The Instigator
LenaQueen
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
XxBatsaraxX
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Noah's Arc Could Not Have Happened

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
LenaQueen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/16/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 659 times Debate No: 54867
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

LenaQueen

Pro

First of all, I mean none of this to be offensive, and if you feel offended please notify us in the comments including how we can stop (while still debating the topic).

In this debate, I will be providing evidence for how the Biblical story of Noah's Arc could not have happened, and my oponint will provide evidence for how it could. The first round is for intro to the topic/ rules/ acceptence. The second round is arguements only. The third round is for rebuttals and arguements, and the final round has no new arguements, only rebuttals, and concluding statements. Thank you, and may the odds be ever in your favor! (Haha sorry to be off topic I love the Hunger Games)

The Noah's Arc Story
http://www.biblegateway.com...
XxBatsaraxX

Con

I found your statement very interesting. I would like to take on the challenge and try to shine some light on why I think that it is possible that the story of Noah's arc could have happened.
Debate Round No. 1
LenaQueen

Pro

Okay, I have four main points. They include Noah's age, the number of animals he would have had to take with him, the Arc itself, and the recovery of the land and animals. Throughout these arguments, I will use the Bible's logic to prove itself wrong.

In the Bible, it said that when this story took place, Noah was 600 years old[1]. The world's oldest recorded living person lived until about 123 years old[2]. Other than in the Bible, which is a questionable source for this very reason, there has been no one ever recorded to be over even 150. And even if they did somehow manage to live this long, they would not be able to build a boat from scratch, more on that later.

My next point is probably my biggest. There are around 8.7 million species in the world[3], and none of them could have possibly evolved after the Flood, using the Bible's logic of creationism. Now since he took 2 of every animal, that's 17.4 million animals. Noah's Arc was huge[1], but definitely not that big. And even if you could manage to cram that many animals into that space, it would be inhumane, and don't you think the lions would eat the deer, or the anteaters would eat the ants? Also, how could he possibly get them all to come, being from all over the world and across seas? And only two of each animal isn't enough. If two dogs have a litter, the puppies would have to incest to continue the species. This would cause birth defects.

The Arc itself. Noah was not a boat-builder. It would be insanely hard for him to gather all the wood necessary to build the Arc, let alone build it. Now, let me tell you about a ship very similar to the Arc. This ship was called the Wyoming[4], and it was even a bit smaller than the Arc is said to be. The Wyoming even was enforced with internal steel bracing[4], and she was still too big. To skim her story, she twisted so much at sea that she ripped holes in herself by twisting. The designs were similar, except for the Arc was bigger, and the massive size was the flaw of the Wyoming. Because of the design, size, and materials of the Arc, it could not have stayed afloat for a year.

Let's say all the aforementioned flaws of the Arc are gone. What happened after the Arc landed? The Arc came back ashore in what is now known as the middle east[5]. 17.4 million animals all on one mountain. We know that there are animals that can only live in specific climates, so how did they get back there, across seas and deserts? There should be fossils of kangaroos and polar bears somewhere in the Middle East, but none have been discovered. Also, when the whole planet flooded, most of the plants would have drowned. There would be nothing for herbivores to eat. The carnivores couldn't eat either because their prey needed time to repopulate.

In conclusion, the Noah's Arc story could not be true. Thank you for accepting, and I look forward to hearing your side. Please stick to arguments this round and wait to share rebuttals. Thank you!

As a side point, I really like your profile picture, I think it's funny!

Sources:
1: http://www.biblegateway.com...
2: http://en.wikipedia.org...
3: http://www.sciencedaily.com...
4: http://www.uh.edu...
5: http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com...
6: http://en.wikipedia.org...
XxBatsaraxX

Con

XxBatsaraxX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
LenaQueen

Pro

To make this as fair as possible, consider this a forfit. If my oponint forfits again however, I have more points. I wish the best health to my oponint, and I understand if they are busy.
XxBatsaraxX

Con

XxBatsaraxX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
LenaQueen

Pro

LenaQueen forfeited this round.
XxBatsaraxX

Con

XxBatsaraxX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
Another one where Pro has scared away the opposition by simple application of Logic.
Wish I'd find it that easy!
Posted by LenaQueen 3 years ago
LenaQueen
When I said points in round two, I meant arguements.
Posted by Christian_Debater 3 years ago
Christian_Debater
I'll be keeping my eyes on this debate. Hopefully Batasara refers to sources that I am hoping they do. If not this might be difficult for them.
Posted by LenaQueen 3 years ago
LenaQueen
@Gs325jcbd If you want to debate with me, click accept.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
LenaQueenXxBatsaraxXTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
LenaQueenXxBatsaraxXTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not put up an argument, thus leaving Pro with the only argument and sources. Though one argument Con could have used is the Story that Noah's Ark was a large boat that Noah (a farmer) took his cattle to market on which became washed downstream by the Tigris River flood (Gilgamesh) and it landed on the side of a hill, where when the water subsided, Noah drove his cattle to market and all survived. That is one legend that Con could have used, because the probability for it is far greater than the Biblical version of this story.