(September 24, 2015 at 9:38 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(September 24, 2015 at 3:03 am)StuW Wrote: So let me get this straight, when the floods receded there were plenty of animals?  Then why did Noah need to take a load on the ark?  If you mean he ate the animals that were on the ark then  which animals didn't make it to modern times through being made extinct through being eaten?

 Surely you can't mean you do not understand what I was saying, let's go at it again. God gave man the permission to eat meat of some animals that were on the Ark. Man also eat vegetation, there were probably many nuts laying around, nuts will last for years. As far as eight people eating up the animals they were allowed to eat, why do you think God told them there would be seven pairs of those animals. Many animals reproduce at quite a good rate, and fish would have been abundant, not just for man but also for the animals who would need meat to eat along with vegetation. Many animals that eat meat also eat vegetation, seaweeds would have be in great supply, seaweed is a great source of food. Milk from sheep and goats would have supplied a great source of nutrition. There would have been fourteen supplying milk, eggs from birds like chickens would have supplied more eggs than they could eat and still have plenty of chicks, in a years time there would have been hundreds of chickens alone to eat and lay eggs which would have supplied most of there food needs until other animals had a chance to grow their populations. Chickens start laying eggs within six months of hatching. I have three chicken I got as chicks back in the spring, they are now laying more eggs than I and my pup can eat and these are not even a huge eggs producing breed. I have three others that very good producers and there are days those three will lay as many as nine eggs a day, what do you think fourteen would produce and in six months an abundance of chicks will have grown up and started laying. There would have been plenty for the people and some of the animals. Need I continue, sheep, goats and chickens would have supplied the eight with plenty until a good recovery was under way, plus the vegetation they would have, seems to me they would have eaten quite well.

GC

Somehow I doubt they ate better than the Egyptians, the Chinese, the early inhabitants of the Americas, or any of the other civilizations that seem not to have noticed the worldwide flood. Why are you so wedded to this particular story? There are Christians who don't think there was literally a worldwide flood, yet they continue to believe in Christ resurrected. If you were to acknowledge that it is a myth or a legend of a particular people of a particular time and place, would that invalidate your faith or cause you to consider the Bible, as a whole, suspect?

I'm not trying to play gotcha. I mean that as a serious question.

Well, here is something the Christer God actually does:

He sits on his Holy ass for 1500 years and does absolutely nothing while Catholic priests diddle little kids.

(September 24, 2015 at 9:48 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 24, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote: Damn, who is the hotty in your avatar?

Yo mama.

You obviously never saw my mama.  My mother had some great qualities.  A hot body wasn't one of them.

(September 24, 2015 at 9:38 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(September 24, 2015 at 3:03 am)StuW Wrote: So let me get this straight, when the floods receded there were plenty of animals?  Then why did Noah need to take a load on the ark?  If you mean he ate the animals that were on the ark then  which animals didn't make it to modern times through being made extinct through being eaten?

 Surely you can't mean you do not understand what I was saying, let's go at it again. God gave man the permission to eat meat of some animals that were on the Ark. Man also eat vegetation, there were probably many nuts laying around, nuts will last for years. As far as eight people eating up the animals they were allowed to eat, why do you think God told them there would be seven pairs of those animals. Many animals reproduce at quite a good rate, and fish would have been abundant, not just for man but also for the animals who would need meat to eat along with vegetation. Many animals that eat meat also eat vegetation, seaweeds would have be in great supply, seaweed is a great source of food. Milk from sheep and goats would have supplied a great source of nutrition. There would have been fourteen supplying milk, eggs from birds like chickens would have supplied more eggs than they could eat and still have plenty of chicks, in a years time there would have been hundreds of chickens alone to eat and lay eggs which would have supplied most of there food needs until other animals had a chance to grow their populations. Chickens start laying eggs within six months of hatching. I have three chicken I got as chicks back in the spring, they are now laying more eggs than I and my pup can eat and these are not even a huge eggs producing breed. I have three others that very good producers and there are days those three will lay as many as nine eggs a day, what do you think fourteen would produce and in six months an abundance of chicks will have grown up and started laying. There would have been plenty for the people and some of the animals. Need I continue, sheep, goats and chickens would have supplied the eight with plenty until a good recovery was under way, plus the vegetation they would have, seems to me they would have eaten quite well.

GC

No, I don't understand. Your description only works if ALL animals are vegetarian. The likelyhood of a carnivore sticking to eating clean animals so as to not extinct a species is as likely as the flood itself. This is all a moot point anyway as any species needs ~ 100 individuals minimum to be genetically viable.

(September 24, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(September 24, 2015 at 9:09 pm)Yeauxleaux Wrote: "Interpreting"? The Bible makes it pretty fucking plain women are seen as the inferior sex. You don't have to "interpret" anything, it's there written plainly for you to see.

