RoderickSpode,
YOUR QUOTE WHERE YOU MISSED THE POINT: "So under this premise, which would be more likely? Infant or adult animals?"
What part of this statement of mine didn't you understand?: "SIMPLY PUT, AND WHERE WE PROMISE NOT TO LAUGH FOR THE SAKE OF THIS DISCUSSION, LET US USE "DINOSAUR INFANTS" INSTEAD OF "ADULT DINOSAURS," and leave the thousands upon thousands upon thousands of other “kinds” of breathing life that had to be upon the crowding available space on the Ark for later, okay?"
For the sake of a discussion, I am just going with the proposition of "infant kinds of breathing life" (Genesis 7:14-15) upon the Ark because this is the main premise of the thread. Whereas, a pseudo-christian can NEVER say that ONLY animals were placed upon Noah's ark like one embarrassingly did in the past, where this showed the complete Bible ineptness this Christian had! LOL!
Both pro and con propositions are troubling, where if a pseudo-christian can actually say there had to be baby animals, fledgling birds, fish frys, insect larvae, and dinosaur hatchlings upon Noah's ark, then how did they "enter" onto the Ark like it is stated in Genesis 7:9 as infants? Whereas, this is just the beginning of trampling upon biblical axioms relating to Noah's ark when "infant breathing life" of all "kinds" are mentioned, understood?
Most importantly, how did all of these "infant kinds of breathing life" (Genesis 7:14-15) survive in the Arks environment without the ADULT MOTHERS AND FATHERS providing for them as they would have done in their natural environments? Let alone, and in only "one kind" of thousands upon thousands, upon thousands of "kinds," how did Noah feed 8 pairs of "infant sharks" that had to be in a separate saline water tank to prevent them from eating the "other 'kinds' of fish" upon the waters for 371 days?! A truly Bible inept pseudo-christian mentioned there had to be water tanks on Noah's ark for every "kind" of fish, therefore if he thought this to be true, then so should we!
Now, there is no further need to dodge my questions to you in post #4, AND in addressing EVERY proposition within this post as well, is there? Good.
++++++++++++++ RoderickSpode, I do have to tell you that it is appreciated that YOU DID NOT RUNAWAY from the obvious complications of the Flood and Noah's ark like a certain Bible inept pseudo-christian did at their total embarrassment within this forum in the past! Good for you! ++++++++++++++