"How Did All Those Animals Fit on the Ark?"

[Ouroboros]

This comes to mind every time I hear about their kinds becoming species. Wanting it both ways is stupid beyond belief, but then that's creationism for you.
.

It's extra funny when one of their own express it as "speciation" and try to explain it away as something that's not quite part of evolution.

 

[Skwim]

It's extra funny when one of their own express it as "speciation" and try to explain it away as something that's not quite part of evolution.

What I find amusing is how AiG's veterinarian cannot bring herself to regard the transformation of kinds into species as evolution. She talks around it, but cannot say the word. The closest she comes is to recognize that:

"To some people, what I just described sounds too much like evolution."
​

Nice little irrelevant aside, which she doesn't bother to follow up on. And the reason she doesn't follow up is to imply that, "what Ive just described isn't evolution at all." She then proceeds to say:

"The evolutionary process definitely includes the idea of speciation, but the formation of species in response to geographic (or habitat) differences is consistent with a biblical worldview."

Nice non sequitur. Her "but", which conveys "to the contrary," and what follows, in no way speaks against what preceded it. However, what it is is an attempt to is distance her transformation of kinds into species from the process of evolution, and particularly from the term itself.

Creationists are truly a sad lot.
.

 

[Ouroboros]

The closest she comes is to recognize that:

"To some people, what I just described sounds too much like evolution."

Yeah. That's too funny. Basically, she described literally evolution, and then... "oops. That sounds like evolution, but it isn't..."

Nice little irrelevant aside, which she doesn't bother to follow up on. And the reason she doesn't follow up is to imply that, "what Ive just described isn't evolution at all." She then proceeds to say:

"The evolutionary process definitely includes the idea of speciation, but the formation of species in response to geographic (or habitat) differences is consistent with a biblical worldview."

I have no clue what she mean with that. The truth is that the geographic distributions of species (often called radiation of species, which has to do with radial/circular rather than radioactivity) corresponds with both evolution and geographic changes, for instance new vs old world monkeys and apes. In other words, she's making some claim that is completely contrary to the actual evidence we have. The Bible doesn't explain the geographic distribution at all. For instance, why are there marsupials only in Australia, New Zealand, and areas around there? Why not a trail of them, living and fossils, from mount Ararat all the way to Australia? And many other examples like that.

Nice non sequitur. Her "but", which conveys "to the contrary," and what follows, in no way speaks against what preceded it. However, what it is is an attempt to is distance her transformation of kinds into species from the process of evolution, and particularly from the term itself.

Yup. She can see the strong connection to evolution but have no idea how to dig herself out of the hole.

Creationists are truly a sad lot.
.

Anything to maintain the belief. I was there once myself...

 

[whirlingmerc]

I believe the world is a creationary orchard and so the created types on the ark could give rise to the animals today.... not seeing why that might be so difficult

In any case nothing is impossible for God

 

[Ouroboros]

I believe the world is a creationary orchard and so the created types on the ark could give rise to the animals today.... not seeing why that might be so difficult

Sure, through hyper-fast evolution.

In any case nothing is impossible for God

Except for ordinary evolution (normal speed according to geological timeframe and scientific support). Because... that he can't do.

 

[psychoslice]

No no no. God magically made the Ark bigger on the inside.


(this is how religious wars start)

Silly me, how could I have not known that.

 

[Skwim]

I believe the world is a creationary orchard and so the created types on the ark could give rise to the animals today.... not seeing why that might be so difficult

In any case nothing is impossible for God

And god could have poofed us all into existence a moment ago with all our memories, cars, homes, neighbors, etc., etc. as is. But that's not what creationists claim. Creationists claim one of two things.

1) God created all the species on earth as is. None evolved.
2) God created organisms called kinds that Noah took aboard the ark, which subsequently transformed themselves into all the species. ("evolved" is a dirty word, so it isn't used)
​

Problem is, there's simply too much scientific evidence contradicting both. Some creationists, such as our veterinarian friend, attempt to counter the evidence with evidence and arguments of their own, none of which hold any water. In fact, unlike almost every scientist, they never shirk from fabricating evidence, purposely lying, and making numerous fallacious arguments. And these aren't just the amateur creationists, but those raking in thousands of dollars with their web sites, speaking engagements, museums, and other assorted cash producing platforms.


.

 

[Brian Schuh]

There are couple traditions that I would like to point out.
1.) Noah could have had a fleet of ships.
Which raises the question, who could have manned these ships if only Noah's family survived?
2.) The land of Israel did not go under water. Which again raises the question, did more people survive the Flood than Noah's family?

Both ways to explain how all the animals survived just raise more questions.

I am going to keep an open mind. I'll listen to all sides of the debate.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

The question was "how" not "if" so I will assume they walked up the ramp and went to their places.

 

[Sapiens]

There is simply no evidence of universal genetic bottleneck having occurred.

 

[Brian Schuh]

How do we know that scientists are not counting more species than there really are? If two animals can produce a fertile offspring, then they are the same species. Short of trying to crossbreed all the so called "species" on earth and testing for fertility, we must assume the estimated number of species is at the high end. There could be actually a lot less.

