Extreme Extinction Event!
Part 4 – Noah's Ark
Welcome to our next session of Literal Genesis, where here, as always, we strive to hold firmly to Scripture and loosely to theories, especially the theories that have to do with the past. Why is that? Well, because Scripture never changes. When we read in Genesis 6 about God giving Noah instructions on how to build the ark and why the ark was to be built and the impending flood that was going to destroy the earth, that's read the same for thousands of years. It hasn't changed. However, when we look at the past through a non-biblical lens, we're liable to have to change our theories all the time.
For example, it was believed that grasses, like the grass outside on the ground and in parks, that it didn't evolve until 10 million years after the dinosaurs disappeared and after they went extinct. That is, until they found at least five types of grasses in dinosaur coprolites, which is fossilized dinosaur manure, so when they find these things, they have to go back and they change their theories.
However, for those Christian Scientists who base their lens on Scripture, especially the early history in Genesis, they already knew. They already knew that God created the vegetation and the grasses on day three, and dinosaurs came on day six, so naturally, they would have known that dinosaurs would have been around the same time as grass.
In the last session we took a look at a possible mechanism for the flood. We looked at rapid or catastrophic plate tectonics, and we looked at a way to describe where we got the water, how it got on the continents, and how everything came to be buried. In this session, we're going to answer two questions, if we have time. One is about Noah's ark. How big was this ark? How did Noah get all the animals on the ark? And what kind of animals were included on the ark? And then, kind of a follow-up question, that is very similar, one we get all the time, and that is, were dinosaurs included on the ark? And if they were, what happened to them after they got off the ark? So those are the two questions we'll look at today.
Of course, we start with Scripture, and this is where we get our clues, so we want to make sure that we're viewing the past through the lens of Scripture or we're liable to have to change our own ideas, and in Genesis 6:20, we see,
"Of the birds according to their kind, and of the animals according to their kind, of every crawling thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive."
- Genesis 6:20
Now, I've got to say this: this does not seem natural, does it? Animals coming to Noah to be preserved? Does this sound natural to anyone? It doesn't sound natural to me. In fact, animals, whenever there's impending danger, whether it be a fire or a flood coming, or a hurricane or tornado, they don't stay around those areas. They tend to leave. They escape. But here we find just the opposite. There's an impending flood coming. Of course, it was a little ways out. And we'll ask a question about what these kinds mean here in a moment. They came to Noah. So I would call this a supernatural event. This was not natural. Animals don't behave this way naturally.
The reason I want to point this out is that during this Literal Genesis session, we've been looking at scientific theories. We've been looking at how science actually supports Scripture, right? We're not always going to be able to do that, are we? And in this, this is one of those examples where this is a supernatural event. Animals don't come to people to be preserved all on their own. And the reason that I bring this up is that we want to be careful, as Christians, that when we come across the supernatural readings like this, that we don't try to find a naturalistic or scientific reason to explain it. It's okay if you want to try, but I'm saying we don't really need to do that in these cases, where something supernatural has happened.
For example, in the virgin birth, science will tell you that's impossible. Well, we don't need to try to find a scientific explanation as to how Mary became pregnant, it's just going to be too difficult. Rather, it's going to be impossible. And we don't want to discount these supernatural events in the Bible either, and this is really the point is we don't want to compromise and say, "Well, it must not really mean they came to Noah."
We want to take this as it is, as it reads, "two of every kind came to Noah to be preserved." It's a supernatural event. So what did this ark look like anyway? It looked exactly like the image below. Well, actually I hope not.
There are so many things wrong with this depiction that it's kind of hard to know where to begin. If we start with the obvious, we've got big animals on this tiny little vessel. It doesn't look like there's a whole lot of room. I mean, how could he fit all of the animals that he would have needed to fit on there, two of every kind? That doesn't really look right. If we look at the waters there in the far right, they look tranquil. It's just kind of peaceful. Well, remember our last session. We looked at this idea of the fountains of the deep bursting forth and the floodgates of the heavens opening. This was not a tranquil event like this.
Obviously, you've got animals hanging off there, and just in general, they look far too happy, right? This looks like a pleasure cruise. That's not the idea we get from Scripture. Now, I get it. When we're teaching this to children, we obviously want to teach down to their level. I'm totally okay with that. I understand that. However, as children age and mature, how often do we go back and correct this image and then teach them exactly what Scripture says? It was not a pleasure cruise. This was a catastrophic event, a global deluge that killed billions and billions of living animals and creatures. It's no wonder that our kids, by the time they reach middle school, have already started to question the authority of Scripture because we, as parents, we have failed to go back and teach them according to their level as they mature. So I don't think this is an accurate picture, and we're going to look at Scripture to get a better idea of that.
But how did the animals fit on the ark? Well, actually, I think it comes down to a couple of things. One, how many animals are we talking about? Are we talking millions? Are we talking hundreds of thousands? Are we talking thousands? So that's one question that we need to get answered.
Another is the size of the ark. Was it like that bathtub ark we've just seen? Or was it immensely larger? Really, it comes down to math. Sorry to say, it's a math problem, right? We need to figure out the number of animals and the size of the ark to get an idea of how this might've been possible. The Scripture doesn't leave us without clues. We don't have to guess here. So naturally, we go to Scripture to look for those clues, and Genesis 7:15 says,
"So they went into the ark to Noah," this talking about the animals, "by twos of all flesh in which there was the breath of life."
- Genesis 7:15
Here we have our first clue. Animals that were preserved, or at least two of every kind, and when we read in other passages in Genesis where there were seven of other kinds, seven of the clean kinds, so there wasn't just twos; there was actually seven pairs of some of the others, that these animals had the breath of life in them.
Well, I'm not sure what that means, but that's a clue that we need to hang on to. Actually, if we kind of fast forward here a few verses to verse 22, Scripture says,
"of all that was on dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died,"
So it's kind of coming together. We get the idea that the animals that were destroyed, who weren't represented on the ark, were land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures, and by air-breathing- the spirit of life- like in the nostrils, right? Breathe through the nostrils. So this would exclude some things right off the bat, like fish. Fish don't dwell on land, do they? They could survive a flood, although many, many marine creatures were buried during the flood, many would have survived. What about whales and dolphins? They breathe air, but again, they don't dwell on the land, so they don't qualify as this having a counterpart on the ark.
Things like insects- insects respirate differently than mammals, for example, you and I. They breathe in oxygen through pores in the skin. It's not the same as having nostrils, so we can eliminate some of these things, although I imagine plenty of insects would have hopped on the ark anyway, right? And insects have a way of surviving these catastrophes. They could survive on floating mats of vegetation, for example. We don't have to really explain the insects. It really comes down to these land-dwelling, nostril-breathing, air-breathing animals. These are the two clues that we want to go by, so this means that we would have needed to have two of every kind of dog, right? Two German shepherds, two spaniels, two bulldogs.
Now, this doesn't sound right. We need to key in on what this term kind is, because Scripture keeps talking about these kinds of animals. So we wouldn't need two of every one of these. In fact, today there's over 400 species of dogs. I don't know what Noah would have had in his day. He would have had probably more than three different species, so would he have needed all these different species of dogs? I don't think so. In fact, let's go back to Scripture. Let's get a little better understanding of this word kind. In 6:19-20, God's telling Noah,
"You shall bring two of every kind into the ark. Of the birds according to their kind. Of the animals according to their kind. Two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive."
- Genesis 6:19-20
Now, if we couple this with what we know about Genesis 1, when God created the entire universe and everything in it in six days. He rested on the seventh. He gave commands to the living things. He told the fish to multiply, be fruitful after their kind, the sea creatures. He told the land animals to do the same. The cattle kind, reproduce after your kind. Humans to reproduce after their kind. So we get the idea that a biblical kind is not necessarily a species, but something on the level of where you could still reproduce, and I'll make this more clear here in a moment because, the sole purpose of these animals coming to Noah was to keep them alive so that when they exited the ark after the global flood, they would have been able to reproduce and fill the earth again. That was the purpose. It has to do with reproduction within a kind, within a biblical kind.
Number of Animals
So going back to our dog analogy, we don't need all the different species of dogs. That's too specific. Instead, we would have just needed two of the dog kind that had within them all the genetic variability to produce all the species that we have today. In fact, scientists say those 400-and-some species of dogs we have today, they all came from one pair of dogs. That's what they say, looking at the genetics. Probably something on the order of a wolf is generally what's accepted here.
