Ark accomodation (was Precambrian geology)

David Campbell (
Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:57:29 -0400

>These two qualifications eliminate a good portion of the animal kingdom.
>Part 1 eliminates nearly all animal life that lives in the waters. Part 2
>eliminates all insects. Amphibians may not have needed to be on the Ark
>either because they could survive in water.

Modern amphibians and most other freshwater organisms will not survive in
salt water. Most marine organisms cannot tolerate brackish or fresh water.
If the Flood had water all over the globe, at least either freshwater or
shallow marine organisms needed aquaria on the ark. Catastrophist
scenarios I have encountered, by envisioning some mixed source of water,
would require both to be on the ark. Don't forget the previously mentioned
problems with regard to the second law of thermodynamics, either. God
would not only have been miraculously protecting those on the ark from the
heat, but also some areas outside if life was surviving out there.

Even if they do not breathe through the nostrils but some other part of the
anatomy, most land animals can still drown. Snails, worms, and arthropods
needed some sort of shelter, though not necessarily much other protection.

>As for what is left, the number depends upon what is a 'kind.' 'Kind' is
>usually equated with species, however the definition of species is only
>some 200 years old. The Bible is not real specific, but some have
>concluded that the current classification of 'family' may be closer to the
>meaning of 'kind.' John Woodmoreappe, in his book 'Noah's Ark: A
>Feasability Study, makes some interesting educated guesses on numbers of

Even at the family level there are over 100 families of air-breating
snails. Family-level evolution is generally denied by global flood
advocates when it comes to Homidae, but there is no particular Biblical
evidence for the immutability of kinds. In fact, the similar usage of
flesh in I Cor 15:39 is leading up to the assertion that earthly can be
transformed into heavenly nature. The change from primordial cell to human
seems rather trivial by comparison.
(Exegesis of "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" as
applying strictly to the occupants of the church nursery is not
well-founded in the text.)

David C.