Christian, Jews, or Muslims...Can you explain this?

True. I don't think it would have been necessary to have every single species but the kinds in order to save the species.

 

I think you kinda do have to have every species or else you drift into evolution, and there is no way so many species evolved over such a short space of time - let alone having to contend with the theory of evolution.
Noah didn't supposedly build his ark approx 650 million years ago - did he?

 

noah did something crazy that worked out fine . have you
ever ? some hippies in oregon once cleared a circular spot
in the forest , moved the stones away , leveled it flat and
then waited for the flying saucer to land . i guess they had
a good time camping , and that spot in the woods still holds
its
story
.

 

No, he is not talking of evolution. He is merely saying that dogs are dogs and cats are cats and that there is no need to take all the variations we see around us on the Ark because all the various cats and dogs can be bred from one set of cats and dogs.

 

Even if one cuts out the variations in the species, it still ends up being roughly 2.4 million different species. And the basic species you propose were saved on the ark could not possibly evolve into the variations we have now during the 4356 years since the bible claims the flood happened. Not to mention the complete absence of any DNA evidence of a genetic 'bottleneck' even remotely in the vicinity of that date.

Anyway, I thank everyone for their responses. This thread turned out just how I intended. Unless I missed one, every argument attempting to support the myth of Noahs ark has been successfully countered. If any believers would like to make any more attempts, you are graciously invited to.

Thanks everyone

 

and then Noah cursed Ham.. and ham hasnt been the same since.. iggy:

 

where did the whales go?? Is that what that boat builder said..

Kirt and Spock brought them back, on a stolen Klingon bird of prey.. everyone knows that..

 

This is pretty much what I was going to say.
Only I was going to give some benefit of the doubt as far as dogs and cats are concerned.
He could argue both have been domesticated and variations have emerged - out of one or two species? Perhaps not - I wasn't going to argue over dogs and cats.
It's the other millions of species and sub-species that we are supposed to believe cross bread and brought forth the myriad of variations within a species I find that hard to believe.

 

For mulsims, they have no problems with this.
There's no indication to accept or reject whether the flood was local or global from islamic texts.
http://www.islam101.com/history/people/prophets/nuh.htm

 

It's a boat, Jim. But not as we know it.

 

And I thought the crew of the Enterprise could solve pretty much anything...

 

Sounds plausible. What's always puzzled me is how Santa gets to all those houses on Christmas Eve, and how he manages to fit down all those chimneys!

 

It's only a third of the worlds population, and there are time zones to take into consideration. Plus most children are bad. So it's only me he has to visit every year.

 

God says and it happens, probably what ever creature entered in the ark was following his commands not to mention the lions etc, Noah had no fear because God was on his side.

 

Science speaks of species, the Bible speaks of kinds, kind of a apples and oranges thing. So 2.4 kinds would not be needed to make up the 2.4 million species.

Again no evolving took place, so millions of year would not be need to account for the mechanisms of evolution, only several generations for the breeding different variations of kinds.

Genetic "bottleneck"?

Not really.

What more specifics would you like?

You are welcome.

 

Again, science speaks of species, the Bible speaks of kinds, kind of a apples and oranges thing. There was no "cross" breeding. What is being said is that to breed all the animals of one kind you only need one pair. Take just one human pair, that pair can have all the genetic traits needed to produce all the human "races" and the variations in height, hair, eye and skin color.

 

So, we essentially have to disregard what we know now as species and the variances, and refer to 'kinds'?
So the ark saved a 'kind' of butterfly and hence forth all the variances we see today sprang from one kind of butterfly?
The myriad of apes all sprang from one kind? - ignoring the fact we have records showing various species dating back hundreds of thousands of years - the ark came along saved one kind and then repopulated the planet with the same variant species we had before? - none of this involves evolution, either?

...and how long did this all take again?

 

That's 50 years, right?

 

When it comes to what animals were taken on to the ark, yes the term species can be discarded.

In spirit of kinds, yes that could be true.

If they were all of the same kind, that is true.

No, not ignoring. If those variations of kinds existed before the Flood, that does not mean those variations of kinds could not also exist after the Flood.

Yes and no it doesn't involve evolution.

The Bible is not specific about how long it took but I would say a few generations, not millions or billions of years like evolution claims for it self.

 

For a generation? Probably closer to 70 or 80 but yes.