It is the same thing for cats. We don't need lions and tigers and cheetahs and all the different kinds of cat kinds. We just need two of the cat kind that, again, had all the genetic variability within them to produce the variety of cats that we have today. So automatically, you can see now that we don't need millions, right? We're kind of backing off of that number. When we back up a little higher to the level of kind, this number is probably much, much less.
John Woodmorappe has written a book called Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, and John is educated formally in biology as well as geology. I have this book. It's a very good book, easy to read, and he not only covers the possible amount of animals that Noah would have had to take on the ark, but he goes beyond that and talks about possible maintenance, how Noah and his family might've cared for the animals given the technology that they had and didn't have back then. The number that he's come up with, which a lot of biblical scholars would agree with, is somewhere around 16,000 animals.
If kind is what we would classify as a genus today- so if you think back to your high school biology and taxonomy. We've got species at the bottom. You've got genus. Then you have family, and as you go up, you have other things higher than that. So genus is not species, but it's kind of one step up.
If we go a step above genus to the family level, now we're talking around 2,000 animals. So this number is not as big as people might've thought. And when we look at the fossil record and we look at the- and this is what Woodmorappe has done in his book- extinct families in the fossil record. If you add those in, and then, all of the ones that we have today, it's probably going to be a number between 2,000 and 16,000. Generally, some biblical scholars say around 7,000 animals.
Regardless, let's just take the upper limit. Let's say 16,000 animals of this biblical kind is what Noah would have needed. The average size, again, from the fossil record, when we dig up remains of the fossils, we see the average size of these land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures would have been about the size of a rabbit or a dog, and this would have included the dinosaur families. It makes more sense to take the younger animals who would have been able to reproduce when they got off the ark. You don't need grandpa and grandma apatosaurus. You don't need grandpa and grandma T-Rex, right? All animals, including humans and dinosaurs and the reptiles of the past, they all started out very, very small. In fact, the dinosaurs came from eggs you could hold in your hand. Now, I'm not saying that Noah would have taken eggs on the ark, of dinosaurs, because remember, Scripture says the animals came to him, right? A male, female, they came to him. So it couldn't have been eggs. Eggs can't move. Even though that was a supernatural event, I think we can rule out eggs. So you would want to take animals who are on the verge of being able to be mature enough to reproduce, and by the time of the end of the flood, a year later, they would be able to reproduce when they got off the ark. So it just makes sense you would take the younger, healthier one.
What about the something like the apatosaurus? We know they got really big from their bones in the fossil record. In fact, somewhere on the order of 30 tons, 35 tons. These were really, really big reptiles. However, scientists have studied these growth rings inside of these apatosaurus bones, and what they have learned is that up until about age five, the apatosaurus weighed less than a ton, and it grew very, very slowly, but once it hit five, it grew on order of around five tons per year until it got to maturity at the age of 12 or 13. So why not take the four-year-old apatosaurus, right? It's very, very small. It took up a lot less space, ate less food, requires less maintenance. If Noah had to do much maintenance at all. There is this concept of hibernation that some scientists believe happened while the animals were on the ark.
Again, it could have been supernaturally imposed, But we want to take the smaller juveniles, right, is the key here. We don't need the gigantic dinosaurs, and when we narrow those down to the dinosaur kinds, there were probably less than 30 kinds, not all the species of dinosaurs that we know about today.
Again, just looking at the fossil record of what we know. So where does this biblical kind fit? I've got a chart here of the different taxonomy classifications of the red fox, and if we start very low down here at the species level, that's Vulpes vulpes. That's a red fox. Red foxes can reproduce with other red foxes. We know that. If we go higher up, to genus, to just Vulpes, we know that at this level, they could also reproduce, not only amongst themselves, but with other kinds of foxes, not just the red fox. If we go up one more to family, that's Canidae, this is where it gets interesting to me, is that at the family level, we still have the ability for these animals to reproduce. Well, what kind of animals are in the Canidae family? It would include foxes, dogs, wolves, coyotes, jackals, dingoes, right? All these things we know, many of them can reproduce today at that level, so wouldn't it make sense for Noah to have two of the family of Canidae, what we would call the Canidae family, instead of going down here at the species level, which would be really broad, too specific, so it's generally thought that biblical kinds is somewhere between the genus and the family level.
That's where we get the numbers of either 16,000 at the genus or 2,000 animals at the family level, okay? Now, I've had the argument brought up that there's really no way to know for sure what a biblical kind is, and we should be ultra-safe and go by species. Okay, so let's do that, just as an exercise. I have a chart here of the air-breathing, land-dwelling type of animals that Noah would have preserved on the ark: reptiles, birds, amphibians, and mammals, even though all the amphibians may not have qualified there, but we're going to include all of them.
Now, this is a modern number that we're going to look at here. Again, no fish, no whales, no dolphins, no insects. We don't need those. No fungi, right? Those don't qualify, but these do, and if we look at these numbers, and we add them up, this is from the IUCN, by the way. If you've heard of the IUCN Red List, that's the endangered species list, this is where this comes from, but these aren't endangered. These are just numbers of species that have been cataloged today. We come up with about 32,234 species of these types of animals that, if we looked at today's numbers, this would be the number that Noah would have had to take on the ark, so either 2,000 or 16,000 or 32,2000, right? Those are the ranges that we have to work with.
So we'll go back to Scripture. Let's get a little more information. Now we need to figure out, now that we kind of have a number in mind, well, how big was the ark? Is it going to be large enough to house all the animals? And Genesis 6:15 says,
"This is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits, its width 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits."
- Genesis 6:15
Now, we all know what a cubit is, right? We use it every day. Actually, we don't use it every day. We kind of have to go back in history to get an idea of a cubit, and it was used all throughout ancient history, not only by the Hebrews, but by the Egyptians as well, and we have different measurements here, depending on the era.
In fact, Ezekiel, when he was told to make the altar, he was told to make it a cubit and a hand width, so it was a cubit plus a little bit more. I don't think we're dealing with that size of a cubit, but if you look here, these aren't greatly different, so we generally use this common one when we think about Noah, and the cubit that he would have used has been about 18 inches. If that's true, and this is probably a safe bet, we don't want to go too high, then that would put the ark with these dimensions: 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high.
Do these measurements seem like a little bit larger than that picture we saw earlier, with all the animals crowded on the ark? To me, this seems like a bigger vessel. We kind of have a picture here, not that this was exactly how it looked. We don't know exactly how the design would have been, but these are the dimensions. It would have been a really, really large vessel. And if you picture this with the three decks that God told Noah to put inside of it. This is not a bathtub toy. This is not the size of the ark we see in our children's book, is it? It's much, much larger.
In fact, you can see a full-size replica using the 18-inch cubit, I believe that's what they used, in Williamstown, Kentucky (arkencounter.com). They have built a life-size replica. Notice the people here for scale. This was a big, big vessel. Well, was it big enough to carry all the things that needed to be carried? That's the question we're trying to figure out. In order to do that, we have a little bit more math to do, but don't worry. We won't have to do the math. The math's already been done for us.
If we think about the size of the ark, and then compare that to standard railroad shipping containers that you would see on railroad tracks tied together, one after another, given these dimensions of the ark, just general math tells us that it could hold a minimum of about 522 of these railroad boxcars. That's a lot of boxcars. And then, if we think about this average size of animal that Noah would have had to have maintained in there, about the size of a rabbit or a dog or even a sheep size, we can fit 120,000 sheep-size animals inside of these containers, which would have been enough to fill the ark. That's a lot of animals, 120,000 animals, but we only needed to carry, remember, if that biblical kind was equivalent to genus, we're talking about 16,000 animals, but even if we use today's species number of 32,000, do we have enough room? We have more than enough room.
In fact, it would seem some of the animals might've even gotten to get out and jogged around the deck. Maybe it was kind of like... No, it wasn't a pleasure cruise at all, but there would have been so much more room than was needed. In his book, John Woodmorappe explains how some of that room might have been used, possibly for exercising and those sorts of things.
Obviously, you've got food storage. Noah was to take a representative of every kind of fruit and plant for storage as well as food for the animals, so there was enough room for the animals. There was enough room to store the food and the water that would have been needed, although he could have caught the water from the rain, right? And stored that.
