I have no idea how 'Good' it is, yet it will serve the purpose of showing that this question has been put to the test many times. The fact that Dawkins to my knowledge does not raise this issue but rather focuses on the 'horror' of such a judgment as the flood I would say is a good indication that the Ark size is not an issue. Tim, you're not giving the theory of evolution a fair go. It deserves to be treated with a great deal more respect than you accord it. Just like any scientific theory, it should be judged solely on its explanatory merits. I think your real gripe is with atheistic materialism, not with the theory of evolution as such. One reason for saying this is that many Christians believe in the theory of evolution. In 1996, Pope John Paul II proclaimed that the theory is 'more than just a hypothesis' and that evolution is compatible with Christian faith. He endorsed theistic evolution . In 2009, the Church of England went so far as to issue a formal apology to Charles Darwin: "Charles Darwin, 200 years from your birth, the Church of England owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still. ..." Science proceeds by a process of inference to the best explanation. There are (at least) two questions we must ask, viz. (1) Is the theory of evolution the best explanation? (2) Is