DISMANTLING Top Objections to Noah’s Ark

[@IluzjaRecords]

Thanks!

[@maegnuz]

Awesome series!

[@bobwilkinson2008]

Awesome as in utter rubbish?

[@logicalatheist1065]

@@bobwilkinson2008 exactly

[@mozzarellatherat9687]

@@bobwilkinson2008what part about it is rubbish? He is only explaining the plausibility of dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark. just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s rubbish.

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@mozzarellatherat9687 It's all rubbish. It's not a question of liking it or not. We know dinosaurs lived until about 60 million years ago and we know the flood never happened. So to suggest the two are linked in any way is ridiculous.

[@snakewithnolegs]

Dad left this bro when he was 3 no doubt

[@ajmittendorf]

I love you guys. May God continue to RICHLY bless you, one and all.

[@snakewithnolegs]

If he's real, he's cursed them with stupidity

[@ajmittendorf]

@@snakewithnolegs Well, it sounds like "snake" might be a good name for you. Nicely chosen.

[@earthisasphere]

@@ajmittendorf His comment is of base, but only slightly. I don't think Calvin is stupid. I think he is a lying grifter. That would make you gullible for believing him though...

[@ajmittendorf]

@@earthisasphere Not if you're wrong, and based on my considerable study and knowledge, you are wrong.

[@earthisasphere]

@@ajmittendorf Yeah, more "Trust me bro..." from the YEC crowd. I have studied these topics quite a bit myself. I was raised a YEC so I am well versed it that. It really didn't take much study at all to figure out they were lying about a lot of things though. So I am pretty certain you didn't actually study real science...

[@Telorion]

Thanks and God bless! 🙏🙂

[@Tuishimi]

I think much of this video makes it the best you've made in this series. At least in reference to the speculation in the paleontological world.

[@dennishagans6339]

And this is what I have come to expect from science over my 65 years, what is scientific Orthodoxy today is tossed out and some explanation posted tomorrow. I am quite confident that most of what I was taught in school has been revised several times over by now

[@plainsman]

That's because as science finds new and stronger evidence on a particular subject, it revises its view to encompass that evidence, unlike religions that remain in stasis forever.

[@dennishagans6339]

@@plainsman So you are just hunky dory that what science claims as fact today, can be overturned tomorrow, and what you call stasis has a better word, stability, The true gospel has not changed in 2,000 years, ill take that stability over truth that changes almost on a daily basis. every day of the week. The big Bang, so what is it, well nothing exploded and created everything, time, space, Hydrogen, Helium, and some lithium. in a big bang universe, you can't wait for it to happen as there is no place or time in which to wait.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Learning news things is so hard, isn’t it?

[@dennishagans6339]

@@Bomtombadi1 When what you teach as truth today, will be thrown out tomorrow by new "discoveries" you are teaching lies, if it's true until something new comes and changes it, then what you had taught as truth becomes a lie. and you are down with that... your beliefs are unstable as water, as water will take whatever form it finds itself in. by the way, the stability I have in Christ keeps me calm in a world full of chaos, and war, I do not have to worry about any of this, as we have been told these things would happen.

[@earthisasphere]

@@dennishagans6339 This is a complete mischaracterization of science. Do you want your doctors to use medicines and techniques from 200 yrs ago? No? Then why wouldn't you want the other sciences to use new knowledge to update ideas as well? Also, no one except ignorant creationists claim the Big Bang was an explosion. And just as a fun fact, the Big Bang was first proposed by a Catholic Priest.

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

John 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 1 John 4:8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Revelation 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

[@mutantthegreat7963]

I think that given the fact we need to assume that God invoked miracles by bringing the animals to the ark in the first place, it is unnecessary to speculate on how the animals survived or how they were fed. God obviously worked miracles during this time and this should be sufficient. We don't need to rationalize parts of it.

[@kurtdejgaard]

Correct. The rational answer for a believer is that we have no rational answer (followed by - "I don't need any, in order to believe")

[@rf7477]

You went from "we need to assume that God invoked miracles" to "God obviously worked miracles". How did an assumption become so obvious? Um, what parts are you gonna try and rationalize? If you need miracles to float your boat you can make it out of sponge.

[@kurtdejgaard]

@@rf7477 The rationale is the same for both faith and science: We can accept that we don't have the answers to everything and live with it just fine. The mistake of Young Earth Creationists is their (desperate) need to have an answer to everything, as if the Old Testament is the ultimate science encyclopedia. It is not. And there is no ultimate science encyclopedia. If there was, I'd be out of a job as a scientist. Yet I can promise you there'll be plenty for me to do for the rest of my career - and for countless careers in science, after me.

[@earthisasphere]

But why did he leave behind evidence that says he never did any of this? That makes his evidence lies, and that would make him a liar....

[@kurtdejgaard]

@@earthisasphere Who are you talking about? I can't find the context to your statement.

[@vikingskuld]

Hey great video thank you.

[@feuermetalz]

Thanks for explaining this, it has been on my mind for years and never found a decent answer

[@Johnny_Eh-theist]

You still haven't....Calvin still hasn't presented a remotely plausable hypothesis

[@earthisasphere]

I wonder why Calvin doesn't provide evidence for his claim? Ah yes, because he doesn't have any.

[@markstone5593]

God help you if you believe a word this fool has to say

[@shadowandreality]

​@earthisasphere I wonder why the haters never present any evidence against it. Ahh yes, because they don't have any. You see how useless such a statement is?

[@earthisasphere]

@@shadowandreality I have presented evidence all over many of his message boards. The flood could not have happened for many reasons. Take coral for example. We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Eniwetok atoll if you want more info

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

Thank you AIG 🙏 blessings in Christ

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Watching now, AIG 🙏✝️🕊️ God bless you

[@wileytheacmesalesman7760]

I’m a Christian and believe the Bible 100% and I also love the Jurassic Park series. The Bible is fact, movies are fiction, and fiction is fun sometimes.

[@kirkjgries3527]

God could have made several kinds to sleep while on the ark, along with meat eaters to eat grasses while also on the ark.

[@daviddavenport9350]

Speculation through supernatural means Kirk????

[@earthisasphere]

Why would meat eaters eat grasses while they were on the ark?

[@marveloussoftware4914]

Meat eaters eating geass??? Not possible for them to survive. It doesn't matter anyway since grass or meat you would need a couple of arks of food to feed the animals. If you believe the tale pf noah is real then you might as well believe the story of humpty dumpty is real. They are both equally likely.

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

Amen AIG 🙏

[@Cap661]

This is fantastic! I think it is also worth considering that in the world before the flood, it is possible that most, if not all creatures,were able to survive just from eating plants. Plant life probably offered such abundant nutrients because of the rich soil with little exposure to dangerous elements outside the earth’s atmosphere. There would have been abundant irrigation of the soil with the constant moisture. Besides, it is only AFTER the flood that the Lord tells mankind, in this case Noah, that they may now kill animals to eat-“Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭9‬:‭3‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

[@Bomtombadi1]

Wow! This is so unbelievably dumb!

[@marveloussoftware4914]

​@@Bomtombadi1yeah. Religious people say all kinds of ludicrous things to cling to their fairy tales.

[@MrInsaint]

God knows best!

