Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Food for Noah's Ark survivors.
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 1 of 105 (385235)
02-14-2007 6:39 PM


It struck me today as I was researching some verses concerning Noah's flood that I would like to ask of those that adhere to the validity of the flood lore an explanation of the problems presented by this verse.
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.
Since every living substance was destroyed { the Hebrew word is machah whose definition can be found here Bible Search and Study Tools - Blue Letter Bible} after being submerged for at least 150 days no vegetation could be left upon the entire planet and therefore there would be no forests remaining. Since Noah did not carry with him representatives of these species it is not possible for any of today's plant life to exist.
Now to the difficulty. Many forests cannot germinate without fires to provide heat or smoke for the seed to produce germination. Since no forests exist such germination is impossible to accomplish.
Without forests many animals have no food source nor cover from predators {especially vital when population numbers off the ark are next to extinction levels}.Since no food source survives the animals that survived the ark would starve to death. The predators would also go first as the plant eaters cannot be eaten without eliminating their only food source.
I will delight in hearing how such difficulties can be addressed.
I guess this can be posted in Geology and the Great Flood.

"The world is so exquisite, with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better, it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look Death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides." - Carl Sagan, Billions and Billions

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Doddy, posted 02-15-2007 8:27 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 10 by iceage, posted 02-16-2007 7:22 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 12 by johnfolton, posted 02-16-2007 10:15 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 17 by ringo, posted 02-16-2007 11:47 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 70 by ICANT, posted 04-08-2007 9:43 PM sidelined has replied
 Message 92 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-18-2007 6:46 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 99 by ThreeDogs, posted 01-25-2008 12:27 PM sidelined has not replied

  
AdminQuetzal
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 105 (385335)
02-15-2007 7:35 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5909 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 3 of 105 (385344)
02-15-2007 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by sidelined
02-14-2007 6:39 PM


Maybe plants didn't die
I've used this one before. The response I got was that Gen 7:22 says "All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died." (italics mine).
So, the argument goes, plants etc weren't living, because they don't breath through their nostrils. Thus, the Bible doesn't say they died.
Something like that.

"Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber nicht wollen was er will." (Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.) - Arthur Schopenhauer
Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sidelined, posted 02-14-2007 6:39 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by sidelined, posted 02-15-2007 9:48 AM Doddy has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 4 of 105 (385361)
02-15-2007 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Doddy
02-15-2007 8:27 AM


Re: Excuses excuses excuses
Doddy
That is fine for them to use as a reason however, in order for them to capitalize upon the assertion they must adhere to the notion that the plants also have a requirement for access to the atmosphere and without access they too perish.
So the question to them becomes what happened to the plant life that allowed them to escape being destroyed utterly while at the same time allow the animals that survived to find sustenance. This also still does not refute the way in which plants that require fire in order to germinate may accomplish this when there are no conditions remaining upon earth in order for them to do so.
Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.
Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Doddy, posted 02-15-2007 8:27 AM Doddy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Jon, posted 04-07-2007 3:34 PM sidelined has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 5 of 105 (385369)
02-15-2007 10:39 AM


Let's not even start on the ability of acorns and the like to sprout after several months' soak in seawater.....

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4115 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 6 of 105 (385422)
02-15-2007 4:12 PM


Let's deal with the another related problem.
How long can plants survive submerged is brine much less after when the soil has been saturated with salt? How long can the bacteria and other organisms in the soil that allow much of the vegetation we see today to live survive submerged?

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by sidelined, posted 02-15-2007 8:18 PM obvious Child has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 7 of 105 (385503)
02-15-2007 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by obvious Child
02-15-2007 4:12 PM


Bump for creationist input. That is if there is any way in which you can.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by obvious Child, posted 02-15-2007 4:12 PM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by obvious Child, posted 02-16-2007 2:41 AM sidelined has not replied

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4115 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 8 of 105 (385550)
02-16-2007 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by sidelined
02-15-2007 8:18 PM


Of course.
I'm under the impression that much of the vegetation we see today is dependent upon the organisms that live in the soil. These organisms produce a efficent and rapid decomposition of organic matter, which is then used by vegetation. Without these organisms, plant life can't exist in the amounts we see today. A flood of such porportions would invariably wipe out these organisms, therefore reducing the colonization speed of the vegetation necessary to support a food pyramid which obviously has huge implications for a flood's probability.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by sidelined, posted 02-15-2007 8:18 PM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Doddy, posted 02-16-2007 2:52 AM obvious Child has replied

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5909 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 9 of 105 (385552)
02-16-2007 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by obvious Child
02-16-2007 2:41 AM


I'm under the impression that much of the vegetation we see today is dependent upon the organisms that live in the soil.
A creationist would no doubt point out that this may not have been the case with plants in Noah's day. It could have evolved since then as post-flood adaptation of the 'kinds' progressed.

"Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber nicht wollen was er will." (Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.) - Arthur Schopenhauer
Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by obvious Child, posted 02-16-2007 2:41 AM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by obvious Child, posted 02-16-2007 11:29 AM Doddy has replied

  
iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 10 of 105 (385559)
02-16-2007 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by sidelined
02-14-2007 6:39 PM


Koala Bears and Theories
Of course there is the problem of animals with very specialized diets. For example the Koala bear. The Koala Bear's diet consists of eucalyptus leaves and has an adapted digestive system to extract the required nutrients from low value leaves.
sidelined writes:
I will delight in hearing how such difficulties can be addressed.
Since very few Creationist are participating and teaching us the word here I will advance some possible theories...
  • The Koala Bears floated on giant living eucalyptus rafts from the Middle East to Australia along with the rest of the Australian fauna. This theory solves both questions of transportation and food requirements. After the flood Noah with his zoological and nautical know-how built a multitude of rafts or mini-arks to distribute animals throughout the world and provide food for the journey.
    Carnivores were provided with stores of dried meat that was prepared from all the floating carcases that floated by the ark during the flood. This remarkable theory also solves the problem of feeding the carnivores during the stay on the ark.
  • Koala Bears didn't exist at Noah's time but evolved from other base "kinds". God instituted a sort of rapid evolutionary period so that we achieve the diversity we have today. Diversity has ever since been on the decline just like the speed of light and earths gravitational field.
    This concept of special evolutionary periods are useful as they also solve the thorny issue of why there are some nasty animal species like the Guinea Worm.
    God is good and loving he could not have produced such despicable life forms. However, since the serpent is the lord of this earth he also had a hand in these special evolution periods and consequently some bad apples fell out of the process.
    BTW is also why we should not be concerned with the loss of species. If God did it once he can do it again, if need be, as he will provide for all of our needs.
    Edited by iceage, : No reason given.
    Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by sidelined, posted 02-14-2007 6:39 PM sidelined has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by sidelined, posted 02-16-2007 7:51 AM iceage has not replied

      
    sidelined
    Member (Idle past 5908 days)
    Posts: 3435
    From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
    Joined: 08-30-2003


    Message 11 of 105 (385563)
    02-16-2007 7:51 AM
    Reply to: Message 10 by iceage
    02-16-2007 7:22 AM


    Re: Koala Bears and Theories
    iceage
    Since very few Creationist are participating and teaching us the word here I will advance some possible theories...
    Well that is the problem isn't it? Since they refuse to participate they are can never be challenged nor can they be considered to be debating the difficulties their ideas present.
    # The Koala Bears floated on giant living eucalyptus rafts from the Middle East to Australia along with the rest of the Australian fauna. This theory solves both questions of transportation and food requirements. After the flood Noah with his zoological and nautical know-how built a multitude of rafts or mini-arks to distribute animals throughout the world and provide food for the journey.
    Carnivores were provided with stores of dried meat that was prepared from all the floating carcases that floated by the ark during the flood. This remarkable theory also solves the problem of feeding the carnivores during the stay on the ark.
    # Koala Bears didn't exist at Noah's time but evolved from other base "kinds". God instituted a sort of rapid evolutionary period so that we achieve the diversity we have today. Diversity has ever since been on the decline just like the speed of light and earths gravitational field.
    This concept of special evolutionary periods are useful as they also solve the thorny issue of why there are some nasty animal species like the Guinea Worm. Since God is good and loving he could not have produced such despicable life forms. Since the serpent is the lord of this earth he also had a hand in these special evolution events and consequently some bad apples fall out process.
    These answers are fraught with huge difficulties and in another thread I would tackle them, however, this thread is dealing with plant life and the impossibility of its survival after the Noahic flood. It is obvious that such difficulties were not considered since such challenges are insurmountable with such obtuse hand waving and wishful thinking.
    Real life is far more complex than such simple minded "explanations" would have their flocks of ecologically illiterate adherents believe.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by iceage, posted 02-16-2007 7:22 AM iceage has not replied

      
    johnfolton 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
    Posts: 2024
    Joined: 12-04-2005


