How Noah did it

frenchstudent

Newbie
Jun 24, 2009
6
0
✟7,616.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hi. I was reacting to this post from stormdancer0 in the pentacostal fellowship forum:

[sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet. You'll have to dig for yourself]


How Noah did it There was a question in another thread that speculated how much time, and how hard it would be, for Noah to collect all the animals for the ark. I actually have studied this.

There are millions of species of animals, yes. But about 45% of them are insects. Another 30% or more are ocean or water dwelling. 45-50% of the rest are housecat sized or smaller. The average size, counting from mice to elephants (and yes, dinosaurs - most were cow-sized or smaller) would be that of a sheep. Plus, he wouldn't have to take two foxes, two wolves, etc. Just two canines. Same for felines and other species. The size of the ark, with three levels, was 1.5 million cubic feet. This is the equivalent of almost 530 railroad box cars. Each boxcar can carry about 240 sheep.

In order for all of creation to be saved, the ark would have to be large enough to carry (at the highest estimate) 25,000 animals. But the ark was big enough for over 80,000 sheep-sized animals. With only 30% of the ark taken up by animals, that left a lot of room for animal supplies.

My only question is, where did they get an elephant-sized pooper scooper?
<staff edit> I'm moving my reaction here.

My reaction it the following one :


There are currently 41 species of felids known. These are 41 sets of felids that cannot interbreed and produce offspring that can breed.

This is the definition of a species.

Mules, for example, are barren hybrid of horses and donkeys. If mules could breed, that would make horses, donkeys and mules part of the same species (the same way poodles and german shepherds are still part of the "dog" species). As it is, horses and donkeys are different species, and mules are a hybrid.


So, if your theory is correct (and I did not say in my original post it was not, nor will I say it here, although I will say that I believe it to be wrong), that means that of the 2 individuals in the ark, the two felids, these 41 species were bred.

Now if you believe that the flood was 4000 years ago, that would mean there was a new species of felids every 100 years.

That would be faster than any biologist expected. and it would be proof that speciation (what you would call "evolution", I suppose) does happen.



Now in my opinion, this is not challenging your faith. I am merely following up on your idea, and following it wherever it may lead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,446
803
71
Chicago
✟121,700.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Hi. I was reacting to this post from stormdancer0 in the pentacostal fellowship forum:

[sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet. You'll have to dig for yourself]


Since I was told that my post was a challenge to someone's faith and therefore not at its place in the fellowship forum, I'm moving my reaction here.

My reaction it the following one :


There are currently 41 species of felids known. These are 41 sets of felids that cannot interbreed and produce offspring that can breed.

This is the definition of a species.

Mules, for example, are barren hybrid of horses and donkeys. If mules could breed, that would make horses, donkeys and mules part of the same species (the same way poodles and german shepherds are still part of the "dog" species). As it is, horses and donkeys are different species, and mules are a hybrid.


So, if your theory is correct (and I did not say in my original post it was not, nor will I say it here, although I will say that I believe it to be wrong), that means that of the 2 individuals in the ark, the two felids, these 41 species were bred.

Now if you believe that the flood was 4000 years ago, that would mean there was a new species of felids every 100 years.

That would be faster than any biologist expected. and it would be proof that speciation (what you would call "evolution", I suppose) does happen.



Now in my opinion, this is not challenging your faith. I am merely following up on your idea, and following it wherever it may lead.

You ARE challenging. Because the person has to argue to defend what you said (not to discuss)
 
Upvote 0

frenchstudent

Newbie
Jun 24, 2009
6
0
✟7,616.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I am supposing that the hypothesis (two felids on the ark) is right. I then use a simple, logical chain of thought and follow it where it leads. I am totally open to being told where my reasonning is wrong. If my reasonning is right, then either my premise is false, or my conclusion is right.


Anyway. In this forum, it should not be a problem anymore, should it?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,934
17,414
Finger Lakes
✟7,361.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You ARE challenging. Because the person has to argue to defend what you said (not to discuss)
No, that particular ARGUMENT is being challenged, not the faith that led the person to propose it.

