ANSWERS: 31
  • Because there are a lot of variables that we don't know in that equation. For example, "who was Cain's wife?", which implies that there were other people besides Adam and Eve on the planet. If that were the case, then we also don't know that there weren't other pople to whom God told to build another Ark. Also, from the perspective of the writers at the time, anything that covered a very flat area, which that region mostly is, would be considered as a flood. This allows for the possibility that people survived other, higher places without any problem. Also, what are the long term signs of inbreeding? Have there been studies done over many (more than say 4) generations of human inbreeding? Perhaps we all do have those signs and really it's now the norm. It also states that people lived a very long time back then (hundreds of years). Perhaps the sign of inbreeding from that point is a shorter lifespan. We really just don't know what the differences are from then until now and it's really had to say that we all don't have signs of inbreeding.
  • Ah, you icredulous person, the lord works in mysterious ways indeed...
  • Good question. Kind of proves that it never fucking happened
  • Because it didn't happen. It is a myth.
  • Because it's only a story and it's not true, it did not happen the way the bible says. There was a huge flood but the whole Noah's Ark thing is BS.
  • Noah, and his Wife...His Sons and all of their wives. The breeding would have came from cousins which dont always show signs of inbreeding...and may show non at all. Besides if "God was involved" why would he allow that? People show signs of imbreeding now, not cuz they HAVTA inbreed...but cuz they want to even though they know its not "correct". Were talkin God here. If the story is true, God would get involved.
  • I'm not so sure about that. When I see the insane things that us human beings can do to one another... if that isn't inbreeding at its worst... I don't know what is. Hope this helps.
  • The wives of the 3 sons were not related to the family. Also, people at that time were evidently physically stronger based on their life span, and could deal with it. When life spans got down to today's average of 70-80, it was no longer advisable and probably had already stopped by the time laws were put into place to prohibit it.
  • Since there isn't a shred of scientific evidence in the geologic record of any world-wide flood ever occurring, why should there be a genetic record? Either it's an allegory or God made sure it wasn't scientifically verifiable.
  • We do. Do you think we are smart?
  • simple ... it never ever happened ... no proof ... no evidence that any flood of the world happened, just another Myth from the book of the greatest Myths ever written down by man
  • because when they adapted the myth from the older Sumerian version, the study of genetics was not very advanced, so they did not factor it into the story.
  • Haven't you ever seen the British?
  • Wouldn't we all have the same last name if the flood did happened? I am just glad the Ark didn't run into any iceberg or we woild all be in Davy's locker. And I hate myself for being an inbreeder.
  • because it's all boloney. Look at it from this point of view, throw inbreeding out for a minute and consider this. If all animals were reduced to 2 of each, how the heck are there carnivores and herbavores and omnivores living on a boat without eating each other? If you figure that there's only 2 of each species and carnivores need quite a lot of meat to survive then well at least one if not both of many species would have been eaten, so they became extinct. Even if they were in pens and couldn't eat one another on the boat they would have done so as soon as they got off the boat. Not to mention what would the herbivores eat when the ark landed? It's scientific proven if water covered the entire earth (and that's a mighty mighty big IF) then there was surely no grass or trees or much of anything but rock and mud on the piece of land noah found (I won't even go into how high the waves must have been unobstructed by land and how a boat or ark or anything manmade could have survived such forces). So the herbivores are either eaten or starve to death and then just maybe then the carnivores (without somehow eating noah and his kin) had some offspring (half of which were eaten). So then why do we have herbivores today? heck why is anyone here today? All life would have starved to death or been eaten. And if something did manage to survive it wasn't an omnivore...so how did the animals survive and how did there come to be omnivores? Well if you say evolution..oh well that's not an option really if you believe in the bible...so it must have been a miracle of god and then why even ask anything, it's all just a miracle of the guy in the sky and needs no other answer, heck why question anything at all, it's all some god's plan and doesn't require any scientific or plausible answer.
  • Because we are not dogs.
  • It's a miracle!!! Just like creation and Lot's wife. Get over it. This is God's world, like it or not.
  • because Noah found a bunch of surfing men and women and they bred with them.
  • Because the exagerated version of the great flood never happened the way it was described in the bible. In truth large deluges of water have flooded great swaths of land before in prehistory. The Scablands of Washington state are one such example, carved and shaped by a megaflood created by the collapse of an ice dam at the end of the last great ice age. Undersea earthquakes, large-scale landslides, and astroid/comet impacts can also create large tsunami that can wash away miles of coastal areas across an entire ocean. It is possible that one of the above disasters did happened sparking either an emense tsunami or megaflood that effected people living in prehistoric eurasia. Then over time that tale was told over and over again, getting exagerated every time little by little until we have the tale of Noah and his ark the way it is today.
  • Because it never happened.
  • The flood has been proven not to have happened. Well, either that or it did and god very, very carefully adjusted the entire planet's geography to make it look like it never did. If he's willing to be that sneaky then he'd surely be willing to mess with the genetics of every living thing to make them look like they ALSO changed and grew over millions of years. Rather deceptive trick for a god of love who wants everyone to know him though, yes?
  • I do believe the story. But do not believe the flood was global. It was regional. The word translated as "Earth" 776. 'erets (eh'-rets) 777 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land) -- X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X natins, way, + wilderness, world. I think it should be land or ground.
  • I take it you don't believe in creation. Do you believe in evolution?
  • Didn't you see the study that was released a couple of years ago that said just that? Scientists said that there was DNA evidence that we'd all come from one woman in the fairly recent past, and possibly more than once. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve http://biology.suite101.com/article.cfm/who_is_mitochondrial_eve
  • Leave German Shepherds out of it. That's a fallacy.
  • Your question is how only 8 closely related individuals and just 2 animals of each kind could produce a viable gene pool for the various creatures after the flood that didn't show signs of severe inbreeding. Well think about this....The asumption of scientiests who accept the theory of evolution presupposes a beginning of all creatures from just a single cell. Thus, most respected scientists believe in a developmnet that are far more difficult than having an already-existing pair.
  • Obviously, because it didn't happen.
  • The same reason that it's legal to marry and reproduce with first cousins. As the population expanded, more distantly related alternatives would have become available.
  • which is easier for you to believe? That we sprung from eight individuals without severe signs of inbreeding or that we evolved from a single cell without severe signs of inbreading?
  • *Raising one eyebrow* Have you taken a good look around? Are you SURE we dont show signs of severe inbreeding? I beg to differ!
  • Maybe we could also consider the possibility that the story of the Flood does not reflect what really happened. For instance, it is against all scientific evidence.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy