Personally, I don't believe insects had to be on board [Noah's ark]. You see, I don't believe they're classified in the Bible as having the "breath of life" as vertebrates are.

Now Noah didn't need to take all the SPECIES of land animals on board- just representatives of the KINDS. In other words, he didn't need all the varieties of dogs - just two dogs that would give rise to numerous species in the new world after the flood. Calculations show that probably only around 16,000 animals were needed on board the ark.

There are HUNDREDS of SPECIES of “Carnivora” listed in zoology books today. Noah did NOT have to take HUNDREDS of pairs of Carnivora on the ark. Just 7 pairs MAY have done the trick. Changing from a wolf to a dog is a MINOR change compared to a dog coming from a ROCK (over billions of years of course!). I don't care how many billions or trillions of years they want to “imagine” it took- animals ALWAYS “bring forth after their kind” just as the Bible says.

People say, "Dinosaurs on the Ark? Now, Hovind, they are kind of big aren't they?" The big ones were big, but the little ones were little. You see Noah was 600 years old when he built that big boat. He was probably smart enough to know that you do not have to bring the biggest dinosaurs. You bring two babies, be sure to bring a pink one and a blue one that will be important later, okay. There are all kinds of reasons for bringing babies on the ark. You bring babies because they are smaller. The biggest dinosaur egg is smaller than a football. You bring babies because they weigh less, they eat less, they sleep a lot more, and they are a lot tougher. Do you know that when kids fall they bounce and then they get up and keep running? Adults fall down and break or they lay there a while. Plus you bring babies because after the flood they will live longer to produce the offspring. And that's the whole reason that you are bringing them. Why on earth would you bring big elephants on the ark? That would be stupid, for multiple reasons. Why would you bring a big giraffe? Just bring babies of everything.

As Noah looked upon the powerful beasts of prey that came forth with him from the ark, he feared that his family, numbering only eight persons, would be destroyed by them. But the Lord sent an angel to his servant with the assuring message: “The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.” Before this time God had given man no permission to eat animal food; he intended that the race should subsist wholly upon the productions of the earth; but now that every green thing had been destroyed, he allowed them to eat the flesh of the clean beasts that had been preserved in the ark.

The main point is, did God tell him to make a boat, or did Noah just use his captain common sense? Cause there are a number of us, if we were somewhere where it was raining and raining and raining and raining and raining and raining and raining and raining, and we had a big pile of wood, some of us might put two and two together and go, "I'm gonna make a bloody boat!" Others might go, "I'm gonna make a hairdresser's", "I'm gonna build a monkey emporium.", "I'm gonna build a big pair of wooden shoes, that would fit a giant." … But he made a boat. Oh, he was quite sensible! And what did he put on the boat? His family. What else? Animals. Which animals? Any he could find. Did he put two of every animal in the world on the boat? No! How can I be so sure? Try it!

Most of us tend to think of Noah as much less advanced than we are. Actually, the opposite would be true. We've had 4,500 more years of the effects of sin and the Curse on our brains. I'm convinced Noah would have had the intelligence necessary to devise methods of feeding and caring [for the animals on the ark] that would put today's farmer's to shame. If farmers today have methods that could easily allow eight people to look after 16,000 animals - I've no doubt Noah could do much more!

We know that there are many animals on this continent not found in the Old World. These must have been carried from here to the ark, and then brought back afterwards. Were the peccary, armadillo, ant-eater, sloth, agouti, vampire-bat, marmoset, howling and prehensile-tailed monkey, the raccoon and muskrat carried by the angels from America to Asia? How did they get there? Did the polar bear leave his field of ice and journey toward the tropics? How did he know where the ark was? Did the kangaroo swim or jump from Australia to Asia? Did the giraffe, hippopotamus, antelope and orang-outang journey from Africa in search of the ark? Can absurdities go farther than this?

If it was so important that man should have more than one woman to supply his sexual demands, why was the Creator so short-sighted as to make but one Eve? It would have been as easy to remove two or three or half a dozen ribs from Adam’s side as one; and as the whole world had yet to be populated, a plurality of wives would certainly have accelerated the process. Surely, if polygamy was ever required or excusable, it ought to have been allowed at the start. Again, when Noah went into the ark taking with him an assortment of all species of animals, he took some kinds of pairs and some by sevens, from which we might suspect, at least, that he observed the laws of nature respecting polygamous and monogamous animals. But he took only one wife for himself, and only one for each of his sons. Why not two or half a dozen instead? Polygamy would certainly have accelerated the repopulation of the earth most wonderfully; but Noah was monogamous. To say, in view of such facts, that monogamy originated with the paganism of ancient Greece and Rome, is blasphemy.

It took guts for Noah to build the ark because it had never rained. Got watered the earth with a mist.

Can anyone with intelligence really believe that a child born today should be doomed because the snake tempted Eve and Eve tempted Adam? To believe that is not God-worship; it is devil-worship. Can anyone call this scheme of creation and damnation moral? It defies every principle of morality, as man conceives morality. Can anyone believe today that the whole world was destroyed by flood, save only Noah and his family and a male and female of each species of animal that entered the Ark? There are almost a million species of insects alone. How did Noah match these up and make sure of getting male and female to reproduce life in the world after the flood had spent its force? And why should all the lower animals have been destroyed? Were they included in the sinning of man? This is a story which could not beguile a fairly bright child of five years of age today.

Since none of the creatures of the sea were taken on Noah's ark, there would be a strong possibility that some plesiosaurs and maybe even some ichthyosaurs survived the Flood. The violent and turbulent waters of the Flood would surely have killed and buried many of the sea creatures (over 90 percent of fossils found are of marine animals). However, if some had survived the Flood and lived on in the seas for years after, they could help account for many of the legends of sea monsters that have been gathered from all over the world. Remote as it may seem, there could even be the possibility that a few have survived till modern times. After all, it's much easier to believe that they could have survived for several thousand years rather than for nearly a hundred-million years.

By perseverance the snail reached the ark.

By perseverance the snail reached the ark.