RationalWiki's 2018 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3383Goal: $5000

Aquatic species and the global flood

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Rescued from the
Global Flood
Icon flood.svg
Twelve of the clean kind
Noah did not take any fish, or other marine life, on the ark,[1] so every species of fish, mollusc or crustacean observable today had to survive out in the open ocean for the 367 day[2] duration of the flood. This would have presented numerous insurmountable problems. The mixing of salt and fresh water would have killed many fish, tremendous oceanic turbulence would have killed others, and still others thrown out of their normal habitat would die of starvation.

Demonstrating the obvious[edit]

It should be clear that the story of Noah’s Ark and the flood is a myth. Unfortunately, because of the growth of creation "science", actual scientists are forced to run studies with computer models to demonstrate the obvious to fundamentalist Christians, who usually don't listen anyway.

Problems with the survival of aquatic life[edit]

Salinity change[edit]

Changes in salinity would have killed many of the fish.[3] Most marine life cannot survive in water of reduced salinity, and likewise most freshwater creatures cannot tolerate increased salinity. This is a simple fact due to the nature of their evolved osmotic membranes, which tend to allow water itself to move in only one direction - into the animal in salt water, and out of it in fresh water.


Models of the global flood result in ocean currents fluctuating between 40 and 80 meters per second,[4] a speed of 4000% (40 times) as fast as the fastest ocean currents today, which peak at 2 meters per second.[5] This would have caused massive turbulence that many species would be unable to survive.

Aquatic species such as the various stingrays, which spend most of their time in close proximity to the ocean floor,[6] would be repeatedly bashed against the bottom of the ocean, a collision they would be unable to survive even once. All coral reef fish, and the reefs themselves, would meet a similar fate, and yet the fossil record oddly contains perfectly preserved coral reefs in strata that creationists claim were deposited by the flood.

Sediment accumulation[edit]

The global flooding and the extreme turbulence caused in the Noah's Ark myth would have stripped the earth of topsoil.[7] This would have caused extreme problems for aquatic species that require clear water, and they would choke on particulate concentrations nearing 30%.[3]

Habitat destruction[edit]

Coral reefs, which consist of the accumulated calcareous exoskeletons of tiny invertebrate polyps, provide a habitat for many creatures. They are also very sensitive to changes in salinity, temperature and depth (which includes higher pressures and lower levels of sunlight); the corals would not have survived such a massive inundation.

Pressure fluctuation[edit]

The flood would have caused a fluctuation in the water pressure that would kill many animal species either from decompression or excess pressure.[8]

The answer[edit]

Goddidit! He can do anything, you evilutionist fools!

Since they claim He could do that, when Creationists are asked why God didn't simply destroy all the sinners & not bother with the need for an ark and a flood, they had no clear answer (other than "God works in mysterious ways"... which would appear to be verbal shorthand for "We don't have a good answer to that").

See also[edit]