|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The Flood - Animals and their minimum food requirement | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
and to impute evil motives to them. =============== Pot, kettle, black. I have never imputed evil motives to anyone. Or it's extremely rare if I ever have. Calling someone an idiot is not imputing evil motives. Whereas it is standard here for creationists to be called "Willfully ignorant" or accused of lying. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
What WOULD you call it if someone purposely refuses to look at the evidence, or dismisses the evidence out of hand because it contradicts their beliefs?
That is what YEC's do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I have never imputed evil motives to anyone. Or it's extremely rare if I ever have. Calling someone an idiot is not imputing evil motives. Whereas it is standard here for creationists to be called "Willfully ignorant" or accused of lying. Calling someone wilfully ignorant is not imputing evil motives, it is describing their behavior. It's not even like calling someone an idiot or moron. The key point is how do folk that believe in the flood explain how the animals on the alleged ark were gathered, housed, fed and cared for? Once we get that settled we can move on to issues like the rate of evolution needed after the alleged flood, how the new critters could be fed, distribution, unique species like those found in Australia or islands. Edited by jar, : -d Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jaderis Member (Idle past 3426 days) Posts: 622 From: NY,NY Joined: |
Better yet, even more on topic, plants were more nutritious back then before they micro-devolved into the crappy kind we have today. See! Now you can stuff 1.8 million cubic feet of hay into just a few thousand cubic feet of super-awesome-pre-flood-plant-food-stuff. Would that be like the lambas bread in Lord of the Rings? So maybe Noah and his kin were elves and provided the food for all the animals in small, chock-full of nutrition loaves?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi CK,
Do you know if Woodmorappe took into consideration that there were 7 of all the clean animals and it was only the unclean that had 2 of each kind? Genesis 7:2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate More problematic is the fact that a literal translation of Genesis 7:2 actually states that Noah took 14 of each clean animal on to the Ark. of all the clean beasts thou dost take to thee seven pairs, a male and its female; and of the beasts which are not clean two, a male and its female (Young's Literal Translation) The English Standard Version also has seven pairs, as does The Message, The Amplified Bible, The New Living Translation, The Contemporary English Version, The Holman Christian Standard Bible, and the Revised Standard Version. I wonder if the author has considered the larger amount of animals given in these Bibles? Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Randy Member (Idle past 6247 days) Posts: 420 From: Cincinnati OH USA Joined: |
I also have Woody's book, though not handy right now, so I thought I comment on this question.
quote:To some extent, however, IIRC, he does not consider all animals that "divide" the hoof and chew the cud (even toed ruminants) to be clean, only those commonly eaten by the Israelites. Of course he wouldn't want to admit that there were many ruminants with divided hooves that the Israelites never heard of. For example Giraffe and Oakpi are ruminants with divided hooves. Were they clean animals? If so you need either 7 or 14 depending on which version of the story you accept and they would eat quite a lot. You also need African Buffalo, Bison, Moose, Deer etc. in 7's. I don't know whether the giant ice age bison would be considered a separate "kind" of clean animal or not. quote: It is also unclear to me whether you need 7 or all birds or only of clean birds. Still there are a lot "kinds" of birds. Woody figures about 16,000 animals on the ark which may cover most extinct and extant "kinds" if kind is defined broadly enough. That is going to require a LOT of food and a LOT of different "kinds" of food. Regarding hay, I wonder if anyone here as ever cut hay with a scythe. I have and it is very tedious and time consuming. Hay also rots easily in high humidity, which will be a big problem on this big boat sealed with pitch during a global rainstorm. You are going to have to get rid of a lot of spoiled hay and probably sprouting and spoiled grain during the trip so some extra will need to be packed away. While to problems of producing and storing enough feed for this giant floating zoo are mind boggling it is the problem of 8 people taking care of all these animals on a big boat that is truely insoluble. I don't know if that is off-topic here or not. Randy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bible Backer Inactive Member |
Hi CK, you're forgetting that Noah could have easily constructed multiple follower barges containing much of the food that the animals needed. Noah could have also used a series of fishing nets to capture enough fish to feed the carnivorous species.