[@guylelanglois6642]

Well done Calvin

[@Bomtombadi1]

Yes, lies are to be applauded, aren’t they?

[@Tuishimi]

Actually Utahraptor, not Deinonychus. But point taken. :D

[@phildiamond8549]

How did the kangaroos get to Australia? Hop?

[@johnglad5]

Yes, they hopped.

[@CreationvsEvolution]

#1 Noah had over 100 years to prepare for the flood #2 he was getting his instructions directly from God #3 he was also getting supernatural help from God There is no science that is going to be able to answer all of these questions.

[@Bomtombadi1]

#1 one man building a ship of that size will not complete it in 100 years #2 who TF cares? #3 Christian fan fiction. “It’s true because science won’t be able to answer your magical woo woo,” is not a valid argument.

[@CreationvsEvolution]

@@Bomtombadi1 #1 the Bible disagrees and who said he was building it alone? He had sons. #2 we do #3 disgruntled atheist

[@earthisasphere]

@@CreationvsEvolution There is absolutely zero evidence for a global flood, but we find all kinds of evidence for ancient regional floods. All of geology, archeology, paleontology, history and much of biology and chemistry all show the flood couldn't have happened. Believe in a god if you wish, but stop denying the science.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@CreationvsEvolution #1 it took tens to hundreds of thousands of man hours, hundreds of workers and more than 3 years to build an ark replica. How do you suppose 8 people could accomplish this? #2 and #3 are nothing more than, “Well god can anything,” escape hatches.

[@CreationvsEvolution]

@@Bomtombadi1 100 years......3 years.......

[@judymay903]

Been wondering if the subject of hibernation would ever come up. I thought of that years ago. That would reduce labor in caring for that many animals with only 8 people to do it. You gotta remember that for the first few weeks the tempest was terrible. If it were not for angels guiding & protecting the ark, it would have been overcome & would have sunk!

[@earthisasphere]

Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also know as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km think with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Eniwetok atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@daviddavenport9350]

Soooo...magic again judy? and do you realize how few animals actually hibernate?

[@vernoncleveland6806]

Thanks again. Amen.

[@juliebaker6969]

Q. How would Noahget rid of dinosaur poop? A. Shovel it overboard.

[@Bomtombadi1]

If all the animals were below deck, how do you propose that be does that?

[@earthisasphere]

For over 7,000 animals everyday (That is the number AIG provides)? And 8 people changed all the bedding everyday after the animals soiled it? Come on.

[@tobias4411]

Wake up! There is no scientific evidence for a global flood; only local flood events have been documented. Eight scientific fields that disprove the possibility of a global flood include geology, archaeology, paleontology, meteorology, zoology, anthropology, dendrochronology, and comparative mythology. Stories of a great flood are common in many ancient cultures. This suggests that they may be based on real events, such as local floods or natural disasters experienced by early human societies, which were later exaggerated to extreme proportions. Geologists have found evidence for a local flood that may have affected the Black Sea region around 5600 BCE, potentially inspiring such stories. This discovery also helps explain the prevalence of flood mythologies in various cultures. It's important to understand that myths often contain elements of truth or historical events, but they typically incorporate supernatural or symbolic elements that go beyond mere exaggeration.

[@effigy42]

@@earthisasphereit was a herd of animals for food to feed his family

[@earthisasphere]

@@effigy42 Now you are just trolling... stop.

[@suggesttwo]

3:00 that's why they want to see the dinosaurs movies at 3-5. So they don't question it.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

The flood of Noah's time was both natural and supernatural. God did many things during that time that science can never explain. Same goes for the creation week.

[@sciencerules2825]

Once you start invoking supernatural miracles you've thrown all pretense of a scientific explanation out the window.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

@@sciencerules2825 once you throw out the supernatural, you throw out any chance of figuring out true history

[@sciencerules2825]

@@Abidingingrace-p6z No one has ever used MAGIC! to figure out actual history.

[@Abidingingrace-p6z]

@@sciencerules2825 good thing it wasn't MAGIC then

[@sciencerules2825]

@@Abidingingrace-p6z If it wasn't supernatural GodMAGIC then what process was used?

[@williamburroughs9686]

Jurassic Ark? I'm might tell everyone you said that. 😁 Well there is one thing that they did not have to worry about on the Ark. Water. lol I would think while the Ark stayed above water, it would have been very wet in most places. Also one thing that nobody ever seems to talk about are the water animals. It is interesting that when God talks about destroying things, he doesn't talk about the animals in the water at all.

[@DarrylSteele69]

he doesn't talk about the animals in the water at all. God wasn't destroying his creation, be it on land or water, he was preserving the remnants of it that had not been either contaminated on land or was collateral damage from the violence that had spread across the land from us. Hence the ark being their only form of survival. gen 6:11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. The sea animals were able to survive the deluge, so didn't require the same needs as the land animals. it would have been very wet in most places. Read the scriptures. gen 6:14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out.

[@samuelrodriguez9199]

We have no reason to doubt God.

[@sciencerules2825]

We have every reason to doubt some human interpretations of scripture, especially when those interpretations are directly contradicted by everything we've learned through science.

[@nathancook2852]

The "This is not complicated" on the thumbnail is the most honest thing I have ever seen AIG put on a title or thumbnail. The flood couldn't have happened and therefor, it is not complicated. Good job AIG!

[@TheRundum]

Best work AIG has done in years

[@salty82ndveteran]

You do realize that flood stories are in every single culture on our planet and they have been developed independently of each other which leads me to believe, as a full-blooded Christian, that the flood actually happened. Plus there is tons of physical evidence to support the notion of the global flood.

[@OceanWaves101]

Pretty sure dinosaurs were not monsters

[@Jewonastick]

Pretty sure you don't know shit about what sort of Dinosaurs there were.

[@jaysons6101]

@@Jewonastick Pretty sure you dont know ANYTHING that you're speaking about lmaoo

[@Jewonastick]

@@jaysons6101 You are on a young earth creationists account that claims a 600 year old man build a magical zoo boat.... Compared to those who believe that shit I'm a fkn genius.

[@jaysons6101]

@@Jewonastick you legit deleted your original comment...

[@Jewonastick]

@@jaysons6101 no I didn't. AIG does that often...

[@poliincredible770]

Great video!!!

[@daviddavenport9350]

Yes as dark comedy....

[@poliincredible770]

@@daviddavenport9350 as factual information.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

​@@poliincredible770It's not factual. Your desire for it to be true does not make it true.

[@poliincredible770]

@@vladtheemailer3223 it is factual. Your desire for it to be untrue doesn't make it untrue. Please accept Christ.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

@poliincredible770 Facts are something that should be demonstrable. I'll wait for you to do that.

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. Peter continues to answer the mocking of the false teachers working among the Christians in the early church. They ask, "Where is this coming Jesus promised?" They teach that it's been too long; Christ is not coming. Don't resist immorality; there will be no judgment. In verse 8, Peter urged his readers to remember that the Lord is not bound by human time. For God, a thousand years is like a day and vice versa. Peter's point is that God does not suffer the limitations of time, or confusion about it, the way human beings do. Here in this verse, Peter insists that we cannot apply human demands about time to the promises of God. He is not slow in keeping His promise. God is the one who made the schedule: He cannot be "late." Instead, God keeps every promise at the perfect time for His glory and for the good of those He loves.