 

[Koldo]

God is all-powerful, all-knowing, created the universe with His voice and you ask about a small thing like fitting animals on an ark? I don't get it.

He specified a given size. Why was the size relevant if he was going to make all animals fit in by a miracle ?

 

[Ouroboros]

How do we know that scientists are not counting more species than there really are? If two animals can produce a fertile offspring, then they are the same species. Short of trying to crossbreed all the so called "species" on earth and testing for fertility, we must assume the estimated number of species is at the high end. There could be actually a lot less.

Or a lot more. And even cause paradoxes like ring species.

Ultimately, species is a term we've come up with as humans to categorize groups of individuals with shared traits. In reality, every individual is unique. And every individual is part of the change of one species to the next. In the end, taxonomy is an arbitrary system that isn't exact. We still move some animals and plants around from one taxa to another. There's also attempts of creating new ways of classifying species.

"First, the species problem is not primarily an empirical one, but it is rather fraught with philosophical questions that require — but cannot be settled by — empirical evidence." Pigliucci

 

[Revoltingest]

Some speculations.....
- The animals were freeze dried, & then re-hydrated when the boat docked.
- Moses had some of that Fanstastic Voyage shrink ray technology.
- Magic boat....much bigger on the inside than the outside. Think of Snoopy's doghouse on a massive scale.

 

[Ouroboros]

Some speculations.....
- The animals were freeze dried, & then re-hydrated when the boat docked.
- Moses had some of that Fanstastic Voyage shrink ray technology.
- Magic boat....much bigger on the inside than the outside. Think of Snoopy's doghouse on a massive scale.

- Stored DNA samples of all species in tubes, and recreated them all through cloning.

Here's a question though that I thought of. What about plants? Why wasn't Noah commanded to save seeds, roots, shoots, etc of all plants? Where did all the plant species come from?

 

[Brian Schuh]

The ark was measured in cubits. A cubit is from the tip of middle finger to the elbow. What if Noah was a giant? Then the ark was much, much larger than we thought and could hold more animals.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Here's a question though that I thought of. What about plants? Why wasn't Noah commanded to save seeds, roots, shoots, etc of all plants? Where did all the plant species come from?

Ah, the question that hardly ever get's asked.

 

[Ouroboros]

Ah, the question that hardly ever get's asked.

I was pondering, if the answer is that all the seeds were just floating around and in all the dirt thrown around, wouldn't we have all types and species of all plants all over the world equally? There wouldn't be much of separation, and unique plant life wouldn't be as severe as it is in the rain forests for instance.

 

[Skwim]

How do we know that scientists are not counting more species than there really are?

Well, you can always question any statement anyone makes, but is it a reasonable question? If you don't want to take science's estimate of the number of species on earth

"As of 2009 the estimated number of total species is ~11,327,630

However the total number of species for some taxa may be much higher.

10-30 million insects;
5-10 million bacteria;
1.5 million fungi;
~1 million mites
~1 million protists
source​

[The number of possible chordates: mammals, fish, birds etc, is ~80,500]​

then so be it. However, the rest of us do. So you can either stick to your doubts and excuse yourself from the discussion (if you can't accept the premise then what else do you have to contribute?), or play along with what science says and remain a participant.

If two animals can produce a fertile offspring, then they are the same species.

Not at all. Wolves, Canis lupus, and coyotes Canis latrans, two different species, have often interbred to produce fertile offspring. Then there's the grapefruit, which is a cross between two plant species, a sweet orange, Citrus sinesis and a pomelo, Citrus maxima. In fact, animals from different genera have been known to interbreed and produce fertile offspring, such as cattle, Bos taurus and bison Bison bison, which produce beefalo.

Short of trying to crossbreed all the so called "species" on earth and testing for fertility, we must assume the estimated number of species is at the high end. There could be actually a lot less.

Of course you must, because if you don't it makes explaining all the animals and plants Noah had to take aboard all the more difficult. (The number of identified plants is 326,175, and they had no way to travel cross country to walk on board the ark.)

And let's not forget about all the fish Noah and crew would have had to gather and take on board. If the flood water was saline then about 15,000 species of freshwater fish would have to have been saved---freshwater fish will die if put in salt water. Or if the flood water was fresh then approximately 15,300 marine fish would be in jeopardy of dying---saltwater fish die if put in freshwater. And if the water was mix of the two, only half as saline, then just about all the fish would have had to be taken aboard. Only a handful of fish, such as the bull shark, salmon, striped bass, and rainbow trout, can tolerate both waters.

Trouble is, the more one thinks about the particulars of the story the more ludicrous it sounds.
.

 

[Ouroboros]

Of course you must, because if you don't it makes explaining all the animals and plants Noah had to take aboard all the more difficult.
.

Oh. And bacteria and insects. Many of them necessary for both our own survival and plants. Did Noah bring a beehive? A vat of kefir? Fermenting beer or wine to save the yeast?

After all, supposedly he produced wine after the journey. He must've had brewing yeast. Or maybe he had a fridge to keep it at temp for a whole year? (Or maybe he knew how to produce dry-yeast to save it for later?)