The fact is that there is no list of the animals that were in the ark. The Bible just says that all the animals came. So we can't really make any definite statements about which ones were there and which weren't. Except that the Bible says they all came. That doesn't leave any animals to have been left behind. And the rest of the argument is about how likely the story of Noah and the Ark is.

We could get into another shouting match with one side saying the Bible is literally true, and the other side pointing out inconsistencies in the Bible story. This has been done over and over and there hasn't been any constructive outcome as far as I can tell.

I personally fall on the side that doesn't believe the Bible is literally true. It contains many stories that provide allegorical guidance in making our way through life. But to me that is its main use.

Trying to make the Bible fully describe the creation of the universe just doesn't work. It doesn't match the observations that many people have made over many years. Those observations have been checked and rechecked and even where there is some disagreement on details the overall story remains the same and is fully consistent with observations. And the observations have been made by many different people who have been observing many different things, in many different disciplines.

Most Creationists accept the Bible as containing the true story of the origin of the universe. This belief is based on no independent observations. While many Creationists claim to have scientific evidence that the Biblical story is true they have not so far come up with any unequivocal evidence. The fact is that the whole backing for the Creationist view of the universe is found in the Bible.

And in the mean time this topic has strayed far from the original subject which was the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.