Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2017 10:53 AM
369 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,986 Year: 6,592/21,208 Month: 2,353/2,634 Week: 16/525 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
67NextFF
Author Topic:   Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?
Dirk
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-20-2010


(1)
Message 1 of 991 (575750)
08-20-2010 11:00 PM


Hi all,

For my first post, I hope to have come up with an intriguing question: which animals would populate the earth today if the flood really happened?

Let's assume that the ark was indeed large enough to contain all land animals (which, according to most YECs includes the dinosaurs, if I'm not mistaken) and that there was enough food. So, after the flood the ark sits 4000m high on Mt Ararat and Noah opens the doors to release them all. What happens? Who gets killed first and who survives? Who freezes to death and who makes it off the mountain?

And did Noah release the chickens and cows and pigs and sheep as well, or did he keep them in the ark so that he didn't have to catch them later if he wanted eggs & bacon for breakfast?

And what would we find on Mt Ararat, except for the ark, of course? Would there be evidence of a massive slaughtering of slow, fat animals by tigers, velociraptors, and so on?


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 5:53 AM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 4 by bluegenes, posted 08-21-2010 6:02 AM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 12 by jar, posted 08-21-2010 10:04 AM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 22 by Buzsaw, posted 08-21-2010 10:00 PM Dirk has responded
 Message 46 by mignat, posted 09-02-2010 7:09 PM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 62 by Pollux, posted 03-04-2012 7:36 AM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 63 by foreveryoung, posted 03-05-2012 11:18 PM Dirk has not yet responded
 Message 119 by mindspawn, posted 08-22-2013 8:36 AM Dirk has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12390
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2 of 991 (575810)
08-21-2010 5:29 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


(1)
Message 3 of 991 (575811)
08-21-2010 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dirk
08-20-2010 11:00 PM


Basically only insects, a few small rodents, maybe an amphibian or two. Possibly a few species of bird make it out alive. A handful of fish and other aquatic animals survive the devastation of the oceans.

After the flood the world is covered in a thick layer of mud, unsuited for most plant life, and treacherous to any large animal. The herbivores die first, unable to feed and unable to escape the predators. The predators die soon after with nothing to feed on. That leaves the smaller animals that could root through the mud to live on, surviving on the corpses of the dead, and the animal and plant matter washed up from the flood.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dirk, posted 08-20-2010 11:00 PM Dirk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 6:13 AM Dr Jack has acknowledged this reply
 Message 66 by glowby, posted 03-06-2012 2:23 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2967
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 4 of 991 (575812)
08-21-2010 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dirk
08-20-2010 11:00 PM


Dirk writes:

And did Noah release the chickens and cows and pigs and sheep as well, or did he keep them in the ark so that he didn't have to catch them later if he wanted eggs & bacon for breakfast?

No bacon, he was Jewish.

Then, pretty much what Mr. Jack said, so further miracles would be required from God.

And welcome to EvC.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dirk, posted 08-20-2010 11:00 PM Dirk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 6:12 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 5 of 991 (575814)
08-21-2010 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by bluegenes
08-21-2010 6:02 AM


No bacon, he was Jewish.

Ah, but Noah predates the Jewish laws so he might be okay.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by bluegenes, posted 08-21-2010 6:02 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 6 of 991 (575815)
08-21-2010 6:13 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 5:53 AM


Infestation
Oh, and the animals on the Ark must have been utterly infested with parasites, and shaking with disease - after all, they all needed to survive the flood too.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 5:53 AM Dr Jack has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Percy, posted 08-21-2010 6:30 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded
 Message 10 by nwr, posted 08-21-2010 8:52 AM Dr Jack has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.5


(1)
Message 7 of 991 (575817)
08-21-2010 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 6:13 AM


Re: Infestation
Mr Jack writes:

Oh, and the animals on the Ark must have been utterly infested with parasites, and shaking with disease - after all, they all needed to survive the flood too.

