Ai, I'm sure any Christians here have prolly had a Noah's ark debate already, but here's another one:

How the fuck do a handful of people gather together two of every single species of animal on the planet and get them to live together on a boat while the world floods?

As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong, which I prolly am cos my knowledge of the bible is shit) it says in the bible that God didn't use any miracles for this. All explanations are welcome.

Yah would be nice to know how they manged that cause No one had discoverd Norht america so how did all those animals get there? And plus that boat would have to be huge way too big for those guys to build.

Yeah, a Christian chum of mine says they've actually calculated the exact proportions of the ark and proven that it is actually possible. But I still fail to believe it. Plus there's shit loads of other things that seem beyond explanation. Like how did they find every single species on the planet when today we are still discovering new species. Our technology these days shits all over technology back then so how did they do it?

Also, how did they create the environments necessary for each and every single type of land animal to survive on a boat? Think about the different climates and environments necessary for different animals survival. What about animals fighting with each other and wanting to eat each other? Think about the amount of food required to feed every type of bird, every type of cat, every type of dog etc ..

How did they keep the ark clean of all the animal shit?

I could prolly think of more stuff, but that'll prolly do.

If the bible is the word of God then what's a bullshit fairy tale like this doing in there?

Ah yes, Noah's Ark.

Think about this; first off, the WORLD flooded, right? The known world back then was not the whole world, it was Mesopotamia, an area between the Tigrus and Euphraties (sp) river in modern day Iraq That was where civilazation was at the time, that esentially was the world. Now that being said it makes it easier to understand my second point; how they could have gotten two of every animal? The animals they got onto the boat were the only known animals. Maybe some sheep and pigs, few others that were around and important back then. It wouldn't have been two either, just whatever they could find. Next, the ship. They've sspeculated that the most logical way for Noah to have a ship was if he was a trader, not a farmer like what is said in the bible or where ever. The ship (it was more like a big boat) wouldn't be shaped like a convential boat. It would have been like other boats at the time. It would have had maybe four large baskets, maybe 7 feet deep by 7 feet across, nearly completely submerged in water holding it up. On top of that would have been a platform, and above that another platform, the whole thing being maybe 30 feet across. If you've ever seen a picture of Noah in a kids story book or something we looks like an old man with a long white beard wearing a long white robe. That's also wrong. We're talking about the middle east, it was hot as fuck. He would not have worn a massive robe. He would have looked like all the other men of the time. No shirt, a long kilt, shaved head and a lot of eye makeup was the style at the time.

This whole story about the flood is most likely true. Similiar stories have been recorded in Indian and Babylonian scripts.

[This message has been edited by WristSlitter (edited 04-20-2004).]

It is my opinion that the authors of the bible had no problem with unrestricted use of hyperbole.

quote:Originally posted by WristSlitter:

The animals they got onto the boat were the only known animals. Maybe some sheep and pigs, few others that were around and important back then.

So what happened to all the other animals not on the ark?

And what's hyperbole?

quote:Originally posted by Lil' bag o' Waggy Bash:

So what happened to all the other animals not on the ark?

And what's hyperbole?

I don't know? they lived, provided they wern't close enough to one of the rivers that they drowned.

quote:Originally posted by Lil' bag o' Waggy Bash:

So what happened to all the other animals not on the ark?

They all died, of course.

Of course, Noah's Ark is just a rehash of the Epic of Gilgamesh which is a conjugation of Sumerian flood myths, so it has nothing to do with reality if that's what you're asking.

quote:Originally posted by Dark_Magneto:

They all died, of course.

Of course, Noah's Ark is just a rehash of the Epic of Gilgamesh which is a conjugation of Sumerian flood myths, so it has nothing to do with reality if that's what you're asking.



Ah ok. You seem pretty dang clever, coming up with words like "gilgamesh" and "conjugation" and being an administrator and all, so I'll take your word for it http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif) Never heard that one before though. Mad! Cheers http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

Hex, i think you have a point there with the hyperbole. 78% of all problems with the bible i've heard come from the (edit)Genesis. This book has existed as an oral tradition for years and years before it was ever written down. So saying that it is a fairy tale, I don't think is really unfair to say. That being said, there is definite evidence that a catastrophic flood actually happened around turkey near the Black Sea.

Remember, the hebrews were going to be God's chosen people so the rest of the world and animals kind of doesn't matter because it was a specific group of people God was trying to wipe clean.

Dont Know What Hyperbole means? Go Here: www.dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com)

And always remember: Stay In School.

[This message has been edited by theBishop (edited 04-21-2004).]

My Religon teacher in my old High School told me that its just a story to make you see Gods power. Meaning he though it was bullshit too. I then transfered out of the school and became an Atheist.