All right, so let's sum it up. We've got more than enough room, given the biblical dimensions of the ark and what we know about the number of animals. It would have been 16,000 or less, and the size of the ark could have held 120,000 of these sheep-sized animals, which the average animal might've been even smaller than that.
What Happened to the Dinosaurs - Top Three Theories
Okay, so we've answered two very important questions. We think the ark would've worked, right? Now, what happened to the dinosaurs? If two of every kind, including the dinosaur kind, came to Noah to be preserved, that would obviously include the dinosaurs, so we know that the rest, who weren't on the ark, they were buried, and we find their bones all over the globe today, billions and billions of those things. So what happened to those representatives that got off the ark? They obviously aren't alive today.
Many species that got off the ark do have a modern-day counterpart. They're still alive. So what happened to these dinosaurs? Let's look at the top theories, the top three. We'll do this pretty quickly here. You've probably heard of these. Number one at the top of all the lists is this: meteorite impact. So a meteor about 7 1/2 miles wide traveling at 27,000 miles an hour smacked into Earth, and obviously, that would've kicked up a lot of debris, a lot of cloud, a lot of dust, and that would have blocked the sun- these particles, these fine dust particles- and it would have blocked it for a really long time, so maybe that changed the climate, blocked the sun, it got colder, reptiles being warm-blooded, they need the warm environments. That's one. And by the way, this theory, even though it's number one on the list, the location that this meteorite was supposed to have hit is Mexico, Chicxulub, Mexico. There's a lot of controversy these days about whether or not that was an actual meteorite.
Now it's generally believed that that's a site of a massive volcano because of the iridium that's found there. You find iridium in meteorites and volcanic debris as well, but anyway, it's not a done deal. Nobody knows because it was the past. Unfortunately, Noah's descendants didn't record what happened to the dinosaurs, so we don't know. I think I just gave the whole thing away right there, right?
What's the second one? The second one's a food shortage. We kind of see some of that now as we go to the grocery store. We see a shortage of some things. But the idea here is that, again, probably a meteorite or a volcano kicked up massive particles in the air, and food sources died out, so the dinosaurs died out along with it.
The third most popular is really kind of along the same lines: massive supervolcanoes. Now, when we look at the fossil record, we do see evidence of these volcanic activities, of which we have never seen the likes of. Mount St. Helens is a drop in the bucket compared to some of these volcanic explosions we see in the fossil record. Super-super-massive volcanoes, and again, kicked up lots of gases and dust, and blocked the sun, and it would have affected the climate, would have affected food.
Now, it wasn't just the dinosaurs that went extinct. Scientists believe that whatever caused the dinosaurs to go extinct, also caused around 80% of all life to become extinct. Now, I think they're really close right there, right? Because if we go back to the flood history in Genesis, it's a big number of animals that died, that were were affected, and then a few, 16,000, that would have survived the flood, so it was a mass extinction event, for sure.
Some of the other more strange theories, and what I want to point out here is that these are written in scientific papers by scientists, and they're not just made up by anybody on the street. Some interesting ones. For example, the egg theory: that the shells of the eggs of the dinosaurs, they became too thick, couldn't allow oxygen in, so the baby dinosaur couldn't make it, or they became too thin.
Actually, that's not this theory. This theory has to do with eating eggs. Sorry, I'm getting ahead of myself. What this theory proposes is that T- Rexes loved to eat eggs of the sauropods, and so they kept eating them and eating them until there were no more baby sauropod eggs to be hatched, and the sauropods went away, and once the sauropods went away, what was T-Rex going to eat? Because supposedly, there wasn't a lot of mammals around during this time, just very tiny ones, so they ate themselves into extinction.
Here's the thin egg one: the shells were either too thick or too thin. Again, probably caused by some type of climate change. That's the general idea. It got cold, and that affected the eggs, the shells.
Self-destruction, this is mutations and natural selection at work. Now, we had several series on mutations, so hopefully, this is familiar, but they were very unlucky. They had some very bad mutations, and it affected their intellect or affected their speed, and they died out. They were chosen for extinction by natural selection.
Too many males. This one, again, is kind of related to climate change. It got really cold somehow, and this affects the cell, the sex of the males, right? You have too many males, and so they couldn't find any wives. They had no girlfriends to go date, marry, and grow up and have children with.
Caterpillars. This is one of my favorites. The caterpillars ate all the vegetation, so we had a massive spurt of growth of caterpillars that ate all the vegetation. Well, what were the herbivores going to eat? Well, they died out because there was no food, and then what were the carnivores going to eat, because their food source ran out all due to those caterpillars.
Cataracts, bad eyesight. This one has to do with, not the climate turning cold, but just the opposite: The sun was too hot, and so before the dinosaurs could reach reproductive age, they went blind, and now they couldn't see. This is an actual theory.
A supernova. There was a nearby star that exploded and just blasted the Earth with all kinds of radiation and X-rays, and this caused them to go extinct, not just the mutations, but reducing the temperatures on Earth as well.
There are lots and lots of theories here, but Robert Bakker kind of sums it up nicely. He says,
"Traditional dinosaur theory is full of short circuits. Like the antiquated wiring in an old house, the details sputter and burn out when specific parts are tested."
- Robert T. Bakkar
The Dinosaur Heresies, 1986
What's he saying here? He's saying when it comes to what happened to the dinosaurs, which is- it's a good question to ask. It's an important question. But the theories just come and go, and there's so many of them. In fact, there are over 160 published theories. Now, many of them are kind of falling out of popularity, but overall, there's a lot. What does this tell us with so many different theories? It really means we don't know, and again, Noah's descendants didn't record for us what happened to every animal kind after they got off the ark and started reproducing.
There's more than just the dinosaurs that went extinct. In fact, in the last 100 years, recent history, IUCN has recorded over 1,000 species that have become extinct. Now, this is a very, very generous number because they're only taking into consideration the species that have been cataloged. There are on the order of several million species that haven't been cataloged, and when you add those in here, we actually have daily extinction events. That's what the IUCN tells us. The other interesting thing about this is that 1,000 species that have gone extinct, have done so largely coinciding with the effort of humans to prevent this.
Even in my lifetime, I've read about lots of species that have gone extinct, and this is with great effort on the behalf of IUCN to not let it happen, and it happens anyway. So it's not just the dinosaurs, right? Species go extinct all the time, even when we do our best, as humans, to prevent that.
So kind of bringing it back around full circle. Why? Why would God go through this event, a year-long event, not counting the time Noah spent the year building the ark, going through the flood, going through the fountains of the deep bursting forth, the floodgates of heaven, all of this, to preserve the animals on the ark and to kill so many living things, including the humans that were not on the ark? Why would He go through this great length to do that? Well, let's go to Scripture to get an idea. Genesis 6:5,
"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of mankind was great upon the earth." Wickedness is not good. God hates wickedness. He hates sin. He goes on, "and that every intent of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually."
- Genesis 6:5
Now, I think about this verse a lot. We see evil in the world today. We have people that are malicious. We have people that do good, but I wouldn't say that every human that I meet only has evil continually, that their intentions are only evil. So we're talking about a time and period where people were really, really selfish, and they were really doing bad things. He goes on in verse 7,
"Then the Lord said, 'I will wipe out mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the land,'"
- Genesis 6:7
I don't want us to miss the point here. We started out asking the question: How could Noah have fit the animals on the ark? We answered the size of the ark, the biblical kinds, but I don't want to miss the point, and that is this: that is, God really hates sin, and He judges sin, and He punishes sin. So the flood is a picture for us of God's judgment, His righteous judgment.
On the other hand, it's also a picture of salvation because Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives, eight people in all, they were saved. Why? Why just this small group of people? Well, in Genesis 6, Scripture says that,
"Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord."
- Genesis 6:8
So even amongst all this wickedness and evil going on, which God hated, and He had to judge because He is just, He is also able to save those who obey Him. That's the picture that I want to leave us with today.
Now, in our next session, we're going to take a look at the age of things, so we've kind of been skirting around this idea of age, and why do things look old? And why do fossils date so old? Why do rocks date so old? Why do we have starlight coming from so far away? If the earth is really about 6,000 years old, along with the universe, then how do we reconcile this with a biblical lens? That's what we'll take a look at in our next session.