As for the rainwater flooding the ark, Noah would have no problem building a roof of some kind to prevent the rainwater from even entering the boat. No pumping system required...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4128 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
quote: Well I must confess this is indeed a new one, I don't think anyone has suggested it before. So Noah built the ark and multiple barges?
quote: We can get into the specifics of which animals would actually be capable or willing to eat fish later but you are suggesting that this already overworked crew had time to operate fishing nets - really?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bible Backer Inactive Member |
quote: I think it's a reasonable assertion, yes. It wouldn't be much harder to construct enough barges to ease the food storage problem. They could be connected with gangways to allow the crew access. They also could be in close proximity to the ark.. not necessarily in a line. quote: I believe the crew was not necessarily overworked to begin with so using the nets would not really be such an issue. The other tasks which many suggest would take the crew a long time to do would be eliminated with efficient design of the ark. Edited by Bible Backer, : No reason given. "Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." -Matthew 5:16
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bible Backer Inactive Member |
quote: Hi Randy, Noah did in fact take 14 animals of the clean sort according to Genesis 7:2, but you must not assume that Noah was able to maintain all 14 over time. Noah could have used these 12 animals of each kind to feed the others, sparing two of each kind for mating after the flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4128 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
quote: Not overworked? Do you agree with normal creationist number of @20,000 animals on the ark? If you do not, what is the number you go with?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cthulhu Member (Idle past 5852 days) Posts: 273 From: Roe Dyelin Joined: |
As a general rule, giraffes don't eat giraffes. They eat plants.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cthulhu Member (Idle past 5852 days) Posts: 273 From: Roe Dyelin Joined: |
For those who want to know, there's an actual formula for the daily food requirements of an endothermic carnivore.
It's 0.11(mass in kg)^0.75 For ectotherms, it's generally from 1/10 to 1/6 of that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5592 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
spoiled grain during the trip so some extra will need to be packed away. I agree they would of packed away grain, with all the pitching Noah was instructed to do this alone would of easily preserved compact energy rich grain, fruits, from spoilage from humidity. To a creationists the glaciers in the northern hemisphere temporarily froze some creatures above the surface of the earth. The flood only raining 40 days means glaciers would of started melting immediately after the flood. The creatures in the southern hemisphere to a creationists would of survived on floating mats of vegetation: granted those that couldn't cling to these mats would of perished within the surface of the earth(fossil record of the creatures that perished within the earth). You have no native hoofed creatures in australia and no native kangaroo fossils outside australia. The fossil record agrees that all species died within the world flood but not all perished. The lack of native hoofed creatures in australia and the fossil record itself is evidence in the natural that the flood was world encompassing disaster. http://archives.gophercentral.com/issue_20096:33.html In fact, it has been reported that young of year of somespecies have been known to endure being frozen solid within ice at times during the winter...and they apparently thaw out with no problem. Page not found | Geophysical Institute Freeze tolerance is just as it sounds”insects turn into little bits of ice, then thaw in spring to fly or crawl away. To pull off this trick, insects or their larvae must remove much of the water from within their cells and keep ice organized to remain outside cell membranes. They also add sugars and alcohols to their bodies to counter the effects of freeze-drying. If ice forms inside cells or if cells become too dry, the insects die. Insects aren’t the only organisms to use this strategy to survive; trees and wood frogs survive after being mostly frozen much of the year.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
You have no native hoofed creatures in australia and no native kangaroo fossils outside australia. The fossil record agrees that all species died within the world flood but not all perished. The lack of native hoofed creatures in australia and the fossil record itself is evidence in the natural that the flood was world encompassing disaster.
ROTFL The distinctive fauna of Australia clearly refutes the flood story (except, perhaps, as a rather exaggerated report of a local flood).
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024