To: CDHart
I've often wondered if maybe Noah took the DNA of all the creatures, not the creatures themselves.
No, but what he did take on the ark were infant animals, which included dinosaurs.
Which is easier and feed and care for, a baby elephant or a full grown one? More room also for extra animals.
36 posted on
03/19/2004 12:32:27 PM PST by
Chewbacca
("Turn off your machines! Walk off your jobs! Power to the People!" - The Ice Pirates)
To: Chewbacca
No, but what he did take on the ark were infant animals, which included dinosaurs. Wow, that's the first time I've heard anyone declare something like that.
53 posted on
03/19/2004 1:35:18 PM PST by
Dog Gone
To: Chewbacca
No, but what he did take on the ark were infant animals, which included dinosaurs. Which is easier and feed and care for, a baby elephant or a full grown one? More room also for extra animals.
Interesting theory! But don't baby elephants, or for that matter pretty much any mammal, require a mother (ie. adult) to survive?
To: Chewbacca
No, but what he did take on the ark were infant animals, which included dinosaurs.I've often wondered if many of the great extinctions occurred when certain species either didn't board the ark or were not invited to do so.
To: Chewbacca
No, but what he did take on the ark were infant animals, which included dinosaurs. How many animal species were onboard the Ark?
100 posted on
03/22/2004 9:40:04 AM PST by
Modernman
(Chthulu for President! Why Vote for the Lesser Evil?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson