How to feed and keep the animals on the Ark?

THE Dinosaur? Surely by the biblical narrative there would be 14 dinosuars, and 14 elephants, and 14 blue whales and 14 giraffes and 14 of every other 'clean' animal?The big problem with taking 'toddlers' is that they feed far more frequently than adults, they require far more looking after and there were supposed to be only 8 people on the Ark.By biblical chronology, the flood was roughly 4500 years ago. Now you are asking us to believe that not only did 7 pairs of dinosaurs evolve into the hundreds of different species of dinosaur THEY also had the time to become extinct as well. All this and not a single human being mentions their existance?I also would like to know where Naoh kept the aquariums, 14 blue whales would require an enormous ammount of space and an enourmous ammount of food. from http://www.schoolworld.asn.au/species/blwhale3.htmlNoah's flood is a children's story, adults need ot learn to let go of their childhood and grow up.Brian.

Hi, I am sorry, but I don’t know this.Your reply suggests that you find it difficult to believe that someone doesn’t know this, so please be helpful and perhaps post some evidence to support this instead of making sweeping generalisations, thank you. OK, let me do your work for you. Look at Genesis 7:14&15.They, 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.

​

And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.There are so many errors in this it is difficult to know where to begin, but here goes!‘They, and every beast after his kindCreationists still haven’t been able to satisfactorily define what a ‘kind’ is.‘And all the cattle after their kind’Ok, do we take from this that cattle aren’t beasts?
What exactly is a ‘beast’?
What are ‘kinds’ of cattle?
By the earlier argument you would only need one ‘kind’ of cattle.‘and they went in unto the Ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.’What you and your psuedo-biblical scholars at AiG need to concentrate on is the phrase ‘breath of life’.From Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.Genesis 6:17 ‘And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.You can obviously see here that God had intended to kill everything that is in the earth here, there is no distinction between the land and the sea creatures. Everything that God created has ‘the breath of life’ in it, God breathed life into every creature he created. This is basic Sunday School stuff, it only takes a little time to find these things out. You should be studying things for yourself and not taking articles on AiG as being the final word on anything. If anything, you should read everything on AiG with a sceptical eye because their scientific and biblical scholarship is consistently poorNext, Genesis 7:21-23. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark. The grammar in the first line is amazing, ‘both’ of fowl, and of cattle and of beast, couldn’t the bible authors count?Anyway, look at the final line, ‘and only Noah remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.’If it wasn’t in the Ark, it died.The sceptic’s caricature that the answersingenesis website is a source of faulty science and biblical scholarship is completely accurate. Thanks for agreeing.Brian.

Hi, This is astounding, how these people at AiG keep getting away with their remarkably ignorant scholarship is beyond my comprehension.They give two examples and apply it across the board!I would like them to try and compare the physiology of trout and salmon to that of
Mbana cichlids or someof the nice little tetras. LOLLet me think about it, could a cardinal tetra live is salty water at a temperature of less than 20 degrees?Another example of the poor scholarship of the AiG 'experts'. Whales are not dependant on water for breathing at all, they breathe air, so what is the point of mentioning this.The AiG people treat their readers as if they are idiots. Whales do not require clean water to breathe, but the food that whales eat DO require lean water to live in.

Hi, That's it! I have to read the entire website, or could you summarise it. Is everything on this website accurate, can I take it that everything on this site is a fact?Since you appear to be convinced that speciation happens quickly, what is it that convinces you of this?What evidence do you have that dinosaurs have evolved?If dinosaurs evolved from dinosaurs, why are there still dinosaurs around today? Speciation is the appearance of a new species which came from another species? Isn't that what evolution claims? I am not a scientist so I need help here, could you define speciation and then define evolution and perhaps inform me what the difference is? Thanks I wish you had read my entire message and addressed the points I had asked you about.You failed to address the all important 'breath of life' which when applied to this refernce explains why sea creatures would need to be on the Ark. You have to look NOT at the full VERSE but at the entire story, remember that the Jews didn't split their Bible up into chapters and verses, the Christians did this to the Old Testament, so read the whole story for a better understanding.When the redactor edited and spliced together the two existing flood accounts, he intended the Noah narrative to read as ONE story, NOT little unconnected snippets like you suggest. You cannot take ANY line from the narrative and ignore the rest of the account. Why ignore Genesis 6:17 ‘And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.This text clearly tells us that it is everything that is under heaven that will be destroyed. You do realise that by asserting primacy of ANY line then you are negating another part of the text. If it is only land animals that are to die then you are suggesting that it is only land animals that live 'under heaven'You have completely ignored the references I gave to support my argument.Brian.

Hi,Apart from the fact that you completely ignored about 90% of my post, you are now suggesting that genesis 6:17 is incorrect. Why would God contradict himself?Brian.

Hi,Could you tell me if YOU have a copy of Woodmorappe's book, I tried to find it in my University Library and in the Mitchell Library in Glasgow (which happenes to be Europe's largest reference library), but these places have never heard of this book.What I was hoping was that, if you had the book, you could clarify a few things for me.Many thanks.Brian.

Hi,Thanks for the reply.I realise that my post was a very short one and you may have overlooked it. In the meantime I had researched Woodmorappe's (or whatever his real name is) book on the Net. I have decided not to pursue this avenue of research as I do not see it in any way beneficial. Thank you for your time.Brian.PS, Yes we have had inter-library loaning (and lending) in Scotland for over 500 years![This message has been edited by Brian, 09-10-2003]

Hi, But Noah is part of Adam's family. Brian.

Hey there's only one 'Thing' there, didn't Gomez listen to the Lord?Brian.