Thank you so much.
Tukio la Kuangamia Kwa Kiasi! "Sehemu ya 4 ""Safari ya Noa"" Karibu kwenye kikao chetu kijacho cha Mwanzo wa Kihistoria, ambapo hapa, kama kawaida, tunajitahidi kushikilia kwa uthabiti Maandiko na kwa urahisi nadharia, haswa nadharia zinazohusiana na wakati uliopita." Kwa nini hilo? Kwa sababu Maandiko hayabadilika kamwe. "Mwanzo 6:1, 2 inatuambia kwamba Mungu alimpa Noa maagizo kuhusu jinsi ya kujenga safina, na kwa nini ilibidi afanye hivyo, na pia kuhusu gharika iliyokuwa ikikaribia kuharibu dunia.""" Haijabadilika. Hata hivyo, tunapotazama wakati uliopita kupitia lensi isiyo ya Kibiblia, tuna uwezekano wa kubadilisha nadharia zetu wakati wote. Kwa mfano, ilidhaniwa kwamba nyasi, kama vile nyasi nje ya nyumba na katika mbuga, hazikuibuka hadi miaka milioni 10 baada ya dinosaurs kutoweka na baada ya wao kutoweka. "Kama vile ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, kuna aina tano za nyasi katika ""dinozaur coprolites"" - udongo wa dinosaur uliopatikana katika mawe ya dinosaur - na kwa hivyo, wakati wa utafiti wa utafiti wa dinosaur, kuna uwezekano mkubwa wa kugundua kwamba kuna aina tano za nyasi katika udongo wa dinosaur." Hata hivyo, kwa wale wanasayansi Wakristo ambao hutegemea lensi yao kwenye Maandiko, hasa historia ya mapema katika Mwanzo, tayari walijua. "Watu waliamini kwamba Mungu aliumba mimea na nyasi siku ya tatu na kwamba dinosaur aliumbwa siku ya sita, na kwa hiyo, walidhani kwamba dinosaur walikuwa ""wakati uleule"" kama nyasi." Katika kikao cha mwisho tulichunguza utaratibu unaowezekana wa mafuriko. "Tunaangalia jinsi ""plate tectonics"" inavyoweza kuathiri maji, na jinsi maji yalivyopatikana kwenye mabara na jinsi kila kitu kilivyozikwa." Katika kipindi hiki, tutajibu maswali mawili, ikiwa tuna muda. Moja ni kuhusu safina ya Noa. Safina hiyo ilikuwa kubwa kadiri gani? Noa aliwezaje kuingiza wanyama wote ndani ya safina? Ni wanyama wa aina gani waliopelekwa ndani ya safina? "Kwa hivyo, swali la pili ambalo linaweza kuulizwa ni ""Je, dinosaurs waliingizwa kwenye safina?""" Na ikiwa walikuwa hivyo, ni nini kilichotokea baada ya wao kutoka kwenye safina? Hivyo, hizo ni maswali mawili ambayo tutaangalia leo. "Hata hivyo, kwa sababu Biblia inaonyesha kwamba Mungu ni Mungu, tunapaswa kuwa na mtazamo wa kweli kuhusu mambo ya wakati uliopita, kama vile tunavyoona katika Mwanzo 6:20: ""Kutoka kwa ndege wa kila aina, na wanyama wa kila aina, na kila mnyama anayetambaa juu ya ardhi, wawili wa kila aina watakuja kwako ili uwalinde.""" "Mwanzo 6:20 ""Nimekubali kusema hivi, haya hayaonekani kuwa ya kawaida." Wanyama wanaokuja kwa Noa ili kuokolewa? Je, kuna mtu yeyote anayeona jambo hilo kuwa la kawaida? Sioni kana kwamba ni jambo la kawaida. Kwa kweli, wanyama, wakati wowote kuna hatari inayo karibu, iwe ni moto au mafuriko yanakuja, au kimbunga au kimbunga, hawawezi kukaa karibu na maeneo hayo. Wao huelekea kuondoka. Wao hukimbia. Lakini hapa tunapata kinyume kabisa. Mafuriko yanakaribia. Bila shaka, ilikuwa njia ndogo ya kutoka. Na tutauliza swali kuhusu nini aina hizi maana hapa katika muda. Walikuja kwa Noa. Kwa hiyo ningeita tukio hili kuwa la kimuujiza. Hilo halikuwa jambo la kawaida. Wanyama hawaendi kwa njia hiyo kwa kawaida. "Kama nilivyosema hapo awali, ""Mwanzo wa Kihistoria"" ni sehemu ya kipindi cha ""Mwanzo wa Kihistoria"" ambapo tunajifunza juu ya nadharia za kisayansi." Kwa mfano, tunaona jinsi sayansi inavyounga mkono Maandiko. Hatuwezi kufanya hivyo sikuzote, sivyo? Hii ni moja ya mifano ya tukio la ajabu. Wanyama hawaja kwa watu ili wahifadhiwe peke yao. "Kwa sababu ya kuelezea hii, tunataka kuwa makini, kama Wakristo, kwamba tunapokutana na usomaji wa ajabu kama huu, kwamba hatujaribu kupata sababu ya asili au ya kisayansi ya kuelezea.""" "Hakuna ubaya kujaribu, lakini tunahitaji kufanya hivyo katika kesi hizi ambapo kitu cha ajabu kimetokea.""" Kwa mfano, katika kuzaliwa kwa bikira, sayansi itakuambia kwamba haiwezekani. "Hakuna haja ya kutafuta ufafanuzi wa kisayansi kuhusu jinsi Maria alivyokuwa mjamzito, ni vigumu sana.""" Badala yake, itakuwa haiwezekani. "Hatuwezi kuepuka matukio ya ajabu katika Biblia, lakini tunapaswa kuepuka kufanya makubaliano na kusema, ""Hii haimaanishi kwamba walikuja kwa Noa.""" "Hii ni kwa sababu tunaona kwamba Biblia inasema: ""Wanaume wawili wa kila aina walikuja kwa Noa ili kuokolewa.""" Ni tukio la kimuujiza. Kwa hiyo, safina hiyo ilionekanaje? Ilikuwa sawa kabisa na picha iliyo hapa chini. Kwa kweli, natumaini sivyo. Kuna mambo mengi mabaya katika picha hii, ni vigumu kujua ni wapi kuanza. Kwa mfano, kwa mfano, tuna wanyama wakubwa kwenye chombo hiki kidogo. Haionekani kama kuna mengi ya chumba. Kwa nini wanyama wote waliohitajiwa na Mungu walipaswa kuwa wawili? Hiyo haionekani kuwa sahihi. Kwa mfano, ikiwa tunaangalia maji ya juu ya mto, tunaona kuwa ni ya utulivu. Ni aina ya amani tu. Kumbuka kikao chetu cha mwisho. "Hii ni kwa sababu ya ""mito ya kina kirefu"" ambayo ilibubujika na ""milango ya mbinguni"" iliyofunguka." Hii haikuwa tukio la utulivu kama hili. Kwa kweli, kuna wanyama wengi ambao wamepigwa na kuanguka, na kwa ujumla, wanaonekana kuwa na furaha sana. Hii inaonekana kama cruise ya furaha. Hiyo si wazo tunalopata kutoka kwa Maandiko. Sasa, mimi kupata ni. Tunapofundisha watoto, ni wazi kwamba tunataka kuwafundisha kwa kiwango chao. Mimi ni kabisa sawa na kwamba. Ninaelewa hilo. Hata hivyo, kadiri watoto wanavyokua na kukomaa, ni mara ngapi tunarudi nyuma na kurekebisha picha hii na kisha kuwafundisha hasa yale ambayo Maandiko yanasema? Haikuwa safari ya kupumzika. Mafuriko hayo yalikuwa makubwa sana, yakiharibu mabilioni ya wanyama na viumbe. Haishangazi kwamba watoto wetu, wanapofika shule ya msingi, tayari wameanza kutilia shaka mamlaka ya Maandiko, kwa sababu sisi, kama wazazi, tumeshindwa kurudi nyuma na kuwafundisha kulingana na kiwango chao wanapokua. Kwa hiyo, sidhani kama hii ni picha sahihi, na tutaangalia Maandiko ili kupata wazo bora la hilo. Lakini wanyama hao waliweza kuingiaje ndani ya safina? Kwa kweli, nadhani inategemea