[@rf7477]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul all said jesus would return in their lifetime. Mark 13.30, Matthew 10.23, 16.28, 24.34 Luke 21.32 1 Corinthians 7.29-31 and 1 Thessalonians 4.13-18.

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

See article: Did Jesus Say He’d Return within His Disciples’ Lifetimes? gospel coalition

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

See also: What did Jesus mean when He said, “this generation will not pass”? Got questions

[@RC6790]

The Lord is patient, not wanting anyone to perish? Why then did he kill so many, did he run out of patience? Why did he ok slavery, why did he allow women to be worth a fraction of a man - is he really that big of a dick? If he set up things and is a perfect loving, all powerful God, why is there evil? If he can not stop the evil he is not all powerful, if he sees it and does nothing he is not loving or most likely he does not exist!

[@IAMhassentyou-w5m]

@RC6790 sounds like you have a lot of anger and you don't really want answers. You just want to mock God and his people. There is no response to that and no response will be good enough because your heart is stubborn.

[@Ciprian-IonutPanait]

the solution is simpler. The animals fastened in a form of what is now called hibernation

[@davidgardner863]

Simple to a simple mind.

[@Ciprian-IonutPanait]

@@davidgardner863 is actually not simple to find simple solutions to complicated problems. That is why you get paid a lot

[@samburns3329]

A literal Noah's Flood / Ark was scientifically disproven over two centuries ago. For example: 1. The world is full of geologic features (angular unconformities, the vertically incised meanders in Goosenecks State Park, the Columbia Basalt Group) impossible to form in a one year one time Flood. 2. We have lots of archaeological evidence of cities and cultures (Jericho is 11,000 years old, The Jiahu culture in China is 9500 years old) which lived right through the Flood without noticing. 3. Modern genetics shows no extant species underwent a severe genetic bottleneck only 4400 years ago. If the Ark story were true ALL extant species would show such a bottleneck. 4. Besides well established radiometric dating we also have lots of non-radiometric proxies (tree rings, lake varves, ice cores) showing the Earth is way older than 6000 years. Arguing if animals could survive a year on Noah's Ark is like arguing if the Starship Enterprise could beat the Death Star in a 1-on-1 battle. It may be intellectually amusing but has no connection to anything in reality. 🙂

[@samburns3329]

No matter how often I post this I never get any explanations from the creationists here. 😎

[@bobwilkinson2008]

@@samburns3329 Don't hold your breath on that one

[@taylorthetunafish5737]

@@samburns3329 Maybe it's too many things at once. Cite one of your points and see where it goes.

[@samburns3329]

@@taylorthetunafish5737 Pick any one and we'll discuss why it disproves a literal Noah's Flood only 4400 years ago.

[@taylorthetunafish5737]

@@samburns3329 Perhaps I wrote that funny. I mean try posting again to the creationists with just one of your points if you want a response. I think you've too much going on in your post for them to process. Does that make sense?

[@madcinder257]

I think the answer to the Jurassic series 'Velociraptors' is simple, they're just Deinonychus but someone either didn't like the name or didn't know how to pronounce it, so they called them Velociraptors. Deinonychus is a cooler name in my opinion. The dinosaurs look really cool in those movies, though, and I hate every attempt to bird-ize them. Anyway, for Noah, it's way easier to contain sleeping babies than angry hungry adults.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Velociraptor was a cooler-sounding name, and there were most definitely bird-sized dinosaurs. As for Noah, you forget that sleeping babies also have to eat. They must also eat proportionally more food than their adult counterparts in order to grow.

[@madcinder257]

@@Bomtombadi1 First, I said my opinion. I like Deinonychus better. Second, I did not say bird-sized. I know there are bird-sized dinosaurs. I said bird-ized. Very different. Third, I did not forget that sleeping babies also have to eat. You forget, it seems, to read my comment. I said 'easier to contain'. Feed, too, by the way.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@madcinder257 my mistake for misunderstanding. the similarities between dinosaurs and modern day birds can’t be ignored. I don’t know what the issue is. Sleeping babies are easier to contain. They also grow very quickly and need a lot of energy to do so. Do you see this logistical issue posed?

[@madcinder257]

@@Bomtombadi1 Babies do grow pretty quickly. Not fast enough to outweigh the benefits of having them instead of adults, at least in the case of dinosaurs or really any other large animal. 40 days isn't long enough for a baby to become an adult. Similarities are fine, I know and recognize the similarities between dinosaurs and birds. What I take issue with is the obsessive befeathering they've been subjected to. There are marks on some bones that we think might mean feathers. I'm not convinced, firstly, but regardless we only see those marks on certain dinosaur bones. The largest of which is smaller than a Deinonychus.

[@Bomtombadi1]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@madcinder257they didn’t need to become adults. They were constantly growing and could easily outgrow whatever tiny enclosure they were allocated. That’s one. Two, these animals needed more food to continue their accelerated growth while floating for a year until flood waters receded. Third, what did they eat after all the water was gone? The “be-feathering” is actual based on observations of bone structure. Birds have inserts for feathers in their bones. Dinosaurs had the same thing. They aren’t just “some marks on a few bones.” We see these marks on theropod dinosaurs.

[@logicalatheist1065]

Noah's ark / biblical flood never happened. Never seen a creationist support their claims...

[@bradenleaf7997]

Man open your eyes.

[@earthisasphere]

@@bradenleaf7997 To what? What evidence was provided in the video? None, just speculation, and all of geology, paleontology, and much of chemistry and biology disproves the flood.

[@logicalatheist1065]

@@bradenleaf7997 ok? ... Still fiction

[@bradenleaf7997]

@@logicalatheist1065 Noah's Ark's remains have been found on the exact mountain that the Bible said. If you believe in fairy tales, believe in the lie of evolution. Which has been masterly crafted by the devil to purposefully lead people astray from God's perfect will for their lives.

[@jeffc5474]

They know where Noah’s Ark is. You can go there in Turkey.

[@isaiahfiftyfiveseven]

A 20 miles per hour TRex is still way faster than a human.

[@iriemon1796]

Foxes and dingos and chihuahuas "descended" from wolves? How do wolves produced dingo pups? Can you say "evolution"?

[@calvinsmith7575]

Its a process called natural selection- which isn't evolution because it only involves reshuffling pre-existing genetic information- not the creation of brand new genetic information which is wht evolution would require...

[@Bomtombadi1]

Foxes aren’t even dogs. They are related to dogs, belonging to the family canidae, but are a non-canis genera. So this is something even Calvin gets wrong.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@calvinsmith7575 The process of biological replication produces roughly 100 new genetic mutations in every individual in every generation. That is *new genetic information* which is then subjected to natural selection the same as existing genetic sequences are. The neutral and beneficial new information is kept and added to the gene pool. You've had that explained to you a hundred times yet you still choose to lie about it.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@joefriday2275 That is what a lying troll who doesn't understand evolution would claim, yes.

[@calvinsmith7575]

@@sciencerules2825 Mutations break things, they don't write functional new code for forms functions and features that never existed before. Degeneration is the norm, which fits exactly with biblical history of a very good world deteriorating over time...