"The opening chapters of Genesis (1-11) are typically thought to be mythological explanations derived from earlier versions of the story found in the ancient Near East. But this view chooses only to notice the similarities between Genesis and the creation stories in other ancient cultures. If we can propose derivation of the human race from one family, plus general revelation, some lingering traces of the true historical account would be expected. The differences are more important. Babylonian and Sumerian accounts describe the creation as the product of a conflict among finite gods. When one god is defeated and split in half, the River Euphrates flows from one eye and the Tigris from the other. Humanity is made of the blood of an evil god mixed with clay. These tales display the kind of distortion and embellishment to be expected when a historical account becomes mythologized...The common assupmtion that the Hebrew account is simply a purged and simplified version of the Babylonian legend is fallacious. In the Ancient Near East, the rule is tha simple accounts or traditions give rise (by accretion and embellishment) to elaborate legends, but not the reverse. So the evidence supports the view that Genesis was not myth made into history. Rather, the extrabiblical accounts were history turned into myths" -McDowell/ Geisler

Right people, this arguement has been done many times before, so im going to post a long excerpt from a peice of material that was donated to me when i was questioning this very story.... its not hard to read, and is intresting and may put a new point of view on the flood to many of you. here goes...

What About the Flood?

26 Many point to another supposed contradiction between the Bible and modern science. In the book of Genesis, we read that thousands of years ago the wickedness of men was so great that God determined to destroy them. However, he instructed the righteous man Noah to build a large wooden vessel, an ark. Then God brought a flood upon mankind. Only Noah and his family survived, together with representatives of all the animal species. The Flood was so great that “all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens came to be covered.”—Genesis 7:19.

27 Where did all the water come from to cover the whole earth? The Bible itself answers. Early in the creation process, when the expanse of the atmosphere began to take shape, there came to be “waters . . . beneath the expanse” and “waters . . . above the expanse.” (Genesis 1:7; 2 Peter 3:5) When the Flood came, the Bible says: “The floodgates of the heavens were opened.” (Genesis 7:11) Evidently, the “waters . . . above the expanse” fell and provided much of the water for the inundation.

28 Modern textbooks are inclined to discount a universal flood. So we have to ask: Is the Flood just a myth, or did it really happen? Before answering that, we should note that later worshipers of Jehovah accepted the Flood as genuine history; they did not regard it as a myth. Isaiah, Jesus, Paul, and Peter were among those who referred to it as something that really happened. (Isaiah 54:9; Matthew 24:37-39; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20, 21; 2 Peter 2:5; 3:5-7) But there are questions that have to be answered about this universal Deluge.

The Floodwaters

29 First, is not the idea of the whole earth’s being flooded too farfetched? Not really. Indeed, to some extent the earth is still flooded. Seventy percent of it is covered by water and only 30 percent is dry land. Moreover, 75 percent of the earth’s fresh water is locked up in glaciers and polar ice caps. If all this ice were to melt, the sea level would rise much higher. Cities like New York and Tokyo would disappear.

30 Further, The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level.”14 So, if everything were leveled out—if the mountains were flattened and the deep sea basins filled in—the sea would cover the whole earth to a depth of thousands of meters.

31 For the Flood to have happened, the pre-Flood sea basins would have to have been shallower, and the mountains lower than they are now. Is this possible? Well, one textbook says: “Where the mountains of the world now tower to dizzy heights, oceans and plains once, millions of years ago, stretched out in flat monotony. . . . The movements of the continental plates cause the land both to rear up to heights where only the hardiest of animals and plants can survive and, at the other extreme, to plunge and lie in hidden splendor deep beneath the surface of the sea.”15 Since the mountains and sea basins rise and fall, it is apparent that at one time the mountains were not as high as they are now and the great sea basins were not as deep.

32 What happened to the floodwaters after the Flood? They must have drained into the sea basins. How? Scientists believe that the continents rest on huge plates. Movement of these plates can cause changes in the level of the earth’s surface. In some places today, there are great underwater abysses more than six miles [more than 10 km] deep at the plate boundaries.16 It is quite likely that—perhaps triggered by the Flood itself—the plates moved, the sea bottom sank, and the great trenches opened, allowing the water to drain off the land.

Traces of the Flood?

33 If we grant that a great flood could have happened, why have scientists found no trace of it? Perhaps they have, but they interpret the evidence some other way. For example, orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Very likely, then, some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age.

34 Similar mistakes have been made. Concerning the time when scientists were developing their theory of ice ages, we read: “They were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages; formations once identified as glacial moraines have been reinterpreted as beds laid down by mudflows, submarine landslides and turbidity currents: avalanches of turbid water that carry silt, sand and gravel out over the deep-ocean floor.”18

35 Another evidence for the Flood appears to exist in the fossil record. At one time, according to this record, great saber-toothed tigers stalked their prey in Europe, horses larger than any now living roamed North America, and mammoths foraged in Siberia. Then, all around the world, species of mammals became extinct. At the same time, there was a sudden change of climate. Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. Alfred Wallace, the well-known contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered that such a widespread destruction must have been caused by some exceptional worldwide event.19 Many have argued that this event was the Flood.