Frenchstudent's points seem to be valid. What is the argument against his points?
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
200
usa
✟8,850.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
I am supposing that the hypothesis (two felids on the ark) is right. I then use a simple, logical chain of thought and follow it where it leads. I am totally open to being told where my reasonning is wrong. If my reasonning is right, then either my premise is false, or my conclusion is right.


Anyway. In this forum, it should not be a problem anymore, should it?


Your idea is that if noah took two housecats, that 4000 years later they would have evolved into all the types of cats we have today?
 
Upvote 0

Jester4kicks

Warning - The following may cause you to think
Nov 13, 2007
1,555
127
42
✟17,459.00
Faith
Taoist
Marital Status
Single
Now if you believe that the flood was 4000 years ago, that would mean there was a new species of felids every 100 years.

That would be faster than any biologist expected. and it would be proof that speciation (what you would call "evolution", I suppose) does happen.



Now in my opinion, this is not challenging your faith. I am merely following up on your idea, and following it wherever it may lead.

In the immortal words of John McClane... Welcome to the party, pal. ^_^

Unfortunately, we've seen this argument before. Most creos dismiss it by saying that some evolution does happen. They like to refer to it a "micro evolution" or "horizontal evolution". Bottom line, the idea is that change and speciation occurs (they have a hard time arguing against that one since we have SEEN it happen)... but that "Macro evolution", where they whole "type" of organism changes, doesn't happen.

Those same creos will tell you that god flipped on some kind of super switch that enabled the animals on the ark to go through a period of "hyper evolution" in order to diversify again after the flood.


So... yeah... the moral of the story is... it's easy to ignore evidence when you're willing to simply make things up.

Occam's Hammer. :doh:
 
Upvote 0

frenchstudent

Newbie
Jun 24, 2009
6
0
✟7,616.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hespera :Unless someone can tell where the other feline species came from, yes, basically.

But since the cats on noah's ark (in this hypothesis) are the ancestors of the tigers, the lions, the pumas, the housecats, panthers, jaguars, lynxes, etc, etc, I rather doubt they would look exactly as housecats.


Now keep in mind, for the execice of this argument, I accept the premise that the flood story happened and is accurately related. Which I do not believe.


Bombilla : I'm not pointing out any hole. Unless of course Stormdancer0 also believes that speciation (the appearance of new species through mutation and natural selection) does not happen. what I am pointing out is that the scenario proposed supposes that evolution works.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
200
usa
✟8,850.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
Hespera :Unless someone can tell where the other feline species came from, yes, basically.

But since the cats on noah's ark (in this hypothesis) are the ancestors of the tigers, the lions, the pumas, the housecats, panthers, jaguars, lynxes, etc, etc, I rather doubt they would look exactly as housecats.


Now keep in mind, for the execice of this argument, I accept the premise that the flood story happened and is accurately related. Which I do not believe.


Bombilla : I'm not pointing out any hole. Unless of course Stormdancer0 also believes that speciation (the appearance of new species through mutation and natural selection) does not happen. what I am pointing out is that the scenario proposed supposes that evolution works.


I guess I just didnt get enough sleep but you have me confused what you are getting at.

There is a fairly good fossil record for felines, and it deeply predates any "flood". Would that address the question of where the different types of cats came from?

The job for the ark cats would be to quickly re evolve into all the same cats that lived before the flood?

At its core, the ark story requires magic. So really, what is to discuss? If there is a practical problem, just solve it with magic.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

frenchstudent

Newbie
Jun 24, 2009
6
0
✟7,616.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hespera : on this post, I only used what was given in stormdancer0's post and what can be observed with the naked eye, today.

Of course the fossil record totally discredites the flood, but I did not want to use that in this particular argument, in this particular forum.


As for accelerated speciation, it only needs every single dating method we have to be wrong.
Wait. No. It needs all our dating methods to be wrong and yet give the same results.
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟13,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
As for accelerated speciation, it only needs every single dating method we have to be wrong.
Wait. No. It needs all our dating methods to be wrong and yet give the same results.

Indeed. And that is what they argue, that our dating methods are wrong yet still give the same results. They are particularly fascinated by carbon dating and marine animals.
 