[@tomesplin4130]

I’d like to understand how 1,000 kinds of animals on the ark became 10 million separate species in a few hundred years after disembarking from the ark. That’s extremely rapid micro evolution.

[@maylingng4107]

Explanation: The bible story of the Ark is just another hoax from religion.

[@craigbachman5765]

Minor variations in the babies happens constantly.

[@anttisalminen1110]

Noah got out of the ark, and got drunk, what a regular guy!

[@davidgardner863]

So how were all these fruits and veggies picked in huge quantities and preserved for over a year?

[@earthisasphere]

The meat would be an even bigger problem.

[@OlegLankin]

What about grains? Seeds and nuts? Dried meat? Dry fruits? All hard to preserve, no?

[@davidgardner863]

@@OlegLankin , And just who is going to harvest and process all this seed, grain, fruit, and meat for 14,000 animals for a year? You’re talking about a major industry in the days when everything depended on human labor. And what about all the creatures that have specialized dietary requirements? One of the many reasons why the story doesn’t work.

[@earthisasphere]

@@OlegLankin Carnivores don't eat dried meat. It is actually bad from many of them.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Calvin is back in the comments section! He likes to do this when he finds engagement low on a video.

[@earthisasphere]

But he never makes a substantial comment. Much like he never makes a substantial video...

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@earthisasphere he will just drop a frustratingly vague comment to get people riled up but run away and never expand on it

[@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n]

@@Bomtombadi1 "WHY WONT THEY ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE ENDLESSLY GASLIT BY MY HALF BAKED RAVENOUS CRITICISMS BASED ON MY OWN ASSUMPTIONS" Ah Yes. "Reee"

[@anttisalminen1110]

Noah had a pet dino!

[@MarSchlosser]

As did the emporers of china, pictures included. As did the Ica people and so on.

[@anttisalminen1110]

​@@MarSchlosserlike a photograf?

[@earthisasphere]

@@MarSchlosser Oh, man, and you are calling other people science deniers. Stop.

[@jimpassi349]

some people say it was a DNA BANK / they could not all fit in a boat / // what would you take babys or big ones // i think there was more than 1 boat maybe as much as 6 different boats maybe thats how we get different colors people that makes sence to me // if a DNA BANK you try it you can only take as mant people only in your family up to 8 // ask your family how to make other things out of them most likely none

[@jimpassi349]

second its not every anamil its every kind // what is a kind

[@samcotten2416]

Isn’t it more likely the Dinosaurs died in the flood?

[@bwtv147]

Go to your next county fair. Examine the livestock confinement equipment. Understand that the only way 8 people could live with and care for 6,000 animals confined in a three story structure for a year without external resupply, powered ventilation, water and food distribution and waste elimination is with magic.

[@earthisasphere]

These people don't get out much...

[@glocksafari]

Well, even if by supernatural miracle of God, nothing changes. The story is not negatively affected by what extent God used His ability to procure and sustain proper conditions.

[@earthisasphere]

@@glocksafari Yeah, there would be geologic evidence. You can't think that much water on earth for that long wouldn't leave evidence behind. And we see none. If a god hid the evidence, why? That is like lying to all of humanity.

[@glocksafari]

@@earthisasphere the topic of this comment thread was about animals surviving, not the geological evidence of the flood. You’re switching topics. Regardless, is there any geological evidence I can point you to for the flood? I’m (assuming) you know what “evidence” there is but don’t believe it (if wrong in my assumption please correct me).

[@haggismcbaggis9485]

@@glocksafari I am not sure why Noah would have to bring food for the animals if God was going to keep everything alive. Noah could have also built the ark out popsicle sticks and glue and it would still be seaworthy thanks to God.

[@SmithSmithson1]

This is what happens when a dogmatic literal interpretation of the bible is taken to the extreme. This is one of the most ludicrous hypothesis and defence of literal interpretation I’ve ever heard. You’re giving Christianity a bad name.

[@CarmenVeranda]

At least they've stopped setting people on fire. Although only fairly recently in the Southern USA.

[@jeffc5474]

Noah’s Ark was located in Turkey and you can travel there.

[@HS-zk5nn]

Pretty much exactly what satan said to eve

[@vladtheemailer3223]

​@@jeffc5474No, it hasn't been located.

[@logicalatheist1065]

@@HS-zk5nn you believe in talking snakes? 🤣😂😂😂🤡

[@asphalthedgehog6580]

The answer is not complicated at all and needs no further research and excuses: the earth is 4 billion years old. That solves all problems, and answers it all.

[@bradenleaf7997]

Ha?

[@joseramonperez9609]

Hi, If we add up the ages of the characters in the Bible from Adam and Eve, the descendants of Noah, the Patriarchs, and the others in the New Testament, and this has already been done computerized, we have the result of 6,000 years which is the age of the Earth, and another fact is that the remains of Noah's Ark are still visible on the mountain to the "East" where 4,500 years ago Noah, his wife, his three sons, Shem, Ham, Japhet, and his three wives landed.

[@nathancook2852]

@@joseramonperez9609 Yeah, take the results from a 2,000 book that has proven to be changed, inaccurate ,and contradictory any number of times, or take modern science. I'll stick with the science.

[@joseramonperez9609]

@@nathancook2852 Hi, every opinion is to be respected, but I only suggest you to give the Bible a chance, so you read just this book of it, the Gospel of "John", and please, after reading it I'd really like to hear your opinion, but, give the Bible a chance.

[@nathancook2852]

@@joseramonperez9609 I've read the Bible. I found the many errors (a bat is not a bird for a quick example), the false prophecies (Nebuchadnezzar was supposed to destroy Egypt so thoroughly in the old testament that no no one would even set foot in Egypt again -oops, that didn't happen), and contradictions (when exactly did the women see Jesus after the "resurrection"?). John, like Mark, had versus added over 200 years after the original manuscript was written. John very likely had an entire chapter added. My opinion is that it is a storybook from 2,000 years ago that holds little to no relevance today. Some Christian values and teachings I, like many, already follow. Others, like women not being able to leave an abusive husband, I think are stupid.

[@daviddavenport9350]

So you are arguing that Hollywood took liberties in portraying Dinosaurs? Is THAT your starting point for a serious discussion? Hollywood has taken liberties in portraying Jesus Christ Himself! Apropos of nothing.......and fatuous besides.

[@TheChadPad]

And you took all that effort to attack not one of his serious claims? I think you all like wasting effort

Some good points but my fellow creationists have problems here. If one accepts dinos wewre on the ark then one is forced to accept a hugh number of creatures. this because the fossil record shows so many. instead i suggest dinosaurs is a false classification. they were simply four legged or two legged creatures within kinds we have today. They were not reptiles. the clue being theropod dinos. they surely were just flightless ground birds however big. Yes the ones on the movies were only the size of turkeys because they are just birds thyat like turkeys became flightless. the sine of creatures was high for all creatures back in the day. even insects. No so called dinos and so called mammals ever are found in any bone sssemblages from the flood or later. never will. They never lived together because they are the same creatures in different bodyplans.

[@Bomtombadi1]

You could suggest this. What you lack is evidence for it.

