Noah did not have to go out and find the animals. God brought each one. This probably included a young pair of each main type of dinosaur. Perhaps God just included the basic types of dinosaurs He first created; not every variety that had developed since Creation.
Young dinosaurs would be small and easier to care for and would use less food. It would have been foolish to fill up space on the Ark with the oldest, biggest adults.
33 comments
... Basic types of dinosaurs?
Okay. Let's assume he used small children and tiny plants.
That's still a metric fuckton of space as well as trying to keep the animals from eating eachother, which would still be instinctual. As well as some how having enough food for every single animal without running out of plants to reproduce every plant species that can't handle such a massive flood.
So if God brought all the animals together and added extra water content to the planet sufficient to cover all land, why the fuck did he have to get some guy to build a boat for him? Why not use those matter-controlling powers to just float the animals away into space in a bubble of air or something? Heck, why not just kill all the bad people and not bother with that flood crap? Maybe he'd improved his aim a bit by the time of that whole "killing all the firstborn of Egypt" thing.
I wish fundies would get their damn stories straight. Some of them think the flood wiped out the dinosaurs while others say that Noah took them on the ark since it says that he took 2 of every animal. Either scenario is ridiculous as is the flood myth altogether. There is absolutely no way to explain the earth and the life thereon, much less the universe within the context of the freaking Babble.
not every variety that had developed since Creation
Is it just me, or is Paul admitting evolution?
Its worse than that.
THe ark didn't carry 2 of every species, it carried 2 of every *kind*.
One pair of cat kind, which developed into lions tigers cheetahs leopards
bobcats civets and kitty cats.
One pair of bearkind, which developed into brown bears black bears grissly bears polar bears kodiak bears sun bears panda bears.
One pair of dogkind which developed into wolves coyotes bush babies fennecs
arctic foxes red foxes brown foxes.
And this all happened after the flood in less than 5000 years.
Fundies depend on so much evolution in so little time to make their myth work it would
make Darwins head spin.
What's so fundie about this? I have the book Paul wrote this in, and it makes perfect sense to me. There's nothing in the Bible that says evolution can't occur, so just because a Christian believes in evolution, it doesn't go against the Bible. The whole "animals never change" and "animals are the same today as they were before" stuff is just a made-up interpretation of the Bible. "Kinds" aren't the same as species. I think that different types of dinosaurs could have easily developed since Creation. You might say, "but creationists think the earth is 6,000 years old." The Bible never says anything on the earth's age, or the time of the flood. All it says is "in the beginning." It never says when the beginning was. The 6,000 year thing was just an assumtion made by YECs.
You may include me as a fundie after I say this, I hope not, though. I really think that God created evolution as a means for his creatures tadapt and survive. Scutes on a crocodile could have evolved, snakes' fangs and venom sacks could have evolved, an elephant's trunk could have evolved and so on.
Austin, it's pretty fundie to believe that God actually flooded the entire Earth and that some guy built a giant boat with a bunch of animals from the various "kinds." Even if fewer kinds than species are needed, that's still a whole lot of animals.
Also, he thinks dinosaurs existed with humans, which necessarily means that he thinks the Earth is really young and also means he rejects the fossil record(you have to wonder what killed the dinosaurs after God went to all that trouble having Noah save them).
The real problem with the 'baby dinosaurs' idea is that, well, baby T-Rexes (rexae?) weren't cute little cuddly Land-Before-Time cartoons: they were still ferocious, thousand-pound eating machines. Even the herbivores would have needed probably more than the entire weight of the boat+animals in their specific type of plant to survive a year. And also, over a year, baby animals grow up, so we're back again to the problem of having all these giant, hungry animals on a relatively tiny boat with just eight people tending to them.
"Noah did not have to go out and find the animals. God brought each one."
I agree that that is what it says in the Bible. It's not true, but it does say that in the Bible.
"This probably included a young pair of each main type of dinosaur. Perhaps God just included the basic types of dinosaurs He first created; not every variety that had developed since Creation."
