It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


*Noah's Ark* My Big Question

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:51 AM
Ok ill get straight to it.
I have asked this question in other topics before, but i havnt read any direct answers.
For those who believe in Noah's ark, and that there was a great flood that covered the world, within the last 6,000 years...
How could there be fresh water fish exsisting today? Around 97% of liquid water on earth is saline (contains salt). If there was a great flood, i would assume that all the fresh water bodies (lakes, rivers etc...), would of been poluted with salinity. And resulting in alot of environmental problems. This would of resulted in the death of ALL the fresh water fish. But yet we have fresh water fish today? and it would take more than 6,000 years of evolution for a salt water tolerant fish to being intolerant to salt water (eventhough i doubt that the majority of people that believe in the Noah's ark story wouldn't believe in evolution).
There are approximately 10,000 different types of fresh water fish in todays current fresh water bodies, so yet again, its irrelevant if God, evolution or aliens created them all, *ASSUMING IF* there was a great flood how did 10,000 fish survive?
i also thought about this for a while. say somehow Noah did get all these freshwater fish, and when the flood passed he went to release them back into the all those lakes.... OHH WAIT, if he released them back into the lakes, the salinity levels would be to great? its anyones guess of how long it would take before the salinity was removed and the water turned back to its pre-flood state again, the way the fish need it to survive. I'm sure it would of been longer than Noah's life even if he lived to 600 years...

So i ask you, logically how could this be?
i want the question to be answer as directly as possible, and ill be happy if anyone would like to add their own theories or idea.
look forward to reading your replies.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:49 AM
The bible only tells us that animals, birds, were to be taken on the Ark.We do not know how salty the sea was before the Flood. The Flood was initiated by the breaking up of the ‘fountains of the great deep’ (Gen. 7:11). Whatever the ‘fountains of the great deep’ were, the Flood must have been associated with massive earth movements, because of the weight of the water alone, which would have resulted in great volcanic activity.
Volcanoes emit huge amounts of steam, and underwater lava creates hot water/steam, which dissolves minerals, adding salt to the water. Furthermore, erosion accompanying the movement of water off the continents after the Flood would have added salt to the oceans. In other words, we would expect the pre-Flood ocean waters to be less salty than they were after the Flood.There are migratory species of fish that travel between salt and fresh water. For example, salmon, striped bass and Atlantic sturgeon spawn in freshwater and mature in saltwater. Eels reproduce in saltwater and grow to maturity in freshwater streams and lakes. So, many of today’s species of fish are able to adjust to both freshwater and saltwater.
Hybrids of wild trout (freshwater) and farmed salmon (migratory species) have been discovered in Scotland,2 suggesting that the differences between freshwater and marine types may be quite minor. Indeed, the differences in physiology seem to be largely differences in degree rather than kind. The kidneys of freshwater species excrete excess water (the urine has low salt concentration) and those of marine species excrete excess salt (the urine has high salt concentration). Saltwater sharks have high concentrations of urea in the blood to retain water in the saltwater environment whereas freshwater sharks have low concentrations of urea to avoid accumulating water. When sawfish move from saltwater to freshwater they increase their urine output twenty fold, and their blood urea concentration decreases to less than one-third.Major public aquariums use the ability of fish to adapt to water of different salinity from their normal habitat to exhibit freshwater and saltwater species together. The fish can adapt if the salinity is changed slowly enough

als were taen on the ark

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:59 AM
thanks for that, it was indepth and interesting, but yet the flood wouldn't of been a slow progression of salt water into the freshwater bodies. It would of been pritty much instant. And please dont tell me that every 10,000 species of freshwater fish CAN become tolerant to saltwater within there lifespan, or even evolve to tolerate sea level salinity in 6,000 years.
Please provide a link to convince me otherwise

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 03:04 AM
Here is an intersting link I found on this topic.

I, personaly, think there was a canopy of water surrounding the earth before Noah and there were even fish in it (maybe)...(I have a thread about fish in the sky seen in ancient pics and writings but I can not seem to find info on it.)

Maybe Noah had the "essense" of fish on the ARK and cloned them afterwards with all the other living creatures.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 03:25 AM
plaining that link you have provided is talking sh**

Many of today’s fish species are specialized and do not survive in water of radically different saltiness to their usual habitat. So how did they survive the Flood?

yeah many, many arent specialised aswell, but how did the intolerant to salt water fish survive? even if it was a selected few. They never answered that.