@@Bomtombadi1 The evidence is the basic facts presented in these matters. Then its a interpretation of them. cwhether evolutionist, creationist, and me and you conclude its all based on figuring things out. The bible teaches kinds. not divisions in nature like dinos, manmals, reptiles etc. So it should be the so called dinos are just kinds. Then in kinds we have today. Just misidentified. my insight on this was when i realized CLEARLY the thetopod dinos, tres etc, were just flightless ground birds. Got it!! They were not reptiles nor dinos.Just dumb birds however teethy and biggy. they did not roar. it follows all dinos were just four legged or two legged critters we know, loove, eat, today. Just morphed. very likely a horse was a vrontosaurus before the flood. not sure but likely. Thus no horses ever will be found with DINOS or in flood deposits.

[@Bomtombadi1]

It’s actually not “just a matter of interpretation.” I know that’s what creationists like to say in order for their story to be on some perceived equal footing to evolution. “Kinds” is a nebulous word with no real meaning beyond “able to bring forth.” Birds are reptiles. They are theropods, like many dinosaurs of their time. All theropods were dinosaurs, but moths all dinosaurs were theropods. Horses are mammals. While they, like all mammals, share common ancestry with dinosaurs, they split much earlier. They did not descend from a brontosaurus.

@@Bomtombadi1 Well I made my case on the anatomy of the theropod being so bird like as no reason not to be a bird. indeed thats why they must say birds are from them. Nope. Its interpretation of basic facts. Plus bibl;;ical boundarys and imagination

[@chrish5791]

So I wonder if Noah sold the home place before the flood hit? Maybe he could’ve traded the property for dried fruits and vegetables for the family or grains and hay for the critters.

[@hansdemos6510]

The Hebrew word "mîn" (rhymes with "green") was always understood to mean what we nowadays call "species", and has exactly that meaning in modern Hebrew. This is clearly illustrated by old paintings of the animals going into the Ark, with zebras, horses and donkeys, as well as lions and tigers etc., species that Mr. Smith's re-interpretation would exclude, patiently waiting in line, as well as by the translation of the word "mîn" in other languages than English. For example, in my native language, Dutch, the word is "soort", and that is also the word we use for "species". It is a recent twist in the interpretation of the English translation of this word, namely "kind", that has enabled mostly North American Biblical literalists to invent a weird and unnecessary justification of the size of the Ark, which, by their own admission, would not be big enough to hold *_literally all_* species of known air breathing land vertebrates. I find it curious and sad, but also funny, that it is their lack of faith in the power of their God to make all species fit in the Ark that drives them to invent pseudo-scientific justifications for their faith in the literal truth of the scriptures they believe came from their God.

[@MarSchlosser]

Nope, kinds, not individual species. Ask the rabbis. That's where YEC teaching on this came from. All species would have to include whales, walrus, and insects LOL. what race was Jesus? the oldest painting we have of him was done in the 15th century.

[@hansdemos6510]

​@@MarSchlosser You said: _" Nope, kinds, not individual species. Ask the rabbis."_ As I stated and as far as I know; in modern Hebrew that is what it means. Look it up, please. You said: _"That's where YEC teaching on this came from."_ Please support your claim with evidence; which rabbis taught this and when, and how was this teaching transferred to Christian literalists? I don't think you can find any quote about this at all, because it is a peculiarity of English translations that use the word "kind", which in the English of the KJV just meant the same concept as we use when we say "species" in English, but which has the added meaning of a more broader type, making the weird re-interpretation of Mr. Smith and his ilk possible. As I already stated, in many other languages, like my own native language, this particular re-interpretation would be impossible or much more problematic. On top of that, the new interpretation of "mîn" as a "kind" on the genus or family level of taxonomy can only have become possible *_after_* the popularization of the theory of evolution, because it depends on the idea that the animals that came off the Ark then evolved and diversified into all the different species we see around us. Therefore it is *_impossible_* that this was somehow an orthodox Jewish view from many hundreds or even thousands of years ago. You said: _"All species would have to include whales, walrus, and insects LOL."_ That is silly. Mr Smith has already told us that we are only talking about air breathing land vertebrates. You said: _"what race was Jesus? the oldest painting we have of him was done in the 15th century."_ Actually the oldest depiction of Jesus is probably from around the year 200 AD. Check out the Alexamenos graffito...

[@Gek177]

Its definitely necessary to appeal to miracles to explain their care.

[@markstone5593]

Delusional disorder, it's the only plausible explanation, poor guy, I feel sorry for him.

[@earthisasphere]

Don't. He knows what he is doing. He is a lying grifter.

[@marveloussoftware4914]

Theres many reasons while the tale of noah is fiction. 1) the ark was unseaworthy. It wouldve snapped in half due to pressure and wavelength. Large wooden ships require metal frames. 2) if the ark did not snap in half then it wouldve filled with water and sunk. All wooden ships require pumps. 3) the ark wasnt large enough to hold all the animals even if you do your "kind" thing. Sorry but do the math, its a fact. 4) noah would need a couple of arks for food and water to keep an ark of animals alive. 5) eight people is insufficient to take care of an ark of animals. Ask any zookeeper. 6) the ark wouldve had toxic levels of ammonia from all the waste. 7) if anything lived then many species wouldve died from genetic diseases from inbreeding. 8) there would be evidence of inbreeding in our DNA if all humans today came from a small set if they would've survived. They may not have survived. 9) much of the aquatic life would've perished. Many species in the oceans require certain levels of salt. It doesn't rain salt water. Also many freshwater species would perish because of the salt. The water would have less salt than some sea creatures need and too much salt for some freshwater creatures. 10) even if everything on the ark survived then everything would die because there would be nothing to eat. 11) if there was a global flood there would be evidence of global salt deposits. There is none. BONUS: The tale of noah was plagiarized from the Epic of Gilgamesh

[@aomana4357]

If god put all the land animals on Earth initially (Day 6) , why didn't he just do that after the flood, instead of this long elaborate, save the animals on an ark plan?

[@THOUGHTCRIME_No1]

@aomana4357 Noah's arch is just a made up story of a medival author with quite some fantasy. Incredible that people believe that this meant seriously.

[@juliebaker6969]

That's easy. God created the Earth to function as a whole. Leaving the animals out of the equation would be like leaving your spleen or pituitary gland out of YOUR construction. All of the pieces are designed to function as a whole, not independently. If the animals had been left out, the plants would have overwhelmed the Earth with oxygen, since the plants breathe the CO² that animals exhale, and animals breathe the oxygen that PLANTS produce. No animals, no ability to reduce excess oxygen. And the slightest spark or even excess heat from plant decomposition would have burned the whole world down like a bonfire soaked in gasoline. Since there would be no animals to eat all the excess plants, when they died off, they would just heap up like giant compost piles, and compost produces heat. Excess heat from composting plants + excess fuel from piles of composting dead plants + excess oxygen those plants produced = the biggest bonfire in HISTORY! So NO, God COULDN'T have merely waited till after the flood to create animals. Not and still have a functional environment to raise human beings in anyway.

[@foxreno956]

​@@THOUGHTCRIME_No1yeah!! It's much better to believe in masonic Science....!!! 🙄 ¿Right?

[@antzag6983]

Isaiah 55:8-9 “for my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are my way your ways,” declares the lord. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts. Maybe it was to show you have to be saved by entering a door like Noah did but this time the door is Jesus Christ.

