Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Since the topic of the flood has come up in a few thread, I have a question for creationists.
How did the animals survive following the flood until the ecosystem was re-established?
Let take carnivores first:
For example, your typical adult male lion eats between 10 and 15 pounds of meat a day. That's a lot of herbivore meat to be munching on.
If the carnivores are killing off the other animals, then those animals wouldn't even get a chance to breed (and eventually the food source would run out). Or, if the herbivores managed to escape being eaten, then the carnivores are left without a food source and starve.
Likewise, what about the herbivores? The flood is supposed to have devistated the Earth's surface, laying down sediments and carving out geological features. So where are all the plants in this? Not only would they have been caught up in all the geological turbulance, but they would have been effectively drowned with all that water. Where were all the plants required to feed the herbivores so they could repopulate the Earth?
edited: Corrected bit about lion's food intake.
__________________ Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution
Seriously, I have no idea what they may have fed on. They think (according to something I saw on the discovery channel a few weeks back) that they have found noah's ark, buried under a load of something on mount arrarat. Not sure of any details though, sorry!
This was a big storm that lasted for a while. Plants and such would have been torn out of the ground and thrown around, floating on the surface etc, and may well have survived that way. Also, Noah may well have taken some food stores onto the ark (or must have) to keep them going for a bit, though long term plants must have survived if this story is true. As for what did the carnivores feed on, well, when animals drown, theyre not going to be broken down and dead after 40 days underwater are they? Thered be thousands and thousands of dead animal bodies just lying around to be eaten, surely?
I had one creationist once suggest that predators would have eaten stranded fish left over from the receding flood waters. Only problem with this is the time frame between when the waters have gone down and the time Noah actually leaves the Ark (almost 2 months):
Gen 8:13 And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.
Gen 8:14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.
Fish skeletons for breakfast, anyone?
__________________ Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution
This was a big storm that lasted for a while. Plants and such would have been torn out of the ground and thrown around, floating on the surface etc, and may well have survived that way.
How many plants do you know of that withstand being uprooted and tossed into a body of water and survive?
Also, Noah may well have taken some food stores onto the ark (or must have) to keep them going for a bit, though long term plants must have survived if this story is true.
Must've been a heckuva lot of food on board the Ark. Not only did it have to last during the flood, but also after the flood until the populations could re-establish themselves?
As for what did the carnivores feed on, well, when animals drown, theyre not going to be broken down and dead after 40 days underwater are they? Thered be thousands and thousands of dead animal bodies just lying around to be eaten, surely?
Meat that has been left sitting out for 2 whole months? Is there something preventing it from decomposing during that time? (Assuming it wasn't burried during the laying down of all the sediment, or scavenged by sea life during the flood itself.)
__________________ Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution
Also, though most of the plants would have probably died, their seeds wouldnt have and so new plants would grow.
Seeds that have been soaked for 150 days in salt water? And what would they grow in? The erosion of the flood waters receding (supposedly capable of carving out various geological features) wouldn't exactly leave much topsoil lying around.
__________________ Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution
Linear Mode