mambo machache. Kwanza, tunazungumzia wanyama wangapi? Je, tunazungumza juu ya mamilioni? Je, tunazungumza juu ya mamia ya maelfu? Je, tunazungumza juu ya maelfu? Kwa hiyo hilo ni swali moja ambalo tunahitaji kujibu. Jambo jingine ni ukubwa wa safina. Je, ilikuwa kama ile sanduku la beseni tulilokuwa tumeona? Au je, ilikuwa kubwa zaidi? Kwa kweli, yote hutegemea hesabu. Naomba radhi kusema, ni tatizo la hisabati, sawa? Ili kujua idadi ya wanyama na ukubwa wa safina, tunahitaji kujua jinsi ilivyokuwa. Maandiko Matakatifu hayatuachii bila dalili. Hatuhitaji kukisia hapa. "Kwa hiyo, kwa kawaida, tunatafuta mwongozo huo katika Maandiko Matakatifu, na Mwanzo 7:15 inasema, ""Wakaingia ndani ya safina kwa Noa,"" huku wakizungumzia wanyama, ""wawili wawili, wa kila mwili uliokuwa na pumzi ya uhai.""" Mwanzo 7:15 - Hapa tuna kiashiria chetu cha kwanza "Hii ni kwa sababu, kama ilivyoelezwa katika kitabu cha Mwanzo, ""Katika kila aina ya wanyama, kulikuwa na aina saba za wanyama, saba safi, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili, saba wawili.""" Sijui hilo linamaanisha nini, lakini ni kiashiria ambacho tunahitaji kukiweka. "Kwa mfano, katika mstari wa 22 na 22 wa kitabu cha Ufunuo, Biblia inasema: ""Kila kitu kilichokuwa juu ya nchi kavu, kila kitu kilichokuwa na pumzi ya roho ya uhai katika pua zake, kilikufa.""" "Hii ina maana kwamba wanyama walioharibiwa, ambao hawakuwa kwenye safina, walikuwa ""watu wa nchi kavu"" ambao walipumua hewa, na kwa kupumua hewa, roho ya uhai iliingia katika pua zao." Pumua kupitia pua. Kwa hiyo hii itaondoa baadhi ya mambo moja kwa moja, kama vile samaki. Samaki hawaishi kwenye nchi kavu, sivyo? Hata hivyo, kwa sababu ya kuharibiwa na mafuriko, viumbe wengi wa baharini waliokoka. Namna gani nyangumi na pomboo? "Wana pumua hewa, lakini hawaishi ardhini, kwa hiyo hawawezi kufananishwa na ""mwenzake"" katika safina." Kwa mfano, wadudu hupumua kwa njia tofauti na mamalia. Wao hupumua oksijeni kupitia pores katika ngozi. Kwa hivyo, kwa kuwa tuna pua, tunaweza kuondoa baadhi ya vitu hivi, ingawa ninafikiria wadudu wengi wangekuwa wamepanda juu ya safina. Na wadudu wana njia ya kuokoka misiba hiyo. Kwa mfano, wangeweza kuishi kwenye nyasi za mimea zilizoteleza. Hatuhitaji kuelezea wadudu. Kwa kweli inakuja chini ya wanyama hawa wa kuishi ardhini, wanaopumua kwa pua, wanaopumua hewa. Kwa hivyo, kwa sababu ya sababu hizi mbili, tunahitaji kuwa na aina mbili za mbwa. Mbwa wawili wa kuchunga wa Ujerumani, mbwa wawili wa spaniel, na mbwa wawili wa bulldog. Sasa, hii haisikiki sawa. "Tunahitaji kuelewa maana ya neno ""watu,"" kwa sababu Biblia inaendelea kusema juu ya aina hizi za wanyama." Kwa hiyo, hatutaki kila mtu awe na vitu viwili. Kwa kweli, kuna zaidi ya aina 400 za mbwa. Sijui Noa angekuwa na nini katika siku zake. Kwa hivyo, ikiwa alikuwa na aina tatu tofauti za mbwa, je, angehitaji aina hizi zote tofauti za mbwa? Sidhani hivyo. Kwa kweli, hebu turudi kwenye Maandiko. Hebu kupata uelewa bora kidogo wa neno hili aina. "Katika mstari wa 19-20 Mungu anamwambia Noa, ""Uletee katika safina kila aina ya wanyama wawili.""" Ndege kulingana na aina zao. ya wanyama kulingana na aina zao. Wawili wa kila aina watakuja kwako ili kuwahifadhi hai." "Mwanzo 6:19-20 ""Na sasa, tukikubaliana na yale tunayojua kuhusu Mwanzo 1, wakati Mungu alipoumba ulimwengu wote na kila kitu ndani yake katika siku sita." Alipumzika siku ya saba. Aliwapa amri viumbe hai. "Yehova aliwaambia samaki ""wazae, na kuzaa kwa aina zao,"" yaani, wanyama wa baharini." Aliwaambia wanyama wa nchi kavu wafanye vivyo hivyo. Wanyama wa aina ya ng'ombe, kuzaliana baada ya aina yako. Wanadamu kuzaana kulingana na jamii yao. "Kama tunavyofahamu, ""mnyama wa Biblia"" si aina ya mnyama, bali ni aina ya mnyama ambayo inaweza kuzaa, na kwa sababu ya kuwa wanyama hao walikuja kwa Noa ili kuhifadhi uhai wao, ili baada ya gharika ya dunia kuweza kuzaa na kujaza dunia tena." Hilo ndilo lililokuwa kusudi. Hii inahusiana na uzazi ndani ya aina, ndani ya aina ya Biblia. Kwa hivyo, kwa kurudi kwa mfano wetu wa mbwa, hatuhitaji spishi zote tofauti za mbwa. Hiyo ni maalum sana. Badala yake, tungehitaji tu aina mbili za mbwa ambazo zilikuwa na mabadiliko yote ya maumbile ya kuzalisha spishi zote ambazo tuna leo. Wanasayansi wanasema kwamba aina 400 za mbwa zilizopo leo zinatokana na mbwa wawili. Hiyo ni nini wanasema, kuangalia katika maumbile. Yaelekea kitu juu ya utaratibu wa mbwa-mwitu ni kwa ujumla nini ni kukubaliwa hapa. Ndivyo ilivyo na paka. """Hatuna haja ya simba, simbamarara, cheetah na aina zote za paka." """Tunahitaji tu aina mbili za paka ambazo, tena, zilikuwa na mabadiliko yote ya maumbile ndani yao ili kutokeza aina ya paka tulizo nazo leo." Kwa hivyo moja kwa moja, unaweza kuona sasa kwamba hatuhitaji mamilioni, sawa? Sisi ni aina ya nyuma mbali na idadi hiyo. Kama sisi nyuma kidogo juu ya kiwango cha aina, idadi hii ni pengine sana, kidogo sana. John Woodmoray ameandika kitabu cha Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, na John amefundishwa biolojia na jiolojia. Nina kitabu hiki. Kitabu hiki ni rahisi kusoma na kinaelezea idadi ya wanyama ambao Noa angeweza kuchukua ndani ya safina, na pia jinsi Noa na familia yake wangeweza kuwatunza wanyama kwa kuzingatia teknolojia waliyokuwa nayo na hawakuwa nayo wakati huo. Idadi ya wanyama wanaotambuliwa na wataalamu wa Biblia ni karibu 16,000. "Kama kuna kitu ambacho kinaweza kuonekana kama ""kitu"" cha kawaida, basi ni lazima ufanye utafiti wa biolojia na taxonomy." Kuna spishi zilizo chini. Una genus. Unapoendelea na familia yako, na unapokuwa na umri mkubwa, una vitu vingine vya juu zaidi. Kwa hiyo, genus si spishi, lakini ni aina ya hatua moja juu. Ikiwa tutaenda hatua moja juu ya jamii hadi kiwango cha familia, sasa tunazungumza juu ya wanyama 2,000 hivi. Kwa hiyo, idadi hii si kubwa kama watu wanavyofikiri. "Kama tunavyoona katika rekodi ya visukuku, ""Woodmorphe"" ni mojawapo ya familia za watu waliopotea." Ikiwa utaongeza idadi ya watu ambao wamekutana na wewe, basi utapata idadi ya watu