Noah's Ark

[Loss Leader]

However, in the Bible he is described as constantly communicating with humans.

No, he's not. If you read the bible carefully, you will find a God who becomes quieter and quieter like an old man falling into senility. God speaks directly to Adam and to Noah. But then he only speaks to Abraham indirectly - in dreams or through angels. He then stops talking entirely and appeart to forget entirely about everything that he's said and done so far. He wakes up to find that the Jews are enslaved in Egypt and talks directly to Moses about it. And Moses is the last person God ever talks to. After that it's a long, long time where people aren't talking to God but talking about him. He appears by angels or in dreams to the prophets. At the end of the Old Testament, God has faded away.

It's all angels, messengers and people saying that they're speaking the word of God from then on out.

 

[I Ratant]

And don't forget the joke he played on Job.
What a guy!

 

[Foster Zygote]

I like it. You could try first "building" a realistic floating zoo, and noting that things were a bit cramped and unsanitary you would note that "obviously", during the ark time animals neither ate nor excreted. When the ark still didn't fit all the animals, you could note that "obviously" the animals were shrunk to miniature size.

Or maybe, you could put forth different theories on how to make the ark "work". If you could figure out how big a realistic ark would have to be, you could use that measure to determine the size of a Biblical cubit. 18 inches is often used as a standard cubit measure, but it's actually the length from the elbow to the fingertips. Now, consider for a moment that just before the ark story, Genesis 6 talks about the giants in the Earth. Obviously, once you calculate the size the ark would have to be, you could use that to determine the size of a cubit, and it would "prove" that there were, in fact, giants in the Earth, and you could use the cubit calculation to determine the size of the giants, because obviously, Genesis was using the "giant cubit", based on the size of the giant's forearm.

I think this has real potential.

It's a little known fact that "gopher wood" is a Biblical term for TMCP steel plate.

 

[Autolite]

Nowhere in the Bible is that idea that God is beyond all comprehension taught. So that particular idea is YOURS not the Bible's.

And yet that is how so many theists explain illogical occurrences. Whenever something that defies all justification or reason happens, the theist will play the "god works in mysterious ways" card (the implication being of course that we humans are not capable of understanding god's logic). You cannot pretend that this isn't an overwhelmingly popular christian tactic.

And again when someone points out such absurdities, folks as yourself will claim that that isn't the correct point of view. So that particular interpretation is YOURS, not the popular opinion...

 

[triadboy]

The first thing he did was give thanx for having been preserved alive. VBuilding an alter and offering up animal sacrifice.

Yes I know that Noah tempted God with BBQ.

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour

They did that all the time because they knew it drove the Lord crazy.

Nopwhere in the Bible does it say that he imediately began making wine nor that Noah invented wine.

The process of making wine is the first thing he does. Is wine mentioned before Noah?

Skills learned in the preflood world ...

You don't throw up in your mouth a little when you say that?

 

[Madalch]

Whenever something that defies all justification or reason happens, the theist will play the "god works in mysterious ways" card (the implication being of course that we humans are not capable of understanding god's logic).

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

All the animal species in existence now were not in existence at that time. That's basic.

That's a logical fallacy called ad hoc. That's basic.

Genetic studies have shown no bottleneck around 4,000 years ago in any species - including humans. Except for those that have gone extinct or sub-speciated since that time, all species in existance now were in existance then.

 

[bokonon]

Yes I know that Noah tempted God with BBQ.

So THAT'S what happened to the velociraptors.

 

[Gregory]

What's the use?

Their was room for all the animals in the Ark, because Godiditit.
The animals in the Ark didn't have to eat or excrete, because Godiditit
The Ark wasn't sunk by the force of the rain, because Godidit.

Of course it's all garbage; but when the other side can wriggle out of any contradiction by invoking an omnipotent sky deity, what's the point?

 

[learner]

That anyone can believe this religeous nonsense is beyond my comprehension. Take a resonably intelligent person aged above 25 that has never been exposed to any religeous teaching and is completely unaware of the concept (not possible, but imagine) Then try to convince them of it and you would be laughed at. You need to be a child or a fool to believe any of it.

 

[Gregory]

Or have been indoctrinated from a young age. Which of course is normally the explanation.