    Message 12 of 105 (385576)
    02-16-2007 10:15 AM
    Reply to: Message 1 by sidelined
    02-14-2007 6:39 PM


    Trees can replicate without germination
    This poster is a troll and does not engage in rational or honest debate. Answer at the risk of wasting your time.
    Many forests cannot germinate without fires to provide heat or smoke for the seed to produce germination. Since no forests exist such germination is impossible to accomplish.
    Not true, It rained down thus it was a fresh water flood, 40 day flood, its a perfect situation for replication of trees because a seed is not needed when pieces of roots is an easy way to duplicate parent plants.
    ------------------------------------------
    Root Cuttings
    Grow It! : Episode GRW-210 -- More Projects
    Q: What's an easy way to multiply plants?
    A: One easy way to replicate perennial plants is to take root cuttings. Simply pull a piece of the root up and clip it off. (This won't hurt the parent plant since it's sufficiently large and well established). Cut the root into two- or three-inch pieces. Each piece will become a duplicate of the parent plant.
    http://www.hgtv.com/...icle/0,1785,HGTV_3610_1371784,00.html
    Edited by AdminNosy, : troll warning

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by sidelined, posted 02-14-2007 6:39 PM sidelined has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 13 by Coragyps, posted 02-16-2007 11:21 AM johnfolton has replied
     Message 15 by obvious Child, posted 02-16-2007 11:37 AM johnfolton has replied
     Message 18 by Taz, posted 02-16-2007 11:49 AM johnfolton has replied
     Message 40 by Randy, posted 02-18-2007 9:38 AM johnfolton has not replied

      
    Coragyps
    Member (Idle past 734 days)
    Posts: 5553
    From: Snyder, Texas, USA
    Joined: 11-12-2002


    Message 13 of 105 (385583)
    02-16-2007 11:21 AM
    Reply to: Message 12 by johnfolton
    02-16-2007 10:15 AM


    Re: Trees can replicate without germination
    Cut the root into two- or three-inch pieces. Each piece will become a duplicate of the parent plant.
    I notice, Charley, how they recommend always soaking the cuttings in water for five months...........

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by johnfolton, posted 02-16-2007 10:15 AM johnfolton has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by johnfolton, posted 02-16-2007 11:44 AM Coragyps has not replied

      
    obvious Child
    Member (Idle past 4115 days)
    Posts: 661
    Joined: 08-17-2006


    Message 14 of 105 (385586)
    02-16-2007 11:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 9 by Doddy
    02-16-2007 2:52 AM


    But how do they get around the short term problems? Let's just ASSUME that Noah managed to get two of every herbivore on board. The necessary direct post flood food requirements would be huge. Plus many species such as Koalas and Giraffes only eat a specific type of leaf, usually a older leaf from specific types of plants. The time table here doesn't make sense. If the flood wiped out the soil organisms and the plants could somehow grow in a salted Earth situtation, how could they grow so fast and produce the right kind of foliage to sustain a large and varied herbivore population?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 9 by Doddy, posted 02-16-2007 2:52 AM Doddy has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 33 by Doddy, posted 02-16-2007 5:40 PM obvious Child has replied

      
    obvious Child
    Member (Idle past 4115 days)
    Posts: 661
    Joined: 08-17-2006


    Message 15 of 105 (385589)
    02-16-2007 11:37 AM
    Reply to: Message 12 by johnfolton
    02-16-2007 10:15 AM


    Re: Trees can replicate without germination
    Are you forgetting that few perennial plants can survive in salt water? Pray tell, how are they suppose to grow in soil saturated with salt?
    quote:
    Not true, It rained down thus it was a fresh water flood, 40 day flood, its a perfect situation for replication of trees because a seed is not needed when pieces of roots is an easy way to duplicate parent plants.
    Again you apparently have no understanding of what salt does to plant growth. And you are clearly ignoring that being extendedly submerged in brine water kills virtually all plants. No live root = No method of duplication.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by johnfolton, posted 02-16-2007 10:15 AM johnfolton has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 19 by johnfolton, posted 02-16-2007 12:07 PM obvious Child has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024