kati ya 2,000 na 16,000. Kwa ujumla, wasomi wa Biblia wanasema kwamba kuna wanyama wapatao 7,000. Bila kujali, hebu tu kuchukua kikomo cha juu. Kwa mfano, kama Noa angehitaji wanyama 16,000 kama wale wanaotajwa katika Biblia, angehitaji wanyama hao 16,000. Kwa mfano, katika rekodi ya visukuku, kuna idadi ya viumbe wanaopumua hewa, ambao ni sawa na ukubwa wa sungura au mbwa. Kwa hiyo, ni jambo la busara zaidi kuchukua wanyama wachanga ambao wangekuwa na uwezo wa kuzaliana walipoondoka kwenye safina. Kwa nini baba na nyanya wa Apathosaurus? Huna haja ya babu na nyanya T-Rex, sawa? Wanyama wote, ikiwa ni pamoja na wanadamu, dinosaurs na wanyama wa zamani, wote walianza kuwa wadogo sana. Dinosaur zilitokana na mayai ambayo unaweza kuyashika mkononi mwako. "Hata hivyo, hakuna mtu anayeweza kusema kwamba Noa aliweka mayai ya dinosaur ndani ya safina, kwa sababu Biblia inasema kwamba ""mwitu na wanyama walikuja kwake.""" Mwanamume, mwanamke, walikuja kwake. Kwa hiyo haingeweza kuwa mayai. Mayai hayawezi kuhama. Hata ingawa hilo lilikuwa tukio la kimuujiza, nadhani twaweza kuondoa mayai. Kwa hiyo, ni lazima tuchukue wanyama ambao wamekuwa wakikua na uwezo wa kuzaliana, na wakati wa mafuriko, watakuwa na uwezo wa kuzaliana. Kwa hiyo ni jambo la busara kuchukua yule mchanga na mwenye afya. Je, ni nini kuhusu apotosaurus? Tunajua kwamba walipata ukubwa mkubwa sana kutokana na mifupa yao katika rekodi ya visukuku. Kwa kweli, ni karibu na tani 30 hadi 35. Hizi zilikuwa wanyama wakubwa sana. Kwa mujibu wa utafiti uliofanywa na wanasayansi, apotazurus ilikuwa na uzito wa chini ya tani moja hadi ilipofikia umri wa miaka 12 na 13 na ilikua kwa kasi sana. Kwa nini usichukue apotosaurus ya miaka minne? Ni ndogo sana, ndogo sana. Ilichukua nafasi kidogo, ilila chakula kidogo, inahitaji matengenezo machache. Ikiwa Noa alilazimika kufanya matengenezo mengi kabisa. "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""kila kitu kinaweza kuwa na hibernation, na kwa hivyo kuna uwezekano kwamba wanyama hao walikuwa kwenye safina.""" Kwa mara nyingine tena, inaweza kuwa supernaturally kulazimishwa, lakini tunataka kuchukua vijana wadogo, haki, ni muhimu hapa. Kwa sababu dinosaurs walikuwa wengi, na wengi wao walikuwa na aina ya dinosaurs, ni muhimu kujua kwamba kuna aina ya dinosaurs ya aina ya 30 au zaidi, na aina ya dinosaurs ya aina ya 30 au zaidi. Kwa mara nyingine tena, tu kuangalia rekodi ya visukuku ya kile tunachojua. Kwa hiyo, aina hii ya Biblia inalingana na nini? "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, kuna aina kadhaa za mbweha wa rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi ya rangi.""" Hiyo ni mbweha mwekundu. Mbweha mwekundu anaweza kuzaliana na mbweha wengine mwekundu. Tunajua hilo. "Kama tunaenda juu zaidi, kwa genus, kwa Vulpes tu, tunajua kwamba katika ngazi hii, wanaweza pia kuzaliana, si tu kati yao wenyewe, lakini na aina nyingine za mbweha, si tu mbweha nyekundu. """ Kwa mfano, kama tunaangalia familia ya Canidae, tunaona kwamba wanyama wana uwezo wa kuzaliana. Ni aina gani ya wanyama walio katika familia ya Canidae? Ni pamoja na mbweha, mbwa, mbwa mwitu, coyotes, jackals, dingoes, haki? "Kama tunavyojua, wengi wao wanaweza kuzaliana leo katika kiwango hicho, kwa hiyo haingekuwa na maana kwa Noa kuwa na familia mbili za Canidae, badala ya kwenda hapa chini katika ngazi ya spishi, ambayo ingekuwa pana sana, maalum sana, kwa hivyo kwa ujumla inaaminika kwamba aina za Biblia ziko mahali fulani kati ya ngazi ya jamii na familia.""" Kwa hivyo, kwa sababu ya idadi ya wanyama, kuna idadi ya wanyama 16,000 katika jamii, na idadi ya wanyama 2,000 katika familia. "Kama nilivyosema hapo awali, hakuna njia ya kujua kwa uhakika ni aina gani ya Biblia, na tunapaswa kuwa salama sana na kwenda kwa spishi.""" Ok, basi hebu tufanye hivyo, kama mazoezi tu. "Hii ni orodha ya aina ya wanyama wanaopumua hewa na wanaoishi kwenye nchi kavu ambao Noa angeweza kuwa amehifadhi ndani ya safina: ""Wanyama wanaotambaa, ndege, amfibia na mamalia"" - ingawa huenda amfibia wote hawakufaulu, lakini tutawahusisha wote." Sasa, hii ni idadi ya kisasa ambayo tutaangalia hapa. Kwa mara nyingine tena, hakuna samaki, hakuna nyangumi, hakuna pomboo, hakuna wadudu. Hatuhitaji hizo. Hakuna kuvu, sawa? Hii ni moja ya sababu za kutokuwa na uwezo wa kufanya kazi, lakini ikiwa utaangalia takwimu hizi, utaona kwamba ni sawa na idadi ya watu wanaofanya kazi katika IUCN. "IUCN ina orodha ya ""Red List"" ya spishi zilizo hatarini mwa kutoweka, lakini sio spishi zilizo hatarini." Hizi ni idadi tu ya spishi ambazo zimeorodheshwa leo. Kwa mfano, kuna aina 32234 za wanyama, na idadi hiyo ya wanyama ni sawa na idadi ya wanyama ambao Noa aliwaingiza ndani ya safina. Hizi ni mbalimbali kwamba tuna kufanya kazi na. Kwa hiyo, turudi kwenye Maandiko Matakatifu. Hebu kupata habari zaidi kidogo. Sasa tunahitaji kujua, sasa kwamba tuna aina ya idadi katika akili, vizuri, jinsi kubwa ilikuwa sanduku? Je, itakuwa kubwa vya kutosha kuwa na wanyama wote? "Mwanzo 6:15 inasema: ""Na hivi ndivyo utakavyofanya: Urefu wa safina utakuwa mikono mia tatu, upana wake mikono hamsini, na urefu wake mikono thelathini.""" Mwanzo 6:15 - Sasa, sisi sote tunajua kile kikombe ni, haki? Tunatumia kila siku. Kwa kweli, hatutumii kila siku. Kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano, kwa mfano. "Hakika, Ezekieli alipomwambia, ""Ufanye madhabahu ya mikono moja na upana wa mkono mmoja,"" alimwambia, ""Ufanye madhabahu ya mikono moja na upana wa mkono mmoja.""" "Hakuna hata moja ya hizi cubits, lakini kuna moja ambayo inaonekana kuwa ni ya kawaida kwa watu wa Noah, na kwa hivyo inapaswa kuwa ""kubwa"" kama hiyo." "Kama ni kweli, na hii ni pengine bet salama, hatutaki kwenda juu sana, basi kwamba ingekuwa kuweka safina na vipimo hivi: 450 futi kwa urefu, 75 futi kwa upana, na 45 futi kwa urefu. """ Je, unaona kwamba picha hii ni kubwa kuliko ile tuliyoiona hapo awali, na wanyama wote wamekusanyika ndani ya safina? Kwangu, hii inaonekana kama chombo kikubwa zaidi. Kwa mfano, kuna picha hapa, lakini