I don't know if this has already been posted here...
http://ldsmag.com/article/1/14059

How common is this "anti-science" thinking in the mormon church?

I loved the following:"Noah did not need to capture the animals that went into the ark. They amazingly came by themselves, two by two, or by sevens for some kinds of animals. Did the kangaroo from Australia really need to make the long journey or perhaps impossible journey on its own with its mate to be included in the ark? Or, was angelic assistance involved in collecting the animals for the ark? So, the answer to this question about the kangaroos is that they doubtless took the same transportation back to Australia as they took to go to the ark. And I doubt if they or many of the other animals had to hop, jump or walk much at all—they just needed to catch the right “Angel-air” transport at the right time, as it were."

Well, thanks for the laugh if nothing else....

... trying to decide if she actually read what she thinks she read...




*facepalm*

AAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Here are my take aways.....

- amazingly
- perhaps impossible
- angelic assistance
- the answer to this question
- doubtless
- doubt
- they just needed to
- as it were

I feel like I've been watching "Ancient Aliens"!

Oh, dear... This is why there is so much anti-science in Utah.

Hmm, not one mention about how there are multiple ancient cultures whose records and artifacts continue uninterrupted before, during, and after the flood.

Any other apologist can claim a localized flood to get around that, but there's too much global flood doctrine weaved into the scriptures and general conference talks to make that case as a Mormon apologist.

The article can write off a lot of things as "look, it was a really big miracle" but not the concurrent archaeological records, why would god put a big safety bubble around Egypt, and why didn't the notice it?

A term borrowed from my main squeeze: Pure F'ing Magic.

Angel-air transport for the animals. lol

If the Noah story were true it would mean that this earth had the dumbest God ever to declare himself a God.

His big idea: The people are wicked, accept for this man and his family. Some of the people in the family are a bit dicey, but since the man is so good, I'll give them a bye. All other people must be destroyed, so I'll have the man with the help of miracles and angels gather up all of the flora and fauna and put them in a big boat and then I'll wipe the earth clean with a flood.

His wife's idea: Gather up all of the wicked people, put them in a valley and flood the valley. Less effort, less time, less smelly, requires fewer angels and less water.

He just had to do it his way.

+10!

The apologist answer is always magic. However, someone once pointed out, that even if you had magical pokemon balls, and could trap all the medium to large animals into a pokemon size ball, where they would not need food, water, or air, you'd still run out of space given the dimensions of the ark, which is smaller than a modern cruise ship.

"Should doubt knock at your doorway, just say to those skeptical, disturbing, rebellious thoughts: “I propose to stay with my faith, with the faith of my people. I know that happiness and contentment are there, and I forbid you, agnostic, doubting thoughts, to destroy the house of my faith. I acknowledge that I do not understand the processes of creation, but I accept the fact of it. I grant that I cannot explain the miracles of the Bible, and I do not attempt to do so, but I accept God’s word. I wasn’t with Joseph, but I believe him. My faith did not come to me through science, and I will not permit so-called science to destroy it."
President Thomas S. Monson, "The Lighthouse of the Lord: A Message to the Youth of the Church," New Era, Feb. 2001.


FLOOD WAS BAPTISM OF EARTH. Now a word as to the reason for the flood. It was the baptism of the earth, and that had to be by immersion. If the water did not cover the entire earth, then it was not baptized, for the baptism of the Lord is not pouring or sprinkling. (Smith, Joseph Fielding, Jr., Doctrines of Salvation (Salt Lake City: BookCraft, 1955), Vol.2, p.320)



Is not today much like Noah’s day when the population of the earth was wiped out in the flood and but eight righteous souls were spared? Some doubt that there was a flood, but by modern revelation we know that it did take place. By modern revelation we know that for more than a century, Noah pleaded with the people to repent, but in their willful stubbornness they would not listen.
—Mark E. Petersen, “Follow the Prophets,” Ensign, Nov 1981, 64

Also remember the two by two, or seven, is actually two mating pairs for unclean animals, meaning four, and seven pairs for clean, meaning fourteen. That however is just for the vertebras. The insects, were brought in by swarm.

I really like this video in regards to Noah's ark: (warning lotsa swearing)

Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_BzWUuZN5w

Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLr5vl-n0Bo

That was a damn good laugh, thanks for that?

"What do you mean we don't have any unicorns"?

Thank you!

I needed that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2014 09:28PM by archytas.

Too-too-preciously-yrs,

S

In my best Daffy Duck voice: "It is to laugh..."

You know, something I've wondered: why did the earth need to be baptized? Baptism is a symbolic washing away of past sins (or your past life/beliefs) so that you can start anew, so if it was the people God wanted to wipe out, what was Earth's past sin? The people sinned, not the planet; it's just a big ball of rocks and water. And what sin did the billions of other plants and animals commit? I guess it was collateral damage in God's ingenious plan.

Oh yeah, and how did all of those "others" that are supposed to now be so obviously mentioned in the BoM come from after the flood; you know, the millions of Native Americans with Asian DNA that helped Lehi plant corn and survive that first harsh New England winter (Sorry, stories mixed up).

OK, OK, it's all symbolic, except for this goofball and those who might believe him.

I had an interesting discussion with a scientist who pointed out that if the earth, including it's tallest peaks was baptized in the flood, Noah and company would have had very little oxygen in the ark.

Uh, no. They would have had the same atmospheric pressure as before the flood.

The atmosphere starts at the level of the sea or land. If you added enough water to the Earth to flood all the land the atmosphere would still start at sea level. The atmospheric pressure at sea level would be unchanged.

And as for the oxygen content of the atmosphere, it would not change much during the flood because one ark full of animals would use almost no oxygen when compared to the amount of oxygen contained in the atmosphere.

The big question is where did all the water go after the flood?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2014 09:40PM by Mnemonic.

If you want to retain FAITH but study the animals around the time that Noah was sailing the seas in his sacred wooden ark full of 2 termites, 2 woodpeckers, and lots of other critters then I recommend you stick to the animals that were in the oceans. They didn't need any ark to save them as a worldwide deluge of rain would suit them just fine in giving them more oceanspace to swim to their heart's content.

Until all that rainwater mixed with the saltwater of the oceans, producing an unlivable brackish mixture unfit for ocean and freshwater fish.

The comments are even more ridiculous...

"A wise scientist once told me that true science and true religion will never conflict. Obviously the science is wrong here. "

How many species of fresh water creatures would die immediately in a world-wide flood? There are over thirty species of piranha alone. Any thing you see living in a creek or river would not be there if the Noah story were literal. There would be no frogs or minnows.

If the Noah story were actually true, that means that every male
on earth descended from Noah in the last 4500 years. That means
every male would have the same Y-chromosome--Noah's

However the variation in Y-chromosomes vastly exceeds what would
have happened within the last 10,000 years, much less the last
4500 years.

Unless . . . unless Sister Noah had been cheating on Brother
Noah and two of his sons were not his. Then there would be
three "strains" of very similar Y-chromosomes. That doesn't
work either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2014 09:26PM by baura.

Don't forget that any telling of this story should start out;

A 600 year old man built an ark....

+600