The Bible doesn't say "each main type," it says "They (Noah's family), 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 7:14)
"Young dinosaurs would be small and easier to care for and would use less food. It would have been foolish to fill up space on the Ark with the oldest, biggest adults."
Well, one can't worry too much about the foolishness of which, what or how many dinosaurs might have been on the ark as the whole ark story is one of the most absurd lies ever perpetrated.
Why did God even need to bring the dinosaurs along in the first place? I don't understand why fundies are always trying to shove dinos on the ark--does anybody know?
Only half the Fundies shove dinosaurs onto Noah's Ark.
The other half insist that the reason dinosaurs went extinct was that they weren't on the Ark and perished in the Noachian Flood.
I wish they'd make up their minds.
If you believe this horseshit I have some Florida real estate and a slightly used bridge in New York I could let you have for a steal.
Seriously, anytime anyone brings up the Flood my eyes glaze over at the sheer stupidity.
Read the Bible, then tell me how the hell an eight-hundred-year-old man could gather up all the animals and fit them in a boat with the dimensions given.
Go ahead, computer model the fucking thing, I'll wait.
Never mind live on the damn thing for one full year with only an 18 sq.in. hole for air.
Then at the end of it all, when the land dried up enough to get off the Ark, what are the vegetarian animals supposed to eat? There wouldn't be any plant life yet. We can pretty much figure out what the carnivores would eat.
It's a fairy tale, and not a very good one either.
Sierra, I'm really sorry, but if that makes me as fundie as the other psychotic people on the internet (Dad, Xerxes, Dore Williamson, JohnR7 etc. etc.) then fine. I'm not trying to push Christianity on people. It's my religion. My culture. If believing it makes me strange, then I'm gladly a wierdo. Besides, I admit evolution, and it doesn't conflict the Bible, the Bible never says the earth is 6000 years old, and the simple fact that the Ark wasn't big enough to support every single species within every single kind basically proves that God inteded creatures to evolve. I think there's evidence of a flood. I saw a picture of strange ocean wave marks. I'm not saying they're proof, but they are interesting.
Young dinosaurs would be small and easier to care for and would use less food.
Funny, when I got my cats from the SPCA, I specifically went looking for adults, because they're easier to care for than kittens.
Austin, the Earth's topography isn't static. Much of the American Midwest used to be under water, and the Bering Straight used to be a land bridge connecting two continents. Finding ocean wave marks in otherwise non-oceany places (not that this makes sense if you believe an ocean several miles deep covered the entire Earth at once) is not unexpected and can be easily explained without invoking giant, sinner-and-baby-drowning floods.
DV, I fear they're the fundies that believe all those Hovindisms about Nessie, and dinosaurs still existing in Africa, and dinosaurs were dragons in the Middle Ages and a whole other basket of trippy little mushroom shit, so they must've been on the 'Ark' to survive the 'flood'.
*cries*
Austin, you're not as fundie as the clowns that are quoted here, but you have to admit the thought of a world-wide flood as according to the Bible is pretty fundamentalist.
True, evolution doesn't necessarily contradict the Bible, but you really have to twist its original meaning in order to get it that way.
Noah's Ark is logistically impossible.
Not to mention that some kinds of animals needed seven brought onboard instead of two.
Austin:
"the Bible never says the earth is 6000 years old"
If you add up all the begats in genesis you will have to conclude
the earth is 6000 years old, so yes the bible says that.
"I saw a picture of strange ocean wave marks."
There have been many floods in the past 4 billion years
so its not surprising there are "ocean wave marks."
Look up "channelled scablands" If there was a wordwide flood
the whole world would look like that. It doesn't.
Where the heck do people get this stuff from? Does this guy even own a Bible?
"Noah did not have to go out and find the animals. God brought each one.
Where does it say that in the Bible? God tells Noah "you will bring two of every sort into the ark". It doesn't say He'll bring them. That was just made up.
This probably included a young pair of each main type of dinosaur. Perhaps God just included the basic types of dinosaurs He first created; not every variety that had developed since Creation.
"Probably", "perhaps" - again, just inventing stuff not in the Bible.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.