Food for Noah's Ark survivors.

well that's quite different then the 7-days crap.

Hi sidelined, Noah preached for 100 years while building the ark giving mankind time to repent. yes He could have. No He does not change mans heart. Man is allowed to choose.

ICANT Then why the punishment for exercising free choice?

I think you're just making that up. I don't see anywhere in the text where anybody was given a chance to repent after the flood was announced.Any repenters would only have aggravated the food shortage.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I think you're just making that up. I don't see anywhere in the text where anybody was given a food shortage.------end of reply -------- Now then. For any creationist who wants to bother, none of the objections are terribly serious. These people forget about manna, but we haven't. They'll try to make it seem "shameful" if God is expected to directly intervene. As if!Even so, God may have used natural means to provide for the survivors. God is clever, and if I can find ways to "handle" these things, I don't think He'd miss it. The earlier saltwater/freshwater issue is easily resolved if one knows about thermal layers. They're critical in submarine warfare, so that's where to start your searching. Basically, if the water from the rain and fountains was warmer than the saltwater, it wouldn't mix. And we don't know the volume of the pre-flood oceans, for that matter... oops - I almost let an invalid assumption slide past!There are so many false assumptions you'll encounter in these objections! The continents weren't where they are now, neither was the land all at its present elevation. Most flood models have a pangean continental mass breaking up during & after the flood. They'll always try to sucker you into assuming present continental positions. And they'll try to imply that since there are few researchers, and flood geology is far from complete; it must be wrong - if they hold true to historic patterns of behaviour.There's nothing I know of which would prevent polar icecaps on one or both poles, and a small pre-flood ice age could preserve some seeds and some microbes. They'll want to go species-by-species if you use this one. They also won't admit that most plants grow just fine on a compost heap, and there would be plenty of dead plant mass around.The duration of the flood over the whole earth is also unknown. They'll go for max duration - buy their timeframe if you like; but you don't have to.Even at present, Mt. Ararat isn't the highest point on earth; and I doubt that Noah landed the ark on the tip top of the mountain. It's a big world, and other areas could easily have been higher. Every time elevations come up, they'll assume present elevations. You've gotta watch 'em really close on that.Now if anyone wants to argue about this, you've got a starting place. Feel free to e-mail me if they come up with anything better. Don't expect 'em to concede even the most obvious point. Some will, but others will just argue forever as if it helps their case to keep saying stupider and stupider things. The ones that quit on a hopeless point will chip in and try to distract the discussion by questioning every sentence you submit (with the dumbest questions they can imagine, and they've had practice). Rarely will they raise a half-valid point.But have a go, if you're game.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Maybe you didn't read far enough:

quote:

---

Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

---

"All food that is eaten". Not just manna.You might do well to read the thread, too. Just about all of your points have been dealt with.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Nice reasoning there: because Noah took food, there was a shortage.No. That's wrong. If Noah hadn't taken food there would be a shortage. At least that's how most of us reason.And if you'd read through the thread, the complaints were that there couldn't be food after the flood. That's why I mentioned manna - not saying that it was given then, but to point out what a lame objection it is. God has never had a problem providing food.

This being a science forum, God poofing up manna aplenty is not an answer.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

1Kin 17:10 (KJS) So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, behold, the widow woman [was] there gathering of sticks: and he called to her, and said, Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink.
11 And as she was going to fetch [it], he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand.
12 And she said, [As] the LORD thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but an handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, behold, I [am] gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die.
13 And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go [and] do as thou hast said: but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring [it] unto me, and after make for thee and for thy son.
14 For thus saith the LORD God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day [that] the LORD sendeth rain upon the earth. {sendeth: Heb. giveth}
15 And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he, and her house, did eat [many] days. {many...: or, a full year}
16 [And] the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by Elijah. {by: Heb. by the hand of}

---

How about a little going a long way.Lasting for a year.

This being a science forum, God poofing anything is not an answer.How could the animals survive outside the ark when the flood had destroyed all plant life? Scientific answer, please - not Biblical.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

You mean I can't tell you the dove brought back a olive leaf plucked off an olive tree. If that is what you mean then I have no answer.But there was no scientist there to say there was not enough vegetation to sustain the animal life.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

You'd have to show that an olive tree can survive a year submerged in water. Come to think of it, that wouldn't be a difficult experiment to do, would it? I wonder why creationists haven't done it. But we have scientists today - creationists even claim they have some of their own. So why don't we see a real feasibility study? Why don't we see "creation scientists" experimenting to find which plants can survive a year-long flood, how quickly they can propagate after the flood, how many animals they could sustain?Where's the data? How come all ya got is "woulda coulda shoulda"?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

WHY?If God spoke it into existance one time at the beginning why could He not do it again?

Because this is a science thread and "God poofed it" is not an answer. Please remember that point instead of repeating the same non-answer over and over again.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Right you are, CTD. But that was too easy. Got any trickier predictions you'd care to make? Something that requires some insight and subtlety? C'mon, we all saw that coming, although we might have expected 'em to wait until someone actually claimed God intervened before objecting.And you could have been much more helpful. Seriously, how much time would it take to type up a detailed point-by-point post demonstrating that those objections aren't substantial. You're too lazy. What if some person should stumble in here some day and take them seriously, and lose all faith in God? How would you feel then, knowing you could have prevented it?See, even now, here's an easy way to deal with this issue. If a man hoists a flag, it isn't unscientific to say the man hoisted the flag. Hoisting flags is an act quite within the capabilities of a man. Likewise, when God does something quite within his capabilities, there's nothing unscientific about saying so. If God is said to do something outside of His capabilities, like telling a lie or failing; then it is an unscientific statement. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning