Debate: Is the bible 100% true
Side: yes

Kircher, a Jesuit priest and scholar, concluded from his research that some of our modern species of animals were not on Noah’s Ark because they originated from other species after the Flood by a kind of divinely guided metamorphosis. In other words, after the Flood, some animals changed and generated new species. In this way, God did not have to preserve every modern species on the Ark. For example, Kircher believed that the North American bison was not aboard the Ark.5 He thought it might have originated after the Flood from some other cow-like animal.Writing seven years before Kircher, Bishop Wilkins thought the same thing. When discussing the number of cattle on the Ark, he wrote that Noah needed only two basic cattle, arguing, “There being much less difference betwixt these, then there is betwixt several Dogs: And it being known by experience what various changes are frequently occasioned in the same species, by several countries, diets, and other accidents.”6 Like Kircher, Wilkins did not see a need (other than responding to skeptics) to put two bison on the Ark because they presumably could be generated from some other cow after the Flood “by several countries, diets, and other accidents.”6This early view of animals and the Ark, which developed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, is very similar to that of many creationists today. Creationist pioneer Byron Nelson wrote in 1928, “It is ... unjust to the Sacred Record to insist that the ark carried two of every variety, e.g., two fox terriers, two coyotes, two wolves, two jackals, two collies, etc. It is better to say that the ark carried two animals we might call ‘dogs,’ from which, after the flood, all the above-mentioned varieties have come.”Based on my own biological research into created kinds, I would be even bolder than Nelson. Over the past decade, I have worked to develop new methods of studying created kinds using statistics.8 This research is still very new and preliminary, but a pattern is beginning to emerge. For land animals and birds, the created kind most often corresponds to the conventional classification rank called “family,” which includes many species. There is evidence that the camel, horse, cat, dog, penguin, and iguana families are each a created kind.9 Like Nelson, I would put the coyote, wolf, jackal, and dog in the same kind, and I would include the fox. I would put the lion and house cat in another kind, and the llama and camel in yet another kind. Today these species (i.e., llama and camel) look amazingly different, but they seem to have been generated after the Flood from information already present within their parent kind. Lions, coyotes, and dromedary camels were probably not on the Ark but were born to parents within the cat, dog, and camel kinds.How many animals were on Noah’s Ark? If created kinds really are families, as few as 2,000 individual animals might have been on the Ark.10 There were probably a bit more than that since the clean animals came in by sevens. Whatever the exact number, though, there would have been plenty of room to house these and their food, plus Noah and his family. Caring for these animals for a year would have been difficult but not impossible. God’s wisdom ensured that basic kinds of animals would survive the Flood by allowing individual species to change.The Ark is not mythology. If you want to dismiss the supernatural, then I challenge this to you what is your origin? I am sure you are aware of "cause and effect" you should then know about the importance of the First cause. If you know the scientific law I am talking about (secular one) then tell me what you believe.