 

[Kotatsu]

I like it. You could try first "building" a realistic floating zoo, and noting that things were a bit cramped and unsanitary you would note that "obviously", during the ark time animals neither ate nor excreted.

The ancients knew about cryostasis?

 

[learner]

Agreed Gregory, If it wasnt for the indocrination of gullible trusting children with the genetic tendancy to believe the religious would have no hope, Clever people

 

[Primus]

All the animal species in existence now were not in existence at that time. That's basic.

BTW
There are plenty of websites which explain in detail how the animals could have been adequately cared for by the few people on board. Also the ventilation "problem" mentioned by another skeptic is discussed and a detailed explanation strictly from a practicality standpoint given. But that's for you to google not me.

OK then, taking into account all the species of animals that did exist then but are now extinct. How many species roughly would have had to of come onto the ark?

 

[bokonon]

OK then, taking into account all the species of animals that did exist then but are now extinct. How many species roughly would have had to of come onto the ark?

In addition, what was the "bug kind" from which millions of species (including thousands of species of ants alone) evolved in thousands of years? What is the mechanism of hyper-evolution that enabled this speciation? Why is hyper-evolution not observed today? C'mon, creationists, if you really want to get into the science classes next to evolution, you need to do the research.

 

[martu]

The Creationists can't have it both ways though they try - when discussing the feasibility of the Ark the common answer on the number of animals is to mention one of each species which then speciated (is that a word???). However this suggests a rate of change much, much higher than what we observe today. Then, on the other hand, evolution is criticised for not being adequate enough to produce speciation events, mutations are always harmful or not enough time etc and so on.

But if it's true what I want to know is who was carrying all the STIs in the Noah clan?

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I don't know how many of you are familiar with Creationist "arguments" and how they have evolved over the last century or so, but for those of us who are, Radrook's suggestion contains great irony.

Initially Creationists argued for the fixity of species - that is no species was any different than it was since the Creation and the only change that had occured was some went extinct during or after the Flood.

Over time they realized that the evidence for speciation was just too strong so they tried to suggest that "kinds" evolved into species only within that "kind". One of their favorite example is "dog kind" where we have many breeds of dogs, but all are the same "kind". Of course this cannot explain how wolves, jackals, foxes and canis familiaris evolved in the short time since the flood, nor does it explain how lions, tigers, jaguars, cervals, leopards and felix domesticus developed. But still some claim an Ark passenger gave rise to all "cat kind".

One of the most interesting developments I have experienced in debating YECs is their acceptance of hyper-evolution. They have some familiarity with the number of species on Earth today - much less in the fossil record - and rationalize that since there was limited space on the Ark, since the larva, egg, juvenile argument has it's limitations, that all those species we see over the last "4,000 years" evolved within that time from a handful of "kind" species archetypes that resulted in the biological diversity we see.

Guess which "kind" they have problems seeing any evidence as having hyper-evolved?

I've been dealing with a Creationist for several years on another forum who has no problem thinking that lions, tigers, cervals, jaguars and housecats could have evolved from a "cat kind" pair on the Ark over 4,000 years, but thinks it's impossible that our LCA with Chimpanzees could have had it's brain grow in size and complexity over 7,000,000 years.

 

[Sunstealer]

What I would like to know from the creationists is how much did all of these animals weigh? I'm sure than when you take two of every species, even if assuming multiple species such as lion, tiger etc evolving from a "cat kind" were true, then that the total weight would be far in excess of what a boat built to the dimensions and materials mentioned in the bible would physically be able to carry.

The whole thing is so nonsensical yet some people cling to it because it's in their special book.

 

[Loss Leader]

Initially Creationists argued for the fixity of species - that is no species was any different than it was since the Creation and the only change that had occured was some went extinct during or after the Flood.

Including Thomas Jefferson, I'm given to understand.

 

[Reality Check]

In addition, what was the "bug kind" from which millions of species (including thousands of species of ants alone) evolved in thousands of years? What is the mechanism of hyper-evolution that enabled this speciation? Why is hyper-evolution not observed today? C'mon, creationists, if you really want to get into the science classes next to evolution, you need to do the research.

A couple of more additions:
Why did hyper-evolution not evolve new species of humans? (The answer of course is "goddidit").
What about all of the animals in the fossil record?