[@antzag6983]

@@THOUGHTCRIME_No1really, huh you seem quite interested in a fairy tale, enough to watch this video.

[@kurtdejgaard]

(Quote): "However, all modern dog breeds can be traced back to wolves. Which means wolves were likely much closer to the originally created dog kind that God would have sent to Noah. And all current variations of what we call "Canines", such as foxes, dingos, coyotes, etc. has descended from that original pair that left the Ark after the flood". Comment: Which means Darwinian evolution to adapt to their discrete habitats, has played out over a timespan of just 4,500 years. A time span in which foxes (16 pairs of chromosomes) and dogs (38 pairs of chromosomes) must have diverged. Mind you - that's a bigger genetic divergence than between humans and chimps. So who knows: Maybe Young Earth Creationists (YECs) will eventually find that humans and chimps also are descending from the same ancestors on the Ark, that Darwin was right, all along and wrong only in under-estimating how fast molecular evolution actually happens... I am jesting, of course... I'm just trying to point to the fact that all of the pseudo-scientific arguments that AiG and other YECs are propagating, are not just counter-intuitive, they are unfounded in realities. They are Flat Earth Society on steroids. There was no Global Flood around 2500BC, through which the hieroglyphs of Egypt and cuneiform writing of Mesopotamia and Persia, survived "in-situ" along with the local religions, societal hierarchy and rulers, languages and civic societies survived unscathed, non the less.

[@plainsman]

There was no global flood EVER. Such a flood would leave behind evidence contrary to what we see. For instance, why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers, and Antarctica cores go back 420,000 years. A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a unique layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, and a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, yet no such evidence exists.

[@calvinsmith7575]

"Genetic studies show that dogs evolved from wolves and remain as similar to the creatures from which they came as humans with different physical characteristics are to each other, which is to say not much difference at all."- National Geographic June 2002. (I.e., Dog kinds turn into variations of dog kinds. ) If you want to believe any kind of animal turned into another kind over millions of years- I respect your faith. : )

[@kurtdejgaard]

@@calvinsmith7575 You forgot the foxes! Wolves, koyotes and dogs can still interbreed and are evolutionarily close. But you move a good deal further out the "family-tree". And that's where your "science" collapses: You make authoritative statements on the basis of very little insight and essentially no "home work". And you don't need a university education on molecular genetics to realize it. You need only to spend 20 minutes with Google to figure out that the molecular genetics of foxes has diverged from wolves, coyotes and dogs to a very large extent. Their chromosome numbers are staggeringly different. -A genetic divergence that is "Darwin on steroids", even for a molecular biologist like myself. -And to think that this could have happened over a mere 4,500 years? 😄 PS. (quote) "If you want to believe any kind of animal turned into another kind over millions of years- I respect your faith". Comment: You can call science-based facts "faith". But your "respect" becomes a mockery when you call scientists, historians and archaeologists "liars" and "brain washers", when plainly observable facts are on their side. I respect your faith (the same as mine) and your right to believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old. We differ in our beliefs that the Old Testament is historically accurate. You believe it is - you have the right to believe it. But for as long as you make a mockery of science, history and archaeology and for as long as you call them all "liars", while you claim to represent "the truth", there will be opposition to your historical and scientific revisionism. Both are demonstratively false!

[@MarSchlosser]

Kurt, another science denier. do you know what mutations are? A loss of information. A curse, you might say.

[@kurtdejgaard]

@@MarSchlosser Mutations are not "A loss of information". That would require that there is only one correct code. But there isn't. A fox is not a degenerated wolf. A zebra is not a degenerated horse. A polar bear is not a degenerated grizzly bear. All of them are adapted to their environment. In that sense, even Young Earth Creationists will have to agree that natural selection and evolution takes place. We may argue about the time scale...

[@effigy42]

Why havent dinosaurs ever been actually found by anyone ever before? Noone knows one story of a dinosaur being dug up in real life 😂

[@MarSchlosser]

Chinese have been digging them up for ages. American Indians who passed thru Hell's creek would take fossils.

[@daviddavenport9350]

What are you talking about?

[@calvinsmith7575]

I have gone fossil hunting in the badlands of Alberta myself. I can assure you there are lots of dinosaur bones there : )

[@earthisasphere]

@@calvinsmith7575 And yet, you can't define what a dinosaur is. So you don't even know what bones you found....

[@earthisasphere]

Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also know as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km think with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Eniwetok atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@plainsman]

There was no global flood EVER. Such a flood would leave behind evidence contrary to what we see. For instance, why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers, and Antarctica cores go back 420,000 years. A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a unique layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, and a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, yet no such evidence exists.

[@earthisasphere]

@@plainsman If you are responding to me, actually read what I wrote.

[@Jucer_box]

Ok so I read though your entire comment and your arguments are extremely compelling, which thank you for that it got me to do some thinking. Personally I think the earth is about 16,000 years old not 6000 and that's one of the biggest problems with YEC. Is that if you look at the in the bible of Adam to Noah to Abraham to Jacob to Moses to Jesus to now you get roughly this age. Now I'm bad at math so don't take this as fact its a rough estimate. I don't know much about geology but I'm curious do you think the earth's rock layer could recover from a global flood?

[@Jucer_box]

@earthisashere I didn't know this at the time of my reply to your original comment but I looked into it (and I encourage you to do the same). I found out that given enough time rock layers can recover from erosion caused by flooding and so can salt layers. Although salt layers are a little different in that they need sea water to evaporate which leaves behind salt. Limestone also can repair itself via sediment forming over it. Perhaps the rock layers that we do see had more layers at one time that eroded away and no one was there to see it. I'm not a scientist so take this with a grain of salt (pun intended) and look into this yourself God bless you.

[@earthisasphere]

@@Jucer_box My reply to you disappeared. Young earth creationists claim the rock layers were laid down during the flood. However, we know for a fact that floods deposit sediment based on density. That means that if a flood happened, then nowhere on earth should we find more dense layers on top of less dense layers, yet we find that all the time. Evaporites and shale cannot form in water. Limestone needs calm, shallow water, that is littered with massive amounts of calcium carbonate (from shelled organisms) in order to form. After the flood, the layers of rock would have been mud for who knows how long. Canyons would have collapsed. Mountains would have had massive mudslides. There is no evidence of any of that.

[@justinlong6847]

He didn't! That's the simplest answer. For the thousandth time, what is a dinosaur Calvin? You refuse to answer this question.

[@non-international_socialist]

dragons

[@justinlong6847]

@@non-international_socialist what's a dragon?

[@non-international_socialist]

@@justinlong6847 dinosaur

[@justinlong6847]

@@non-international_socialist scientifically what is a dinosaur?

[@Johnny_Eh-theist]

​@@non-international_socialistgood ol anti-intellectual circle talk from someone who doesn't know what dinosaurs OR dragons are lol.....😂😂😂

[@snakewithnolegs]

You didn't actually fully answer the original question, as I commented last time. Also a wooden boat couldn't hold every animal (including prehistoric ones) without breaking

[@shiwadaay07]

You don't know exactly what kind of woods from trees that termites couldn't eat through them. You weren't even born before the great flood. So, none of us know exactly what it looks like unless YOU read the Genesis in the Bible more carefully.

