I don't remember this being covered in Genesis.
And just how much soil did he bring on this ark of his?
For that matter, how did he get his hands on the Telopea, native only to Australia? Or the Brazilian Peppertree which, until the 1800's, was native only to Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay?
How did this Noah manage to replant all of these things in their proper places after the water dried up?
Are your eyes still closed?
I could have posted this in Home & Garden...
2007-06-25
04:02:35
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Er, Patti R...there was only ONE literal window in the bible, not "windows"....go figure, one little window, no vents, nada. Must've been stuffy and dark.
2007-06-25
04:28:38 ·
update #1
TEK... LOL! Riiiight, the ark was as large as an aircraft carrier from the WWII era. Still not big enough to float ALL the animals, ALL the plants, each with their own required niche.
2007-06-25
04:33:24 ·
update #2
Some people answering this have a very sketchy understanding of biology...
+ seeds that float in the atmosphere for the year that the earth was flooded (nope... never heard of that happening - there's this thing called gravity that stops that)
+ seeds that survive submersion for a year (not many do)
+ there's the slight matter of whether the earth was covered in salt water or fresh water. Whichever it was would have killed the aquatic life - plants AND animals adapted to survive in the other. For example, if the water was fresh water then all the seaweed and saltwater fish would have died out.
+ It would have taken hundreds of years for erosion and the action of mosses and small plants to create enough soil for even a blade of grass to live on. But Noah didn't take any moss with him - and even bacteria die if submerged when they're not adapted to it (and they're not allowed to adapt because that's called evolution)
+ lions eat an entire wildebeest or equivalent about 2-3 times a week. So Noah would have had to have at least 12 on board just to feed the lions. And then there's leopards, tigers, jackals... etc etc. And what did all the herbivores eat? We're back to the slight lack of vegetable matter to feed the herds of herbivores that we need to feed the carnivores.
2007-06-25 04:18:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Upstairs, near the windows. Or maybe on the deck - rain does not necessarily equal "storm". Why is everything you read taken as absolute fact except the Bible. Even in Biblical times seed was carried (as it is now) high in the atmosphere, birds eat it and carry it in their droppings, there was no need for the fishes to be on the ark - nor the fishing birds.
If you don't want to believe the "ark" story or any of the others in the Old Testament - at least take a good look at the New Testament - don't give up your salvation just to make the point that the ancient history could be flawed - even if it is, why would that keep you from seeking God?
Think, really, think things through before you ask then you won't feel foolish - hopefully.
2007-06-25 11:14:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Patti R 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Sure, Noah may have brought some food clippings like grape vines on the ark with him, but that would be all he needed.
There would have been an abundance of seed which would settle into the soils as the waters abated (caused by tectonic plate uplift).
My eyes are wide open. I submit that the eyes of those who refuse to see what is plainly in front of them have blinded eyes. Ever seeing, but never perceiving.
+++
Blearg: you obviously haven't read the entire account. Noah was given two of many animals, but more of others which would have been for food and sacrifice. For instance, he had seven of many birds.
Also, the ark was as large as an aircraft carrier from the WWII era. There's plenty of space on a craft that large to store food in bins.
TEK
2007-06-25 11:13:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by TEK 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
I'm more concerned with the whole re-population thing. I mean, if it was just Noah and his wife and his 3 sons and their wives, then we are all obviously the result of incest.
Strange how homosexuality is an abomination but procreating with your own family is just God's plan. That is the main trouble with the Bible -- believers insist you must believe ALL of it, every word, to be a believer. But stories like Noah are just not believable and discredit the enter book. Not to mention the books that were discarded. I mean God inspires ALL the books to be written and then MAN decides what goes in and what doesn't? How does that maintain the Bible's spiritual credibility?
2007-06-25 11:13:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by whitney g 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Furthermore, think of your local crappy zoo (unless you live in san diego or somewhere with a good zoo). Your zoo is alot bigger than the ark was and they don't have 1/100,000,000 of the diversity of land dwellers on earth, yet we're supposed to believe they all lived on a boat for a year? We can't even keep 5000 men supplied on a ship(much larger than the ark) for a full year, and we have better food storage capabilities now. And to the idiot that posted right before me, the water was there alot longer than 40 days, it rained for 40 days, the earth was flooded for over a year according to the bible.
2007-06-25 11:08:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by PoseidenNeptuneReturns 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Oh, that is minor after the creation museum trying to put dinosaurs on it. At least there are seeds.
I was more concerned with the three living species of Elephants, but heck a Brontosaurus is about 12 times bigger. I really couldn't make that one up if I tried.
2007-06-25 11:11:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Genesis doesn't ever say global flood. It just says that God brought flood waters to wipe out mankind and animals . It says that it basically flooded around the glode, but that doesn't mean the earth was 'Waterworld'. It wasn't a local flood, but in every area in which there were creatures and people, there could have been horrendous flooding, only naturally exaggerated by God. God could have done whatever he wanted with the water. That point of view doesn't contradict the Genesis story, science, or the concept of a global flooding.
2007-06-25 14:20:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
What I want to know is, what did everyone eat, if he only had two of each?
But there is evidence of a flood around that area around that era. It just wasn't over the entire earth.
2007-06-25 11:10:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Blearg 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Seeds last under water.
The water was only there 40 days.
Same thing happens in Rivers where the Hydro Electric Co. lowers the Water Table in the Winter so people can repair their docks.
And, the plants start growing.
Trees start growing that had been under the water.
Ditto.......thats all I know bout' it
2007-06-25 11:07:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by maguyver727 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
where did the illegals and orientals come from. Not to forget some asians, some balcks and browns and also some whales and Squids
2007-06-25 15:05:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