*How did saltwater fish survive dilution of the seawater with freshwater*

Ok, look at it this way. If whoever wrote this had a clue of what he was talking about, he wouldnt of wrote it.
Earth- 97%saltwater, 3% freshwater(2% of that is solid).
I dont think the saltwater would of had much of a problem by fresh water dilution. Common.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 03:26 AM
realorritt- nice copy paste einstien, i can do that to you know

step back

[edit on 12/17/2004 by cheeser]

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 04:47 AM
To everyone this concerns,
With respect.. if people want to talk science.. could you PLEASE avoid posting up sites that have such heavy religious bias. Such sites have been used before in debates and have proven to be unreliable when it comes to scientific facts. Some 'facts' are either twisted or taken out of context, other proven facts have been omitted completely because they do not suit the conclusions preffered- whilst other facts have simply been replaced with lies.
I see no problem with people using CREDIBLE, unbiased scientific sites ALONG WITH religious beliefs- using biased sites however forces people to have to double check continually to see if they are in facts correct.. which is confusing and counter productive. It also forces people to have to sift through endless amounts of proverbs and the like when they may not wish to be converted and only want to argue on a scientific basis. Basically you can only argue science with science.
I contemplated actually basing a thread on this issue but suspect it might be futile.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:27 AM
I really hate it when people use "answerswingenesis" for scientific purposes. That is an idiotic thing to do. It is telling though. When you see someone post a website such as that, you see someone who fots the mold that I often describe on this forum.

The person is unable to think for themselves by choice, so they blindly follow religious leaders (not even God) who know little about science. They listen and believe what they are told without even checking. That is a sign of poor intelligence.

When christians start thinking for themselves, then things will be different. Well, if they do. I am beginning to think christianity is just an excuse for being, well, not so smart (politically correct).

"there was a blanket of water surrounding earth".....nice

Was their a blanet of water around all planets?

What realoritt and others who are followers of the ill informed will tell you is "we dont know how salty ocean water was" ect. It doesn't matter. The remnants of a global flood would be very aparent today. VERY APARENT. We are not talking region. The whole freeking world people! Man alive, use common sense. Why can't you do that? There is the whole problem of multiple continents...if the ark landed on did all these animals get all over the place without evolution considering they would have all died in the GLOBAL FLOOD. How, in just app4000 years since the alleged flood, did the earth repopulate itself to the current state....globally? Salt water is the obvious, unavoidable error that christains try to fake science to cover up. What about the logical conclusions. How can you through them away???

To christians: Think for yourself. Stop following PEOPLE blindly. It is only their personal opinion that you chase. Why dont you make up your own for a change.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:29 AM
Realorrit has been copying and pasting since she came on here.

She definitely does not think for herself.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:15 AM
national geographic had noah's ark on yesterday.

apparantly in the black sea is where noah's ark located, they had some wood tested and it came back 1,000 years old or 2 i can't remember.

The ship is fully in tact and scientist's are saying that once upon a time there was life where the black sea is currently.

They will be starting excavations under the water, when I don't know.

But they say noah's ark is there and it does exist.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:33 AM

Originally posted by TrueLies
national geographic had noah's ark on yesterday.

apparantly in the black sea is where noah's ark located, they had some wood tested and it came back 1,000 years old or 2 i can't remember.

Then that would just make it an ark. Noah was meant to have lived about 5000 [apx] years ago.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 10:18 AM
Almost every culture on Earth includes an ancient flood story. Details vary, but the basic plot is the same: Deluge kills all but a lucky few.

• The story most familiar to many people is the biblical account of Noah and his ark. Genesis tells how “God saw that the wickedness of man was great” and decided to destroy all of creation. Only Noah, “who found grace in the eyes of the Lord,” his family, and the animals aboard the ark survived to repopulate the planet.

• Older than Genesis is the Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh, a king who embarked on a journey to find the secret of immortality. Along the way, he met Utnapishtim, survivor of a great flood sent by the gods. Warned by Enki, the water god, Utnapishtim built a boat and saved his family and friends, along with artisans, animals, and precious metals.

• Ancient Greeks and Romans grew up with the story of Deucalion and Pyhrra, who saved their children and a collection of animals by boarding a vessel shaped like a giant box.

• Irish legends talk about Queen Cesair and her court, who sailed for seven years to avoid drowning when the oceans overwhelmed Ireland.

