Once you get into that sort of reasoning - why do you even NEED an ark - why doesn't God just POOF all the evildoers away or just transform the world into it's post-flood state with just Noah, his family and his Dinos, dodos and other required Kindas*
* "kinda" = Well it's Kinda like a handwaving term.
I know we use the terms in an interchangeable sense here because a)creationists using the terms in a interchangeable fashion and b) because generally at some stage most creationist scientists rely on "goddunit" as part of their answer, but I always think of Creationism and Creation science as two different and distinct things*.
Let's use Noah's ark to explore where I see the difference and we can see where the differences are and if you agree or disagree?
quote:God flooded the earth and with a boat, Noah and his family and the animals were saved
Now to this - a skeptic might ask:
How come Noah was able to get all of the Animals into the ark and they didn't eat each other and fill the place with shit
Because it was God's will that Noah was able to collect the animals. The Grace of God protected them.
To what I consider a "proper" creationist - the fine details are irrelevant, God wanted something to happen - it happened, what more needs to be discussed?
I actually have no problem at all with this and in many respects is by far the most sensible scenario.
however a creation Scientist is likely to say:
creation scientist writes:
Well it's clear from the evidence that the kinds we had then were of a different type than today, far more robust and it's also clear that lion kinds did not require meat and were asleep for 23 out of the 24 hours of the day. This is evidenced by...
The Creation Scientist seems to say that, yes god created everything and the physical laws, but that the physical laws we currently have means that the ark story makes perfect sense without any special intervention on the part of the Almighty.
In short, the difference is that, in the creationist scenario, God is active in stages of the process. In the creation science, God creates the conditions and physical laws that enabled the ark sceanrio to work but his hand is not needed during the process.
Creationism = God the Doer
Creation Science = God the enabler
Am I making any sense?
* (Let me put a little qualificatio to this statement - there is of course a fuzzy overlap, which I suggests represents a continuum from Hard science God representing Creation science and "I can do anything how I please" soft science god representing the extremes of Creationism)
Seems a perfectly sensible question when you make statements like:
quote:Thus for every animal (approximate density the same as water) you need to excavate twice the animals volume out of the wood in order to maintain the animal filled ark half in/half out of the water
So how many animals were on the ark? - if I remember correctly 12,000 is the figure that most of the creationist organizations seem to go for. what figure do you go for?