Upvote 0

Naraoia

Apprentice Biologist
Sep 30, 2007
6,682
313
On edge
Visit site
✟15,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hah, speciation every hundred years is not the only problem with Stormdancer's story.

For starters, many "ocean or water dwelling" creatures can't tolerate huge changes in salinity. I would imagine that enough rain to cover the earth would blow up many marine animals :p

And... um, as for dinosaurs, the modal (most common) size of dinosaurs (both overall and broken down into various categories) as of 1994 is apparently between 1 and 10 metric tonnes. In the paper I linked (unfortunately, not open access AFAIK), there are charts of the distribution of body masses. Overall, 118 of the 216 genera analysed are estimated at 1 t or heavier. Even if more recent discoveries have changed these proportions, I find it unlikely that "most" dinosaurs were cow-sized or smaller (not to mention that cows are pretty big animals themselves!). Seeing as there are plenty of mammals and other small vertebrates known from the age of dinosaurs, I don't think this is only an artefact of preservation.

To be fair, though, I also recall that the average mammal is closer to rabbit- than to sheep-sized, but I wouldn't swear on that. I'm pretty sure I saw numbers in a section of The Book of Life discussing, I think, Cope's Rule, but it's been years since I read that book.

By the way, frenchstudent, assuming that every cat species branches into two after some time, until we reach the current number of species, we would not need a speciation every 100 years. With that assumption, the number of species doubles every "generation", so there will be 2[sup]n[/sup] feline species after n speciation events. 41 is about 2[sup]5.4[/sup], so it comes to a round of speciation roughly every 740 years. Which is not to say that speciation every 740 years, and in every single cat lineage, is much more realistic than speciation every 100 years...

As an afterthought to dinosaurs, why does nobody trying to figure out Noah's ark ever spare a thought for poor synapsids? Was Estemmenosuchus too ugly to be brought on the ark? :cry:

(ETA: also, dinosaurs, with those hollow bones and air sacs, were relatively light for their size, so a cow probably takes up a lot less space than a cow-sized dinosaur.)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Washington

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2003
5,092
358
Washington state
✟7,305.00
Faith
Agnostic
I thought this old illustration I made up some time ago might fit in here.

CATKIND-1.png

 
Upvote 0

Naraoia

Apprentice Biologist
Sep 30, 2007
6,682
313
On edge
Visit site
✟15,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Sorry on the maths, Naroia, in my original comment that got deleted I made sure to say "on average" a new species every 100 years. I figured going into math too complex was not the point here, so I went for the average.
That's okay, I'm just anal ;)

Not to mention that I enjoy playing with numbers. In the relatively rare cases when I know what to do with them, anyway :D
 
Upvote 0

ragarth

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2008
1,217
62
Virginia, USA
✟1,704.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
If we assume that god has a "rapid speciation" button on his cosmic remote, and if we assume that all radiologic dating methods are absolutely inaccurate, we can still make predictions from the hypothesis that Noah's ark existed and that god produced rapid speciation.

At some point in the fossil record we would need to see signs of a world-wide flood and global die off. We would then need to see a distinct global bottlenecking, down to less than 80,000 land-dwelling species world wide. After that we would have to see a rapid speciation event leading directly from this bottlenecking to our current state.

Since from the beginning of time to now god has hypothetically only butchered everything on the planet once by killing it all with water, we should also only see one of these bottlenecks (2 if you think god did the rapid speciation trick after creation, but we should find no animals before this initial bottleneck at all).

So, do we see this pattern? If so, show it to me.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,664
51,417
Guam
✟4,896,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Accelerated evolution is a common creationist theory. Many creationists, unable to refute that evolution does happen, instead insist on a young earth and God miraculously causing the small number of animals on the Ark to speciate with extreme rapidity.
Would it help any if I showed you from the Bible where God planted, then hyper-grew a garden w/i a few hours of time?

If He can do that with flora, what's the problem with fauna?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ragarth

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2008
1,217
62
Virginia, USA
✟1,704.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Would it help any if I showed you from the Bible where God planted, then hyper-grew a garden w/i a few hours of time?

If He can do that with flora, what's the problem with fauna?

So, do you have photographs, documentation of methodology, before and after soil samples, fossil record, or any form of proof other than the bible?
 
Upvote 0