The buried seeds of many plants would also become exposed during the erosion events at the end of the flood period (the erosion at the end of the flood was significant, and caused large geologic structures such as the Grand Canyon to form).
What did the animals from the ark eat after they left the ark? It is interesting to note that God kept them on board for three months following the first appearance of dry land. This would give time for some plants to grow. Other food sources would have included seaweed, fungi, carrion (the meat of dead animals exposed by erosion), fish, insects, earthworms, and rodents.
The animals on the ark would repopulate the world by migrating away from the ark landing site. The mountainous area around the ark would be ideal to encourage successful repopulation, as a mountainous area contains varying ecological zones and would tend to fragment the growing population into sub-populations (different "herds") giving the animal type multiple chances to avoid extinction. Inbreeding within these sub-populations would also cause differing traits to become dominant within each sub-population, leading to the formation of what we now call different "species" ("rapid speciation"). It is important to remember that speciation (the formation of a new species) is NOT evolution, as no new complexity is being introduced, only the rearranging of existing genetic information. We must also remember that it was God who made the final selection of the animals for the ark. This was necessary as only God could know the genetic makeup of the individual animals, and it was important to choose animals having the widest range of genetic potential. But even if this were not the case, it is true that most of the potential variation of any type of animals will be found in every male/female pair. There are modern day examples of a pair or small number of individuals successfully starting a repopulation effort that eventually leads to a diversified population exhibiting much variation (such as the rock pigeon introduced into the USA from England).
Remember the following to have an accurate picture of Noah's ark:
Only animals from each genus, not every species, were taken.
Noah and his sons (and their wives) were smart people.
They had a lot of time to plan and prepare. This allowed for the creation of a menagerie, the design of enclosures to be labor-saving, and the choice of foodstuffs to be compact. They may have hired people to do some of this work.
The ark was not a boat. It was a housing that only needed to FLOAT for one year.
The ark was not a zoo. The animals only needed to SURVIVE for one year.
God definitely helped, but we should not think that continuous miracles were necessary for the completion of a successful voyage. God normally operates through natural means.
__________________________________________________ _
Seems rather well thought out and logical, in it's way.
Are these the current held beliefs of Creationists concerning evolution and other matters... or must I look further?
Continued...
There are other factors that make the gathering of the animals less of a problem than is commonly supposed. The world before the flood may have consisted of just a single continent, eliminating the need for animals to cross oceans. The postulated water vapor canopy covering the earth at that time caused the whole earth to have a warm, tropical-like climate. In such a setting the different types of animals would have been more evenly distributed over the land, with each type capable of living almost anywhere. These two factors (single continent plus one climate) meant that all of the animals for the ark may have lived fairly close by.
Also, animals did not originally fear humans and only ate plants. This would have made them much easier to deal with. Both the fear of man and the allowance for animals to eat meat were introduced by God after the flood (Gen 9:2-3). Some animals may have already started to eat meat prior to the flood, as the scriptures seem to indicate that the animals had also become violent (Gen 6:11) and that God was "grieved that I have made them [men and animals]" (Gen 6:7).
Gen 6:20 states the God brought the animals to the ark. Gish speculates that the migration instinct found in some animals may have been introduced as this time. Likewise, the animals would have been easier to deal with in the ark if many of them were in a state of hibernation. Both migration and hibernation are traits used to escape difficult living conditions, which did not exist before the flood.
Building a large wooden vessel: The ark is larger than any known wooden vessel, but ancient Greeks built a ship carrying 4,000 cargo tons (Alexandris), and boats carrying 450 tons were in widespread use in 1,500 BC. The key point to remember is that the ark was not really a "boat" - it was a simple structure that merely needed to float.
Care of the animals by eight people: With the use of labor saving enclosures for feeding and waste management, Woodmorappe determines that "very many different combinations of [care] procedures would have satisfied the daily 7.2 second/animal/caretaker maximal time allotment" (p. 81), allowing 8 people to care for 16,000 animals.
Animals that eat fresh or live food, or have special diets: Noah could certainly have brought extra animals to provide some live food, and some fresh food could have been grown hydroponically (rooted in liquid nutrient solution). Many of the few animals that normally eat a specialized diet are capable of surviving on other, more common, foods in captivity.
Heat buildup and illumination in the ark: Woodmorappe shows that the presence of the slot "window" is sufficient to remove heat and provide illumination (see Chapter 5).