[@ianmonk6211]

You limit God's ability. With Him nothing is impossible. And only 2 of each unclean animal kind minimizes your body count. If it's pre history then no one knows anything about it. But the bible gives us a historical overview from creation. So nothing is pre history. That's just evolutionist lies

[@mmaimmortals]

It wasn't a boat.

[@MarSchlosser]

Funny, but science tells us otherwise. You have no clue how the Ark was built, what timbers were used, how big it was.

[@earthisasphere]

@@MarSchlosser Science tells us the flood was impossible. Stop lying. Noahs flood is geologically impossible. 1) The sodium carbonate needed for even a small single layer of limestone requires centuries or more of build up of shelled creatures and coral. When explaining the Grand Canyon, in your model, that isn't possible. In the actual model we know that the southwest U.S. was once a shallow seabed, so the sodium bicarbonate could build up over time. 2) The limestone in the G. C. also requires calm, shallow waters to form, like.... a shallow seabed. Not the most violent storm the earth would have ever seen. The hydraulic sorting claim YEC's like to peddle doesn't work either, because the water is still to deep and to volatile. 3) There are multiple places where layers of salt are separated by layers of rock. Sea's would have to evaporate, have a layer (or layers) of rock form, and then the area would have to become a sea bed again. A flood can't explain this. 4) Unconformities don't have the time needed to happen on a 6,000 year old earth. 5) The following were rulers of their respected kingdoms during the flood timelime Egypt- Pepi, Akkad - Sargon, Elam - Helu, and the Indus Valley Civ had been around for 1,000 years and continued for another 1,000 years 5) fossils and stratification layers of rock match predictions of evolution 6) Sand dunes don't have time to form 7) certain layers of rock would require forest fires to exists underwater 8) the amount of energy released during such an event would destroy the earth, also know as the heat problem 9) Ocean basins have less than a km of sedimentary rock on top, while the continental shelves are over 12 km think with sedimentary rock, a flood of that magnitude and length would have eroded away much more of the continental shelves 10) We have studied the growth rate of coral form a very long time now, and it doesn't grow fast enough to match your timeline - forget a flood, 6,000 years isn't even enough time. Look into the Eniwetok atoll if you want more info 11) evaporites and shales take too long to form 12) the change in salinity levels would kill both freshwater and saltwater fish, and on and on and on.

[@watman5]

They went up the chimney just like santa.

[@MarSchlosser]

sorry, but white savages didn't invent the chimney till late in the 14th century.

[@nathancook2852]

🤣🤣 How long do you think it will take them to get it?

[@angelinegrows7765]

Maybe they didn’t , what if they were the un natural creatures created by the fallen angels?

[@LaidbackChristianLifestyle]

Bingo! Enoch 1. not the others(mysticism) book of giants. What you all call apocryphal…. Is canon to us. It is in our bibles. Others have been removed. The timeline is correct and these books tell us exactly what happened. It’s almost irrefutable once you actually read it FOR YOURSELF. God gave us discernment. USE IT! When nobody gives you the truth. Go FIND It! Seriously. Not trying to be a serpent in the garden. But we are being taught a bastardized version of THE WAY…. PS. The only reason they aren’t canon is because we 1. Can’t confirm the writers. And 2. The content was deemed “unimportant” by the council of rome…. 🤨…. The Dead Sea scrolls had them all in complete volumes… and also in Jude and revelations were expected to already know who Enoch was and what he had done…..

[@LaidbackChristianLifestyle]

Oh and if you’re into prophecy. Enoch was the 7th generation from Adam…. And the 70th generation from Enoch was…… Jesus Christ!!!! My lord and savior!!!

[@earthisasphere]

@@LaidbackChristianLifestyle "When nobody gives you the truth. Go FIND It!" Good advice. That is what I did and why I got out of the YEC cult after over 25 years.

[@markmerry1471]

Still coming out with your bull shit I see.

[@hansdemos6510]

If we follow Mr. Smith's "logic" (using the term in the widest possible sense...), then the Ark could have contained just a single pair of cute and cuddly arch-dinosaurs that hibernated through the year of the Flood but that happened to carry all the genetic diversity needed. As his hypothesis relies on rapid diversification after the Flood anyway, there is no need for more. If you think this sounds ridiculous, please be aware that this is just the logical conclusion of the justification Mr. Smith has invented for why the Ark of his holy text was able to carry the animals science has convinced him did exist. In the end, if you have to rely on miracle anyway to make your story work, why not just start off with the miracle and avoid having to mislead your followers about what the modern scientific and scholarly method has discovered?

[@mmaimmortals]

Dinosaur isn't a kind.

[@hansdemos6510]

@@mmaimmortals You said: _"Dinosaur isn't a kind."_ I think you are missing the point of my comment. Mr. Smith is redefining the meaning of the word "kind" to fit his peculiar theological requirements but there is no scientific or even rational reason why we couldn't just keep going. For example, if he claims that foxes and wolves belong to one "kind" and that lions and pussycats belong to one "kind", then why shouldn't he claim that dogs and cats belong to one "kind"? They are alike in the exact same way that foxes and wolves or lions and pussycats are, right?

[@MarSchlosser]

@@mmaimmortals Dinosaur KINDS, Note the plural. Note, as well, something like 60% of dino species have been eliminated because every paleontologist who could claimed juvenile dinos were a separate species.

[@MarSchlosser]

@@hansdemos6510 are you always this droll? Sorry, but the theory is not his, but common in science today, as it was ever since Christians developed modern science from the flat earth crowd's spells and some science :)

[@hansdemos6510]

@@MarSchlosser You said: _"Dinosaur KINDS, Note the plural."_ I think you are missing the point of my comment. If Mr. Smith can re-interpret the word "kind" to mean "animals that look like each other" to suit his theological purposes, then there is no reason why he couldn't re-interpret the word "kind" to mean anything he'd like. So if his theology made it necessary for all dinosaurs to be represented by only 1 pair of small and friendly animals that didn't eat anything and slept for a year, then he could just propose that with the same force of reason as his current proposal. You said: _"Note, as well, something like 60% of dino species have been eliminated because every paleontologist who could claimed juvenile dinos were a separate species."_ I don't understand how that is relevant to my comment.

[@bazexo12.73]

I am currently studying paleontology. And as much as I don't agree with the complete explanation of evolution. I most definitely no longer believe that Earth is 6000 years old. It is much older than the dates Christians say but is not spoken of in the bible itself. People interpret things that make it easy to understand but 90% of people will not Read or research known facts! The Bible does not state the earth is 6000 years old! However Many Christians do believe it is. And this is no better than people who believe in evolution. The Earth is older than what Christians State and they never tell you how they derive to this conclusion.

[@rexrobo2512]

@bazexo12.73 I apologize in advance because it is very difficult to keep sarcasm out of my reply, but come on really? "The Earth is older than what Christians State and they never tell you how they derive to this conclusion." You're studying paleontology yet you don't know how to use Google? It's not even a complex question. Since you took the time to post a comment I will take the time to answer your question with a little less sarcasm. The Bible contains unbroken genealogies from Adam to Jesus. Using those genealogies with other information you find in the Bible, like Genesis 1, you can calculate approximately how old the Earth is.