sio kama hii. Hatujui hasa muundo huo ungekuwaje, lakini hizi ndizo vipimo. Ingekuwa chombo kikubwa sana. "Kama unavyoona, ni ""vitu vitatu"" ambavyo Mungu alimwambia Noa avikate ndani ya safina." Hii si kichezeo cha kuoga. Hii si ukubwa wa safina tunayoona katika kitabu chetu cha watoto, sivyo? Ni kubwa sana, kubwa sana. Kwa mfano, mfano wa kioo cha 18 inch cubit, kilichotengenezwa huko Williamstown, Kentucky, Marekani. Wamejenga nakala ya ukubwa halisi. Angalia watu hapa kwa ajili ya kiwango. Hiyo ilikuwa chombo kikubwa sana. Je, ilikuwa kubwa vya kutosha kubeba vitu vyote vilivyohitaji kubebwa? Hilo ndilo swali tunalojaribu kujua. Ili kufanya hivyo, tunahitaji kufanya hesabu kidogo zaidi, lakini usijali. Hatutakuwa na kufanya hesabu. Hisabati tayari imefanywa kwa ajili yetu. "Kama ukilinganisha ukubwa wa safina na ukubwa wa ""vituo vya kawaida vya usafirishaji wa reli"" ambavyo unaweza kuona kwenye reli, na kuzingatia vipimo vya safina, hesabu za jumla zinatuambia kwamba inaweza kubeba angalau magari 522 ya usafirishaji wa reli." Hiyo ni magari mengi ya mizigo. "Kama tunafikiria kuhusu ukubwa wa wastani wa wanyama ambao Noa angekuwa amehifadhi ndani ya chombo hicho, karibu ukubwa wa sungura, mbwa au hata kondoo, tunaweza kuweka wanyama 120,000 wa ukubwa wa kondoo ndani ya chombo hicho, ambayo ingekuwa ya kutosha kujaza safina.""" "Hiyo ni idadi kubwa ya wanyama, 120,000 lakini tunahitaji tu kubeba, kumbuka, kama aina ya Biblia ilikuwa sawa na genus, tunazungumza juu ya wanyama 16,000, lakini hata kama tunatumia idadi ya leo ya spishi 32,000, je, tuna nafasi ya kutosha?""" Tuna nafasi ya kutosha. Kwa kweli, inaonekana kwamba baadhi ya wanyama huenda hata waliweza kutoka nje na kukimbia kuzunguka sakafu. "Hata hivyo, kwa sababu ya kuwa ""haikuwa safari ya kupumzika,"" ilikuwa na nafasi ya kutosha." Katika kitabu chake, John Woodmorppe anaelezea jinsi baadhi ya chumba hicho inaweza kuwa kutumika, uwezekano kwa ajili ya mazoezi na aina hizo za mambo. Ni wazi kwamba una hifadhi ya chakula. Noa alipaswa kuchukua mnyama mmoja kutoka kila aina ya matunda na mimea ili kuhifadhi pamoja na chakula kwa ajili ya wanyama, ili kuwe na nafasi ya kutosha kwa ajili ya wanyama. Pia, kulikuwa na nafasi ya kutosha kuhifadhi chakula na maji ambayo yangehitajika, ingawa angeweza kukusanya maji kutoka kwa mvua. Na kuhifadhi kwamba. Sawa, basi hebu tufupishe. Kuna nafasi ya kutosha kwa ajili ya kuandaa sehemu ya Biblia ya sanduku la Mungu na idadi ya wanyama. Kwa mfano, kwa mfano, meli ya Arki ilikuwa na ukubwa wa wanyama 120,000 ambao walikuwa na ukubwa wa kondoo, lakini kwa kawaida walikuwa wadogo zaidi. Nini kilichotokea kwa dinosaurs - Nadharia tatu za Juu Ok, hivyo tumejibu maswali mawili muhimu sana. Tunafikiri kwamba safina ingekuwa kazi, haki? Sasa, ni nini kilichotokea kwa dinosaurs? Ikiwa kila aina ya wanyama, ikiwa ni pamoja na dinosaurs, ilikuja kwa Noa ili kuhifadhiwa, hiyo ingejumuisha dinosaurs, kwa hivyo tunajua kwamba wengine ambao hawakuwa ndani ya safina walizikwa, na tunapata mifupa yao kote ulimwenguni leo. Ni nini kilichotokea kwa wale waliotoka kwenye safina? Ni wazi kwamba hawapo hai leo. Spishi nyingi zilizotoka kwenye safina zina mifano ya kisasa. Bado wako hai. Kwa hiyo, ni nini kilichotokea kwa dinosauri hao? Hebu tuangalie nadharia tatu za juu. Tutafanya hii pretty haraka hapa. Yaelekea umesikia kuhusu vitu hivi. "Mfano wa kwanza katika orodha hii ni ""Meteorite impact.""" Meteor iliyokuwa na mwendo wa kilomita 7 na nusu kwa saa, ikishambulia dunia, ilibeba mabaki mengi ya vumbi na mawingu, na ilizuia jua kutoka kuangaza kwa muda mrefu, na hivyo kuifanya jua kuwa baridi zaidi. Hiyo ni moja. Kwa mfano, katika Mexico, kwa mfano, kuna uwezekano mkubwa wa kuwa na meteorite ya Chicxulub. Kuna ubishi mwingi siku hizi kuhusu kama au la kwamba ilikuwa meteorite halisi. Kwa kawaida, watu huamini kwamba eneo hilo lilikuwa na volkano kubwa kwa sababu ya iridium iliyopatikana huko. Iridium pia hupatikana katika meteoriti na mabaki ya volkano, lakini kwa vyovyote vile, si mpango uliofanywa. Hakuna anayejua kwa sababu ilikuwa ni wakati uliopita. Kwa bahati mbaya, wazao wa Noa hawakuandika kile kilichotokea kwa dinosaurs, kwa hiyo hatujui. Nadhani mimi tu alitoa kitu nzima mbali huko, haki? Ni ipi ile ya pili? Jambo la pili ni upungufu wa chakula. Kwa mfano, kuna baadhi ya mambo ambayo tunatambua tunapokwenda kwenye duka la vyakula. Tunaona upungufu wa vitu fulani. Lakini kwa sababu ya uwezekano wa meteorite au volkano, vimeng'enya vilianguka na kuharibu chakula na dinosaurs pia. Jina la tatu la kawaida ni la kawaida, lakini kwa kweli ni moja ya aina ya volkano kubwa. Kwa hivyo, kwa kuzingatia rekodi ya visukuku, tunaweza kuona ushahidi wa shughuli hizi za volkano ambazo hatujawahi kuona. Mlima St. Helens ni tone katika ndoo ikilinganishwa na baadhi ya milipuko hii ya volkano tunaona katika rekodi ya visukuku. Volkano kubwa sana, na kwa hivyo, ilizua gesi nyingi na vumbi, na kuzuia jua, na hiyo ingeathiri hali ya hewa, ingekuwa na athari kwa chakula. Si dinosaur tu waliopotea. Wanasayansi wanaamini kwamba kile kilichosababisha kutoweka kwa dinosaurs pia kilisababisha karibu 80% ya maisha yote kutoweka. Sasa, nadhani wao ni kweli karibu haki huko, haki? Kwa sababu ya kuanguka kwa maji ya mafuriko, idadi kubwa ya wanyama waliokufa, na wengine 16,000 waliokoka, kwa hivyo ilikuwa ni tukio la kutoweka kwa wingi. Kuna nadharia nyingine za ajabu ambazo ni za kisayansi na hazijapatikana kwa watu wa kawaida. Baadhi ya hizo ni zenye kupendeza. Kwa mfano, nadharia ya mayai ya dinosaurs ilisema kwamba shell ya mayai ya dinosaurs ilikuwa nene sana na haikuweza kuingiza oksijeni, na hivyo dinosaur mtoto hakuweza kufanya hivyo. Kwa kweli, hiyo si nadharia hii. Nadharia hii inahusiana na kula mayai. Naomba radhi, mimi nina kupata mbele ya mimi mwenyewe. T-Rex alikuwa na hamu ya kula mayai ya sauropod, na kwa hivyo aliendelea kula hadi wakati ambapo mayai ya sauropod ya mtoto hayakuwa na kuanguliwa, na sauropods walipoondoka, T-Rex alishindwa kula. Kwa sababu, kwa