
The Brown Paradox
Submitted by Kevin R Brown on May 5, 2008 - 3:49am.So, everyone knows the Bible mentioned fantastical creatures. Talking animals, unicorns, sea monsters, dragons...
...Wait. fucking dragons?
A diverse class of reptilia that is sapient, covered in armor plating, able to both fly and breathe fire, and rivals even sauropods in size and weight (some figures suggest lengths of more than 140 ft long and 80 tons in weight, depending on the sourcebook or beastiary you flip through)?
I understand the creationist argument for dinosaurs on the Ark. I even think it's a little bit cute. "Moses only took the adorable lil' infants aboard, so there was lots of room for everybody and nobody fought."
Aww.
But wait a minute... sure, I guess most dumb beasts would just sit there and watch their little ones walk-off into the care of an old windbag human (?), and there wouldn't be much they could do after the proverbial hammer fell. But dragons?
Bilbo Baggins wasn't able to take one single piece of treasure from Smaug's lair without the great monster getting pissed and going on a town-wrecking rampage. How do you suppose they would react, then, to the sight of two of their newly hatched offsprings zipping-off to some unknown destination - and then finding that some lowly human had herded them onto a giant, rickety wooden boat?
To quote Sir Wolfram, my prized Rifts Cyberknight, whose final act of consequence was binding and kidnapping a Horned Dragon Hatchling from it's lair and running into the woods:
"...This is not how you can prevent forest fires."
This is a paradox of crushing magnitude. How do you propose that Moses managed to get every animal aboard his Ark without being turned into glowing embers by at least a few dozen terribly irate, fire-breathing, mega-damage capacity objects of his worst of worst nightmares? How was the Ark not completely obliterated?
Henchman of reason, intellect, logics, and facts
aka, 'Plant Boy'