[@plainsman]

@@rexrobo2512 Completely preposterous. Even the science literate Christians that run the website BioLogos agree with mainstream science on how the age of the earth is calculated, and it has nothing to do with mythical family legends.

[@earthisasphere]

@@rexrobo2512 Great, storytellers wrote down a bunch of names. That means everything else in the Bible has to be accurate, even though we know there is no possible way the flood could have happened, there are major discrepancies and contradictions (when did the women see Jesus after the "resurrection" again) unfulfilled prophecies that should have already been fulfilled (Egypt was supposed to have been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar so thoroughly that no man would ever set food in Egypt again), and on and on and on. But sure, a list of names proves a young earth, although all the evidence we have today says you are full of crap.

[@calvinsmith7575]

@@plainsman Biologos are a collection of heretics.

[@earthisasphere]

@@calvinsmith7575"Biologos are a collection of heretics." LOL, says the serial liar!

[@andym1134]

Imo the solution to the events of the Ark are simple, that the Bible is a record of a very distinct region, the Middle East, Turkey etc what the Ark event records is the saving of those creatures that were known within a locally geographical area. Imo this makes sense to why all animals could be saved to their understanding as there was no knowledge of the America's, Asia, Pacific etc it's a theory at least.

[@MarSchlosser]

OK, so you mean the Aymara Indians on the Altiplano Plateau in Bolivia made it up when they passed down the legend of a worldwide flood? It was recorded long before Columbus was born. How about the other hundreds of cultures that have a worldwide flood? What happened to Pangea? The days of Creation have been proved by secular science, and the only difference is time. How about genealogists claiming there's no reason we can't live for centuries, if only we could shed the mutations killing us. Ica Stones, Acambaro figurines, and much more.

[@rf7477]

@@MarSchlosser "Hundreds of other cultures" don't have any record of a worldwide flood. They would have all drowned and their record, written and verbal, would have been destroyed under several miles of water. You are attempting to extrapolate a myth from Mesopotamia all the way round the world. BTW Australian aboriginal people have been on their island home for at least 50,000 years.

[@earthisasphere]

@@MarSchlosser The Egyptians, Irainian, Indus Valley, Chinese Civs, and the previously mentioned Australian aboriginal peoples all existed before your flood timeline, and continued to exists right through it without interruption. Hell, the Pyramids were built either just before or right through your flood timeline. Pangea broke up around 200 million years ago. The Ica Stones and Acambaro figurines are both known to be faked. Grow up man.

[@andym1134]

​@MarSchlosser I am well aware of the flood event and the recording of this by other cultures however that doesn't change my theory that the events recorded regarding Noah and the Ark were regional/localised and did not take into account other cultures, tribes and related regions animal life. And what I'm suggesting doesn't take away from the event nor is an attempt to diminish its importance, rather imo it actually makes more sense that Noah was dealing with the wildlife he was familiar with that lived within his surroundings.

[@daviddavenport9350]

This is all silly and unbiblical speculation......not at all convincing....

[@logicalatheist1065]

that's AIG for ya

[@Columbo-r4z]

The fossil record is in order of evolution, not a global flood. You lose creationists.

[@spamm0145]

There is no fossil record, YEC wins.

[@justinlong6847]

@@spamm0145 you don't think fossils exist?

[@non-international_socialist]

"fossil record is in order with evolution" ok cool didn't know that evolution teaches humans are older than trilobites

[@Columbo-r4z]

@@non-international_socialist It doesn’t.

[@Columbo-r4z]

@@joefriday2275 The fossils are dated through numerous methods.

[@NovusIgnis]

So hold on, they're going to ask how could Noah and his family take care of the animals on the ark? That means they're assuming, for the sake of argument of course, that the ark happened and God flooded the world. Then the answer is simple: because God made it possible for them to take care of the animals. Whether He made them sleepy, made them calm kept their stomachs full, or whatever else, are you really going to sit there and say the God who made the flood happen and brought the animals to the ark is incapable of ensuring they stay alive? Seems kind of facetious to me.

[@Bomtombadi1]

So animals were kept alive by magic? That answer seems pretty fatuous to people don’t believe it.

[@NovusIgnis]

@@Bomtombadi1 Yet you do believe it, for the sake of argument. You're already conceding that God created the flood by dint of arguing about it. The conversation already *has* the presupposition of "let's say that God *did* make the flood happen: how did Noah and his family take care of all the animals?" That's literally what the subject is. That alike saying you agree Stephen King can write multiple best selling books, but a Yelp review is far beyond his capabilities.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@NovusIgnis why would think this is a gotcha? Why would granting for the sake of argument mean I actually DO believe it? No, it’s not the same thing at all. This is the equivalent of any author writing their character into a corner, only to be written out of the corner by a last minute, non-sense event, such as a secondary protagonist suddenly knowing how to fly a fighter jet.

[@NovusIgnis]

@@Bomtombadi1 No, lol, it really isn't. It's actually exactly like I said. If God told Moses what would happen in the future and then He did it, flooding the world to wipe out all of the evil corrupting humanity, then what makes you think He wouldn't be capable of making the animals behave and providing them sustenance? It doesn't matter whether you believe it outside of the argument or not, *within* the argument you are agreeing that this is possible because you're already arguing on those terms! Since you want to bring fiction and stories into it, this would be the equivalent of you getting angry that Superman was able to lift a car out of the way of a train when you just saw him hold a falling building up so that its occupants could get to safety. You've already seen one supernatural thing, then you're denying that another could be possible. It's cognitive dissonance at its finest. Nobody's saying that you believe any of this, but stating that it's impossible for God to provide and care for the animals when you're already granting that He can flood the planet is silly. We see this sometimes in so called Christian circles too. People trying to find a naturalistic explanation for some of God's miracles when already accepting others. For example people will say that Jesus didn't actually multiple the fish and loaves when feeding the multitudes, He just started giving food from their own supply and others were inspire dby His generosity so they started revealing their own hidden food until everyone had eaten. And yet they'll still say "Oh yeah He brought someone back from the dead and walked on water." It makes absolutely no sense to accept one miracle but deny another.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@NovusIgnis how is it not? A fictional character with fictional powers performing fictional feats which can suit the writer’s intentions. Even if granting this for the sake of argument, it would mean Noah didn’t need to build a boat. God could’ve done it. It would mean Noah didn’t need to care for the animals. God would’ve done it. Yet every single interpretation but yours says Noah did it all with the help of his 8 sons.

[@jnhook8086]

You know you're full of crap when you think you know how fast a trex ran and spout your baseless theory off as fact

[@MarSchlosser]

How fast can a rex run? He was speaking of what secular science says. :)

[@hazaelalvarado9550]

I believe that satan could have created the dinosaurs. I think it cloud have happened between the 1 and second verse in Genesis. 1 day could be a thousand years as the Bible says. The second verse says “the earth was empty and formless”. I think Satan could have come to earth after the earth was created and before God created life on earth. I believe that is when satan could have come to earth and made his version of creation before God cast satan out of heaven.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Why would Satan have created dinosaurs? For what purpose?

[@jeanhendrickx5928]

How could Noah fir Dinosaurs on the ark ? Well simply deflate them and afterwards inflate the again.

[@snakewithnolegs]

0:54 I can't believe you are over 18 years old and STILL can't spell "Jurassic" correctly