Wouldn't the ark have capsized in the violent waters of the flood? First, the most violent waters occur near land, and the ark was likely in deep ocean areas. Second, stability tests performed on models of the ark show that it was capable of withstanding waves up to 200 feet high, and would tend to right itself even when tilted close to 90 degrees. Also, the 6:1 ark length:width ratio is known to modern shipbuilders as a stable configuration.
The condition of the earth following the flood was much different from what it was prior to the flood. Some creationists believe that the cataclysmic events occurring at the time of the flood included the breakup of the single landmass of antediluvian times into the continents as we now know them. This theory is known as "catastrophic plate tectonics", and is basically a speeded up version of standard plate tectonics theory. The flood events would seem to provide a suitable, large-scale cause for the breakup. One of the main arguments for plate tectonics is that the existing continents seem to fit well when placed together. The main argument against plate tectonics is that we don't know what mechanism might make it work. The collision of the plates would lead to the formation of mountain ranges, probably much higher than those existing before the flood.
The removal of the protective vapor canopy above the earth would lead to the start of the hydrologic water cycle, the introduction of seasons, and climate differences between the equator and polar regions. The warmed ocean (friction from the plate movements) in conjunction with more barren land areas would lead to an ice age occurring. One result of all these changes is that some types of animals (including the dinosaurs and many others) would not have the genetic potential to adjust and became extinct.
Even the nature of the animals was now deemed to be different by God, as they were now ordained to have a fear of man and to eat meat (Gen 9:2-3).
Both plant and animal life needed to recover after the flood. Much of this life was not on the ark, so how was it able to survive?
Most of the fish died in the flood, but some fresh, brackish, and salt water individuals would survive in various pockets/gradients of water having appropriate salinity. It is a mistake to think that the flood waters would be fully mixed to a homogenous salinity state. It is also true that most fish can withstand some change in the salinity level of their water.
The waters of the flood were covered with large floating mats of vegetation stripped from the land surfaces. Some plants would continue to grow on these thick mats. Some birds, and maybe some insects, amphibians and other small creatures may also have survived on these mats. Some of the mats would wash up onto the new shorelines to reseed the land, but most were buried to form the large coal and oil deposits we now find. The buried seeds of many plants would also become exposed during the erosion events at the end of the flood period (the erosion at the end of the flood was significant, and caused large geologic structures such as the Grand Canyon to form).
What did the animals from the ark eat after they left the ark? It is interesting to note that God kept them on board for three months following the first appearance of dry land. This would give time for some plants to grow. Other food sources would have included seaweed, fungi, carrion (the meat of dead animals exposed by erosion), fish, insects, earthworms, and rodents.
The animals on the ark would repopulate the world by migrating away from the ark landing site. The mountainous area around the ark would be ideal to encourage successful repopulation, as a mountainous area contains varying ecological zones and would tend to fragment the growing population into sub-populations (different "herds") giving the animal type multiple chances to avoid extinction. Inbreeding within these sub-populations would also cause differing traits to become dominant within each sub-population, leading to the formation of what we now call different "species" ("rapid speciation"). It is important to remember that speciation (the formation of a new species) is NOT evolution, as no new complexity is being introduced, only the rearranging of existing genetic information. We must also remember that it was God who made the final selection of the animals for the ark. This was necessary as only God could know the genetic makeup of the individual animals, and it was important to choose animals having the widest range of genetic potential. But even if this were not the case, it is true that most of the potential variation of any type of animals will be found in every male/female pair. There are modern day examples of a pair or small number of individuals successfully starting a repopulation effort that eventually leads to a diversified population exhibiting much variation (such as the rock pigeon introduced into the USA from England).
Remember the following to have an accurate picture of Noah's ark:
Only animals from each genus, not every species, were taken.
Noah and his sons (and their wives) were smart people.
They had a lot of time to plan and prepare. This allowed for the creation of a menagerie, the design of enclosures to be labor-saving, and the choice of foodstuffs to be compact. They may have hired people to do some of this work.
The ark was not a boat. It was a housing that only needed to FLOAT for one year.
The ark was not a zoo. The animals only needed to SURVIVE for one year.
God definitely helped, but we should not think that continuous miracles were necessary for the completion of a successful voyage. God normally operates through natural means.
__________________________________________________ _
Seems rather well thought out and logical, in it's way.
Are these the current held beliefs of Creationists concerning evolution and other matters... or must I look further?
Just bought a 1980 Special that has been non oped for 9 years. My Skoot will rise from the ashes and be re named "The Phoenix!"
Comment