Follow up to my Noah's Ark question:?

Question

I like trying to turn Yahoo Answers into a debate forum, so here is my rebuttal to alot of answers from my previous question which was: Why didn't all the animals kill each other when they were set free.

Now first of all, alot of people didn't even seem to read the question and think that I was asking why the animals didn't kill each other while on the boat...

Now my rebuts:
Tyler K said: "They took a bunch more than just two of every animal on the ark, some animals they took many more of. ...Besides, I'm sure there were still plenty of fish around for a lot of those predators. Besides, even carnivores are able to sustain themselves on vegetables. They just don't like to."

Your first point: There would have to have been alot of prey for the predators, at the very least a big predator like a Lion has to eat a reasonable size (say, a Gazelle) animal every week, now, 52 weeks in a year, thats 104 animals eaten without being given the chance to produce or support an offspring

Your first point: There would have to have been alot of prey for the predators, at the very least a big predator like a Lion has to eat a reasonable size (say, a Gazelle) animal every week, now, 52 weeks in a year, thats 104 animals eaten without being given the chance to produce or support an offspring (4-9 months to concieve, 9 months-2 years of support), now...I don't know the amount of predators in the world...but in anycase...thats alot of prey, hoped they stocked the possible tens of thousands needed...rather then the just two of every beast...

Your second point: Fish and Vegatables...dont be foolish, the majority of predators don't have access to fish, and if you put a Tiger in a room filled with all sorts of vegatables...its not going to eat them...they just don't.

CG said: M"aybe they just surivived on the oxygen in the air or maybe they ate avocadoes! u can eat avocadoes for a year and still live!"

You can't live off air...and Avocadoes...thats just...illogical....

paradigm said:

"What if all the animals were babies or in eggs at the time? What if they were in a form of hibernation?....Maybe the animals were released over time as well.. I believe these two answers would account for food, space, and waste issues as well"

Gonna rapid fire answers here...
Babies: Nothing to raise them or protect them, still doesn't answer that when they grow up they wouldnt all kill each other.
Hibernation: When they wake up, they will still kill each other.
Released: Still...food supply has to be considered....being released slowly accounts for nothing...Your points are invalid.

seekfind said: At that time all animals ate green herbs (Gen 1:30). Man was given permission to eat meat by God in Gen 9:3.

I was under the impression, that animals started killing each other after the fall of Adam and Eve...I might be wrong about that though...

To everyone saying that its only a story...I know that, the thing is I'm try to apply another logical approach to it, the reason why I actually created this second post was that some people were actually defending the story...isnt that what you do in a debate? Rebut answers? In anycase, what I think is interesting is that a person posted in the original one defending it, then changed his mind and only called it a story...

I also forgot the link to the other question...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhYvTflUjhk5wl561wIdyCnd7BR.?qid=20070320005916AAYa6TW

Last one:
Doug said: am a Creationist. I take the Bible literally. I also believe that thinking for yourself is part of interpreting the Bible. There were animals that came from the ark, but God would have propagated all species again Himself just as he must have propagated all races of humans. Not all Christians believe every animal and human came from one gene. That is like saying all of every species came from one creature, or it is like saying one creature laid eggs for every creature that exists. It is all foolishness to me. There is only one Being that is entirely of Himself, and that is God.

If this were true, why bother with the arc in the first place? I mean, why not just suspend all the creatures in a state somewhere else, then once the flood is over, or, just simply recreate, why go through an unneccessary process? Doesn't make sense...why should he preserve only two, not including any of the dinosaurs that were meant to be running around then, only to just repopulate?

Answer 1

you know the idea of noah's ark is a ridiculous one.. it doesnt take a rocket scientist to know its utter BS... nor a bunch of paragraphs...

i say try picking out a harder thing to prove wrong. and really show us something that will knock us off our feet.

Answer 2

Firstly, the animals would have been young animals when taken on the ark so they could fit more easily, and breed longer to repopulate. So they wouldn't have needed as much to eat.

There were 7 of each clean animal taken on board, and 2 of the other animals.

Marine life did survive enough to repopulate, so there would have been some available to the predators.

It is quite likely that Noah took extra food with him, as he and his family would have needed food to sustain them until they could harvest more.

To find out more about the ark and the actual size of it, see the link below.

To those who do not believe in God: I'm not sure why you are here! Didn't your mothers teach you that if you can't say anything nice, then not to say anything at all? Please learn some basic courtesy and at least debate intelligently and politely.

Blessings, Gypsy Queen

Answer 3

It really is quite simple. You either believe in God or you don't.
Now, if He was able to save these from the rest of destruction, why would He then remove His hand of protection from them before the earth could be replenished as was His intention from the outset.
By the same token, one could ask why the same scenario had not occurred immediately after the initial creation of all the animals.

Answer 4

Meat eating animals on the Ark became vegetarians during their sojourn.
God would see to this.
Just like they will be in his coming New system.
(ISAIAH 11:7) “And the cow and the bear themselves will feed; together their young ones will lie down. And even the lion will eat straw just like the bull.”
(ISAIAH 65:25) ““The wolf and the lamb themselves will feed as one, and the lion will eat straw just like the bull; and as for the serpent, his food will be dust. They will do no harm nor cause any ruin in all my holy mountain,” Jehovah has said.”

This is future and does not refer to those animals on the Ark.

Answer 5

Debating Noah's Ark is like having a town hall meeting on whether or not the Easter Bunny has always been the same bunny. I mean come on, we all know it is.

Answer 6

All the animals were mouth-shut when they borded the vessel. ((for fear of flood or for fear of Noah/God or something else (probabilities lurk, you too could imagine)), They ate what is served on board same as how we get our "morsel" in our modern day flights.

(When foolishness runs in their veins, misconceptions mingle in the minds of men in a miracle)

Answer 7

Don't ever under estimate when the Lord has asked you to do something,,just know He knows what He is doing...

Answer 8

You are debating something that never happened. It was just a story.

Answer 9

you like stirring people up eh??? lol

maybe there were animals already living in the place were the boat stopped! its possible!

anyway, its just a story

Answer 10

I believe in noah's arc,and wanna see it someday..but there are haters out there..check this out... http://youtube.com/watch?v=YxFTCdBBklU
i know it sort of makes me wonder...