This applies to a lot of things in the Bible and the Quran, so I'm bit tired of this "interpretation" argument. The most you can do to "interpret" these texts it leave out the bits you don't like. You can't re-word them, twist them, or pretend they have symbolic meaning that means advocating rape of virgin daughters actually means something else. For the most part, these texts are written plainly and there's no "interpretation" needed, it says exactly what it says.

When the Bible says this;

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 1 Corinthians 14:34

It is quite plainly saying "women must be in submission". You can't "interpret" (read: spin) that to mean something completely different when it is very clear about what it means. That's far from the most misogynistic quote from the Bible btw.

Damn, who is the hotty in your avatar?

Her name is Nana, Korean pop star

I'm pooping.

Awk - - ward!

I'm scooping after her whatters! Not pretty!

(September 25, 2015 at 1:11 am)StuW Wrote:

(September 24, 2015 at 9:38 pm)Godschild Wrote:  Surely you can't mean you do not understand what I was saying, let's go at it again. God gave man the permission to eat meat of some animals that were on the Ark. Man also eat vegetation, there were probably many nuts laying around, nuts will last for years. As far as eight people eating up the animals they were allowed to eat, why do you think God told them there would be seven pairs of those animals. Many animals reproduce at quite a good rate, and fish would have been abundant, not just for man but also for the animals who would need meat to eat along with vegetation. Many animals that eat meat also eat vegetation, seaweeds would have be in great supply, seaweed is a great source of food. Milk from sheep and goats would have supplied a great source of nutrition. There would have been fourteen supplying milk, eggs from birds like chickens would have supplied more eggs than they could eat and still have plenty of chicks, in a years time there would have been hundreds of chickens alone to eat and lay eggs which would have supplied most of there food needs until other animals had a chance to grow their populations. Chickens start laying eggs within six months of hatching. I have three chicken I got as chicks back in the spring, they are now laying more eggs than I and my pup can eat and these are not even a huge eggs producing breed. I have three others that very good producers and there are days those three will lay as many as nine eggs a day, what do you think fourteen would produce and in six months an abundance of chicks will have grown up and started laying. There would have been plenty for the people and some of the animals. Need I continue, sheep, goats and chickens would have supplied the eight with plenty until a good recovery was under way, plus the vegetation they would have, seems to me they would have eaten quite well.

GC

No, I don't understand.  Your description only works if ALL animals are vegetarian.  The likelyhood of a carnivore sticking to eating clean animals so as to not extinct a species is as likely as the flood itself.  This is all a moot point anyway as any species needs ~ 100 individuals minimum to be genetically viable.

It's all moot because a single tiger must eat a lot more than every one of the "clean animals" they brought aboard:

1. Tigers may consume up to 40 kg (88 pounds) of meat at one time.
   
   
2. It is estimated that every tiger consumes about 50 deer-sized animals each year, about one per week.
   

(Source: http://seaworld.org/animal-info/animal-i...ng-habits/)

Let's see... Ark floats for one year... that equals 100 "deer-sized animals" just to keep the tigers alive.

Then there's the lions... according to these guys, the male and female lions average 15 pounds and 11 pounds per day, respectively. Call it 26 pounds per day per pair, and we get about 9500 pounds of meat for the trip, or (according to Butcher-Packer online, an "mature buck" (male deer) averaging 165 pounds will produce 83.08 pounds of meat, so we'll just round that to 85 lbs) a need for the two lions to consume roughly 112 deer on the trip.

Oh yeah, did I mention? There are the panther, jaguar, leopard, snow leopard, cougars, cheetahs, lynxes, pumas... oh man. That's a lot of meat-eating going on in that 450 foot long, 75 foot wide boat! Even if you presume that all eight of the human passengers on that boat spent all of their time hauling giant nets full of fish and seaweed aboard the vessel, there's no way they could get enough in there -- If you've ever watched an episode of Deadliest Catch, you'll have some idea of what I mean, here. Those guys use powerboats, electric hoists, and modern equipment... and they're lucky to fill one hold of one small ship. They might manage to feed a few dozen of the carnivore species aboard, assuming they never got tired, never got sick or injured doing such a dangerous job out on the ocean in a directionless barge, and basically fished every waking hour of the day with gigantic nets that never snapped, tore, or frayed.

Want to start a running tally of the "obligate carnivores" they would have to feed on that trip? (Obligate is a tear meaning they must eat meat and only or mainly meat, for their survival.)

I'll start: owls, falcons, hawks, eagles, vultures, domestic cats, alligators, crocodiles, komodo dragons, wolverines, snakes, ... whew, this could take a while. I hope my point was made already.

There is no way the food supplies needed to support even a fraction of the species that would have to be aboard the Ark for one year, not even counting the requirements of poop removal, oxygen circulation, and physically keeping the animals apart from one another so they didn't change the program and decide to eat one of the two unicorns to make them exti... oh damn.

On a scale of 0 to 10, he does jack shit.