36 An editorial in the magazine Biblical Archaeologist observed: “It is important to remember that the story of a great flood is one of the most widespread traditions in human culture . . . Nevertheless behind the oldest traditions found in Near Eastern sources, there may well be an actual flood of gigantic proportions dating from one of the pluvial periods . . . many thousands of years ago.”20 The pluvial periods were times when the surface of the earth was much wetter than now. Freshwater lakes around the world were much larger. It is theorized that the wetness was caused by heavy rains associated with the end of the ice ages. But some have suggested that on one occasion the extreme wetness of the earth’s surface was a result of the Flood.

Mankind Did Not Forget

37 Geology professor John McCampbell once wrote: “The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism [the Flood] and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.”21

38 That the Flood did happen is seen in the fact that mankind never forgot it. All around the world, in locations as far apart as Alaska and the South Sea Islands, there are ancient stories about it. Native, pre-Columbian civilizations of America, as well as Aborigines of Australia, all have stories about the Flood. While some of the accounts differ in detail, the basic fact that the earth was flooded and only a few humans were saved in a man-made vessel comes through in nearly all versions. The only explanation for such a widespread acceptance is that the Flood was a historical event.

39 Thus, in essential features the Bible is in harmony with modern science. Where there is a conflict between the two, the scientists’ evidence is questionable. Where they agree, the Bible is often so accurate that we have to believe it got its information from a superhuman intelligence. Indeed, the Bible’s agreement with proved science provides further evidence that it is God’s word, not man’s.

This was sent to me by email from a Jehovahs wittness a while ago (he is a friend of mine). I dont know what the source is, but it is most probably a peice of JW literature. Hope it was informative http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

wut about all the evil ducks??? i mean say im a duck "we usually swim here but now be swim way up here... big f***n deal" man and all the evil fish damn... this is just some stuff i wonder about

noahs arc was a babalonian story( i think ) chrisitans jus plagurised it the bastards, noah was a rich merchan not some grate godly person, there main trade was beer, and the arc was subosed to be 4 boats teathered toether with a large area built over it, teh animals were for trad, and such, jus read the babalonian clay tablets, there all carved with teh stories, dam jews (christians wernt around then so i guess calling teh christians plagurists is a lil inacurate)

the whole thing about the ark being a story derived form other religions i reckon would be the most appropriate explanation of its appearance in the bible. this is because that was what christianity was best at, taking other religious concepts and stories and incorporating them into christianity. this is because its a lot easier to convert people to your religion if its very similar to their old one, all they have to do is remember new names and a few new concepts and there christians. this can be seen in the whole christmas and easter thing. i cant remember exactly which holidays they were but the pagan religions put significance on these dates as well, they used them as new year dates or days of the wood or some shit. in order to easily convert pagans they took their holidays and turned them into christian holidays so they could accept it more easily.

the idea that the ark was actually real and could actually hold all these animals and shit i reckon is complete bullshit. remember, the bible isnt real its just a collection of stories. sure some might be real or based on reality but the majority is just bullshit so trying to justify the story is kinda pointless usually. just take a look at the bible contradictions on totse, they blatantly contradict each other all the time and yet its still meant to be the exact word of god, hence, its mostly bullshit.

Fact is, theres no single thick layer of mud and silt jam packed with fossils, which is what I'd expect if there was a world wide flood.

quote:Originally posted by stealthdonkey:

Fact is, theres no single thick layer of mud and silt jam packed with fossils, which is what I'd expect if there was a world wide flood.

but there is recent sea shells on the tops of the highest mountains. that means water had to be there at some point. and how do you explain quick frozen wolly mammoths, which were so quickly frozen that the food in there mouths and stomachs are still edible, and indeed these mammoths are so well preserved that scientists can extract sperm from them.

Niether of those do much to corroborate a flood happening though. Simply put, if there was a worldwide flood, the sedimentary layers would show it, and there would be no doubt as to its happening. Without that proof though, something that would absolutely have to be there to give a worldwide flood any credibility, just makes the story a fairytale.

HAHAHA.....If the world flooded, what in the fuck did they eat.....Even IF they did have food on the boat when the flood ended, all of the trees and everything would be dead. I could go on about how illogical noah's ark is all day long....literally!!! I am just so overwhelmed by the stupidity of the whole thing, so I do not think it deserves my whole days time. Bye-bye

One major detail that no one has mentioned is the reproduction and evolutionary facts. It is impossible for everyont to believe that Noah, (a Middle Eastern Man) could be the father to the ENTIRE HUMAN RACE! How do you explain whites, blacks, asian peoples? The people that have dark skin are like that because for thousands of years they have been in the hot sun. The reason why im white is because my ancestors did not spend all their time in 120 degree weather. Religon has made its last stand, these fairy tales do not make sense anymore. It would be impossible for any life at all to sustain after a flood of that magnutatude. Even if he were able to get two of every creature. They eventually would all die off because they inbreaded too much. Finally I suggest maybe this great flood was really the glaciers melting when the end of the ice age came. Or maybe its just an ancient fairy tale made up by a prostitute 2300 years ago when it was a rainy day and she couldnt get any money.

Religon sucks, become an Atheist

quote:Originally posted by nevermind:

but there is recent sea shells on the tops of the highest mountains. that means water had to be there at some point.

Or that the mountains weren't always taller than the sea.

also, how recent are these sea shells?