This is a point I'd never considered. The animals on the ark would have needed to play host to every disease and parasite on the planet. And in the case of humans, Noah's small clan would have had to play host to plague, smallpox, tuberculosis, polio, measles, mumps, whooping cough, diphtheria, scarlet fever, etc. And all types of genetic defects, too.

Man, that must have been one miserable boat ride!

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 6:13 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-21-2010 7:20 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12442
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 8 of 991 (575818)
08-21-2010 6:42 AM


Even assuming a miraculous regeneration of plant life, the predators would probably eat most of the herbivores and then starve. Even without that the genetic bottleneck would have pretty severe effects so a lot of the species (especially the "unclean" species) could be expected to die out within a few generations anyway.

So the real answer would be "mainly those that didn't need to be on the ark"


Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Dirk, posted 08-21-2010 11:00 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15474
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 9 of 991 (575824)
08-21-2010 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Percy
08-21-2010 6:30 AM


Re: Infestation
And in the case of humans, Noah's small clan would have had to play host to plague, smallpox, tuberculosis, polio, measles, mumps, whooping cough, diphtheria, scarlet fever, etc. And all types of genetic defects, too.

Though not all diseases that afflict humans are human specific. For example, armadillos can get leprosy.

But yes, it must have been hell afloat.

Life on the Ark ...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Percy, posted 08-21-2010 6:30 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5504
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 10 of 991 (575830)
08-21-2010 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 6:13 AM


Re: Infestation
Mr Jack writes:
Oh, and the animals on the Ark must have been utterly infested with parasites, and shaking with disease - after all, they all needed to survive the flood too.

Oh, no. That cannot be right. There were only allowed to be two of each parasite, one male and one female. (We have to go with the literal wording, remember).

Hmm, without the intestinal bacteria, Noah and family must have had severe digestive problems on that trip.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 6:13 AM Dr Jack has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 9:04 AM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 11 of 991 (575831)
08-21-2010 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by nwr
08-21-2010 8:52 AM


Re: Infestation
Oh, no. That cannot be right. There were only allowed to be two of each parasite, one male and one female. (We have to go with the literal wording, remember).

Well, of course. They'll only have taken one male and one female on board - but they're there for a year and an adult flea (for example) lays 50 eggs a day, each of which can hatch and reach adulthood within two weeks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by nwr, posted 08-21-2010 8:52 AM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28433
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 12 of 991 (575839)
08-21-2010 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dirk
08-20-2010 11:00 PM


One thing that can be said with a very high degree of confidence is that none of the species that were on the Ark would be alive today.

There would be no humans alive today, none of the birds, clean or unclean animals. Every species that was on the Ark would not be around today.

The reason is pretty simple.

There were only 8 humans, at most fourteen of the clean animals and birds, and only four of each unclean critter.

That is well below the minimal size for a sustainable population.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dirk, posted 08-20-2010 11:00 PM Dirk has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 10:28 AM jar has responded

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 13 of 991 (575843)
08-21-2010 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by jar
08-21-2010 10:04 AM


Viability of small populations
I'd point out that there are known island populations thought to have been established by a single pregnant female. That's even more extreme than a population of 4 individuals.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jar, posted 08-21-2010 10:04 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by jar, posted 08-21-2010 10:34 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded
 Message 15 by Dirk, posted 08-21-2010 10:52 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28433
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 14 of 991 (575846)
08-21-2010 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 10:28 AM


Re: Viability of small populations
Really? Interesting. Do you have any details?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 10:28 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by rw23, posted 08-21-2010 11:51 AM jar has not yet responded
 Message 36 by caffeine, posted 08-23-2010 7:42 AM jar has not yet responded

  
Dirk
Member (Idle past 1374 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-20-2010


Message 15 of 991 (575848)
08-21-2010 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 10:28 AM


Re: Viability of small populations
quote:
I'd point out that there are known island populations thought to have been established by a single pregnant female. That's even more extreme than a population of 4 individuals.

Depending on whether each pair was put in a cage together or not, there might have been some pregnant animals in the ark when it stranded on Mt Ararat.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 10:28 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
1
23456
...
67NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017