mujibu wa utafiti, hakuna mamalia wengi katika eneo hilo, lakini kuna wale ambao walijitolea kuangamia. Hii ni yai laini: magamba yalikuwa nene sana au nyembamba sana. Kwa mara nyingine tena, labda ilisababishwa na aina fulani ya mabadiliko ya hali ya hewa. Hilo ndilo wazo la jumla. Hali ya hewa ilikuwa baridi na hiyo iliathiri mayai na makombora. Uharibifu wa nafsi ni kazi ya mabadiliko ya chembe za urithi na uteuzi wa asili. Sasa, tulikuwa na mfululizo kadhaa juu ya mabadiliko, kwa hivyo tunatumaini, hii ni ya kawaida, lakini walikuwa na bahati mbaya sana. Walikuwa na mabadiliko mabaya sana, na hayo yaliathiri akili yao au kasi yao, na wakafa. Walipangwa kwa ajili ya kutoweka kwa njia ya uteuzi wa asili. Wanaume wengi sana. Hii, tena, ni aina ya kuhusiana na mabadiliko ya hali ya hewa. Kwa sababu ya hali ya hewa ya baridi, hii inaweza kuathiri tabia ya kiume, na pia jinsia ya kiume. Wanaume wengi sana, kwa hiyo hawakuweza kupata wake. Hawakupata mpenzi wa kuoa, kuolewa, na kupata watoto. Vipepeo. Hii ni mojawapo ya vitu ninapenda zaidi. Kwa sababu ya kuenea kwa wadudu, mimea yote ilitoka kwa wadudu, na kwa sababu hiyo, mimea yote ilitoka kwa wadudu. Kwa nini wanyama hao wanaokula mimea walikula chakula? Kwa sababu ya ukosefu wa chakula, wanyama hao walipoteza chakula chao, na kwa sababu ya ukosefu wa chakula, wanyama hao walipoteza chakula chao. Cataracts, uwezo mbaya wa kuona. "Hii haikuhusiana na hali ya hewa ya baridi, bali kinyume chake: jua lilikuwa moto sana, na hivyo kabla ya dinosaurs kufikia umri wa kuzaliana, walipofoka, na sasa hawakuweza kuona. """ Hii ni nadharia halisi. Jua jipya. Nyota iliyokuwa karibu ililipuka na kuangusha dunia kwa aina zote za mnururisho na miale ya X, na hii ilisababisha kutoweka kwa wanyama hao, sio mabadiliko tu, lakini pia kupunguza joto duniani. Kuna nadharia nyingi za kuibuka kwa hali hii, lakini Robert Bakker anaelezea kwa njia ya kawaida. "Mwanasayansi huyo alisema: ""Nadharia ya dinosaur ya kawaida ina vifungo vifupi." Kama vile nyaya za zamani katika nyumba ya zamani, mambo madogo-madogo huvunjika na kuungua wakati sehemu fulani zinapochunguzwa". "Robert T. Bakker, ""The Dinosaur Heresies"" (1986) - ni kitabu cha kwanza cha kitabu cha ""The Dinosaur Heresies"" cha mwaka 1986." "Kama unavyojua, kuna uwezekano mkubwa kwamba dinosaurs walikuwa ""kuanguka"" katika karne ya XNUMX, na hii ni sababu nzuri ya kutafakari juu ya suala hili." Ni swali muhimu. Lakini nadharia huja na kwenda, na kuna nyingi sana. Kwa kweli, kuna nadharia zaidi ya 160 zilizochapishwa. Wengi wao ni aina ya kuanguka nje ya umaarufu, lakini kwa ujumla, kuna mengi. Hii inatuambia nini na nadharia nyingi tofauti? "Hii inamaanisha kwamba hatujui, na tena, wazao wa Noa hawakutuandikia kile kilichotokea kwa kila aina ya wanyama baada ya wao kutoka kwenye safina na kuanza kuzaliana.""" Kuna zaidi ya dinosaurs tu kwamba akaenda extinct. Katika miaka 100 iliyopita, IUCN imerekodi zaidi ya spishi 1,000 ambazo zimetoweka. Hii ni idadi kubwa sana kwa sababu inazingatia tu spishi zilizotajwa. Kuna karibu milioni kadhaa za spishi ambazo hazijaorodheshwa, na unapoongeza hizo hapa, kwa kweli tuna matukio ya kutoweka kila siku. Hii ni kwa sababu IUCN inatuambia. Jambo jingine la kushangaza ni kwamba spishi 1,000 ambazo zimetoweka zimetokea kwa sababu ya juhudi za wanadamu za kuzuia kutoweka. """Nimesoma juu ya spishi nyingi ambazo zimetoweka, na hii ni kwa juhudi kubwa kwa niaba ya IUCN ili kuzuia kutokea, na inatokea hata hivyo." Kwa hiyo si dinosaurs tu, sawa? Spishi zinapotea kila wakati, hata wakati tunafanya kila tuwezalo, kama wanadamu, kuzuia hilo. Kwa hiyo aina ya kuleta nyuma kuzunguka mzunguko kamili. Kwa nini? Kwa nini Mungu akafanya jambo hili, jambo la mwaka mzima, bila kuhesabu wakati ambao Noa alitumia kujenga safina, kupitia mafuriko, kupitia chemchemi za abyss, kupitia milango ya mbinguni, yote haya, kuhifadhi wanyama ndani ya safina na kuua viumbe wengi wanaoishi, ikiwa ni pamoja na wanadamu ambao hawakuwa ndani ya safina? Kwa nini angefanya hivyo kwa muda mrefu? Kwa hiyo, hebu tuangalie Maandiko ili tuelewe jambo hilo. "Mwanzo 6: 5 ""Basi Bwana akaona ya kuwa uovu wa wanadamu ulikuwa mkubwa duniani." Uovu si jambo zuri. Mungu anachukia uovu. Yeye huchukia dhambi. "Anasema hivi: ""Na kila nia ya mawazo ya mioyo yao ilikuwa mbaya tu daima.""" Mwanzo 6: 5 - Sasa, mimi kufikiri juu ya mstari huu sana. Tunaona uovu katika ulimwengu leo. Tuna watu wenye uovu. """Tuna watu wanaofanya mema, lakini nisingesema kwamba kila binadamu ninayekutana naye ana uovu tu daima, kwamba nia zao ni uovu tu." Kwa hiyo, tunazungumzia wakati na kipindi ambapo watu walikuwa wenye ubinafsi sana, na walikuwa wakifanya mambo mabaya sana. "Mwanzo 6:7 ""Basi Bwana akasema, Nitawaangamiza wanadamu niliowaumba juu ya uso wa nchi.""" "Kwanza, tulijiuliza swali hili: ""Noa aliwezaje kuingiza wanyama katika safina?""" "Kama tunavyoona katika Biblia, ""Siri ya dhambi"" ni ""Siri ya dhambi"" na ""Siri ya dhambi"" ni ""Siri ya dhambi"" na ""Siri ya dhambi"" ni ""Siri ya dhambi"" na ""Siri ya dhambi"" ni ""Siri ya dhambi.""" Kwa hiyo, mafuriko ni mfano wa hukumu ya Mungu, hukumu yake ya haki. "Kwa upande mwingine, ni picha ya wokovu kwa sababu Noa, mkewe, wanawe watatu, na wake zao, watu wanane kwa jumla, waliokolewa.""" Kwa nini? Kwa nini ni kikundi hiki kidogo tu cha watu? "Mwanzo 6:1, 2 inasema hivi: ""Noa akapata kibali machoni pa Yehova.""" "Mwanzo 6:8 ""Basi hata katika uovu huu wote na uovu unaoendelea, ambao Mungu alichukia, naye alilazimika kuhukumu, kwa sababu yeye ni mwenye haki, yeye pia anaweza kuwaokoa wale wanaomtii.""" Hiyo ndiyo picha ambayo ningependa kutuacha nayo leo. Katika kipindi hiki cha utafiti, tutazungumzia umri wa vitu, na kwa nini vitu vinaonekana kuwa vya zamani. Na kwa nini visukuku ni vya kale sana? Kwa nini miamba ni ya kale sana? Kwa nini nuru ya nyota hutoka mbali sana? Ikiwa dunia ina umri wa miaka 6,000 hivi, basi tunawezaje kuifananisha na Biblia? Hiyo ni nini sisi kuchukua kuangalia katika kikao chetu ijayo. Asanteni sana.