• European explorers in the Americas were startled by Indian legends that sounded similar to the story of Noah. Some Spanish priests feared the devil had planted such stories in the Indians’ minds to confuse them.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 10:31 AM

Originally posted by TrueLiesAlmost every culture on Earth includes an ancient flood story

Thanks for that- interesting. Most myths have some basis in reality. I don't doubt their were floods.. the earth is constantly changing so there are bound to be consequences. Perhaps in two thousand years the story of the recent tsunami will be a tale of a world wide flood.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:21 AM
Look at it this way....

Even if these people lived through a flood, and wrote about it (noah didn't bring too many people), they would only be able to verify the flood at the place where they lived. Not the other side of the world. A great flood to them could have been similar to what the nile river does every year.

I may believe in a local small scale flood. It is scientifically possible. As far as a large scale flood (global), no way. As far as every culture having a flood story....

No kidding, I can't imagine a culture surviving without seeing a big flood. I live near pittsburgh, we just had a terrible disaster of a flood at the end of the summer. Maybe I should write about how God was mad (as some did, since the flood was a result of the hurricanes, and many blamed that on a pissed off god) and flooded pittsburgh. I should write how I built a giant arc...and alone, with my girlfriend, incested like heck and repopulated pittsburgh.......

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:16 PM

Originally posted by Seapeople
Realorrit has been copying and pasting since she came on here.

She definitely does not think for herself.

Can I ask you why you seem to hate me or dislike me so?
Everything on here was not copied or pasted as you have said, that was rather insulting. This answer was, as I was too tired to type it al out, so what you said to that extent is true, in the future I will type everything out, so that you will have no cause to say that to me anymore.
Here is an answer about Noah's Ark, the fish survived because God himself protected them from the flood, or, maybe the flood didn't happen at all. I would wish for you to ask me a question, so I can answer myself, you are rather insulting and I do not believe in insulting any person. So peace and take care. You have really hurt my feelings seapeople, I do not even know you.
Take care

[edit on 26-1-2005 by realorritt]

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:46 PM

Originally posted by realorritt
Everything on here was not copied or pasted as you have said, that was rather insulting.

Uhm, most of it was. It's fine to use text from other websites, but let's at least provide a link to where you found the information. Realistically it would be nice to put the quoted text in a quote box so we know what you said and what was copied from another site. Like so.....

Vertabre & Fish Evolution - William A. Wurts, Ph.D.
It is believed that when the newly formed planet Earth cooled sufficiently, rain began to fall continuously. This rainfall filled the first oceans with fresh water. It was the constant evaporation of water from the oceans that then condensed to cause rainfall on the land masses,which in turn, caused the oceans to become salty

As rain water washed over and through the soil, it dissolved many minerals -- sodium, potassium and calcium -- and carried them back to the oceans.

As you can see the oceans are salty due to rain run-off from the continents. So if it never rained before the flood(Gen 2:5-6), the oceans could have been fresh water up until the time of the flood. Who knows, maybe a large number of fresh water fish died off and the hatching eggs provided a new supply of fish. You either believe the story or you don't. You're not going to find enough proof to persuade anyone against what they believe in this scripture.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:55 PM
please do not say things that are not true you have hurt my feelings and I am not here to say anything bad about any member, but rather the opposite. I wish that you seapeople would ask me a question, and let me answer you, but somehow I don't think that you would believe or even read it. It seems like for some reason that I don't know , that you do not like me, and I guess that is your decision. Even so, know that I do not dislike you, and believe everyone has a right to express theor opinions. I wish you only hapiness and good health.

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:26 PM

Originally posted by realorritt
please do not say things that are not true you have hurt my feelings

You have at times had entire posts pasted from elsewhere. People find it annoying as it often gets done [not just by you] without providing a source and without the person's own speculation. It also seems kind of rude to non fundies when quotes from creationalist's sites are used and we are expected to treat it as credible as science just because it's got the bible's weight behind it when the bible is not a book of science.

and I am not here to say anything bad about any member, but rather the opposite.

Are you serious? I needn't remind you. :shk:

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 03:06 PM

the fish survived because God himself protected them from the flood[edit

then if he had that power, why didnt he just save all the animals to save noah the trumble?

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:04 PM
Realorritt. I am sorry I hurt your feelings. Try not to be hurt in the future, because I am always going to argue my points strongly.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in