Wernher von Braun and Intelligent Design in the '70s

Page 4 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

22 Jul 2010, 6:42 pm

Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


So, you would consider it impossible for a lion to live on a vegetarian diet or is it that you view the form of a lion in a teleological manner?



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

22 Jul 2010, 7:32 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


So, you would consider it impossible for a lion to live on a vegetarian diet or is it that you view the form of a lion in a teleological manner?


It is probably possible for a lion to have enough protein from vegetables to get by rather poorly but the gut of a vegetarian animal is much longer than that of a carnivore to permit a breakdown of cellulose tissue which a carnivore does not need. Also the tooth structure of a lion is formed to permit tearing and swallowing whereas a vegetarian animal has teeth formed for clipping and chewing. The muscular and nervous response of a lion is designed for hunting and capturing prey. Grazing animals have a totally different bone and muscular structure. You can drive a bulldozer down a highway but it is not designed for highway speeds and maneuverability and that is obvious from its structure. The same relationship of anatomy to function is obvious in all animals. The shape and dynamics of any living creature is formed by the strictures of function which permits evolution to modify structure to best adapt the animal to survive in its ecological niche. Those that do not conform do not survive or find another niche. Lions and lambs lie down together only with the lamb inside the lion.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

22 Jul 2010, 8:09 pm

Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


So, you would consider it impossible for a lion to live on a vegetarian diet or is it that you view the form of a lion in a teleological manner?


It is probably possible for a lion to have enough protein from vegetables to get by rather poorly but the gut of a vegetarian animal is much longer than that of a carnivore to permit a breakdown of cellulose tissue which a carnivore does not need. Also the tooth structure of a lion is formed to permit tearing and swallowing whereas a vegetarian animal has teeth formed for clipping and chewing. The muscular and nervous response of a lion is designed for hunting and capturing prey. Grazing animals have a totally different bone and muscular structure. You can drive a bulldozer down a highway but it is not designed for highway speeds and maneuverability and that is obvious from its structure. The same relationship of anatomy to function is obvious in all animals. The shape and dynamics of any living creature is formed by the strictures of function which permits evolution to modify structure to best adapt the animal to survive in its ecological niche. Those that do not conform do not survive or find another niche. Lions and lambs lie down together only with the lamb inside the lion.


So, in other words you think in a teleological manner with regard to their morphology.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

22 Jul 2010, 8:20 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


So, you would consider it impossible for a lion to live on a vegetarian diet or is it that you view the form of a lion in a teleological manner?


It is probably possible for a lion to have enough protein from vegetables to get by rather poorly but the gut of a vegetarian animal is much longer than that of a carnivore to permit a breakdown of cellulose tissue which a carnivore does not need. Also the tooth structure of a lion is formed to permit tearing and swallowing whereas a vegetarian animal has teeth formed for clipping and chewing. The muscular and nervous response of a lion is designed for hunting and capturing prey. Grazing animals have a totally different bone and muscular structure. You can drive a bulldozer down a highway but it is not designed for highway speeds and maneuverability and that is obvious from its structure. The same relationship of anatomy to function is obvious in all animals. The shape and dynamics of any living creature is formed by the strictures of function which permits evolution to modify structure to best adapt the animal to survive in its ecological niche. Those that do not conform do not survive or find another niche. Lions and lambs lie down together only with the lamb inside the lion.


So, in other words you think in a teleological manner with regard to their morphology.


Teleology is a term which describes a structure predesigned to fit a situation. It does not indicate that the situation itself forms the structure. I doubt that the term "teleological" is accurate in describing an environment that forms the structure. The structure is not formed before the environment demands it and eliminates all structures that do not function in the environment. Since the environment is never constant over a long time period, there is a continual modification of structure to survive in the dynamic environment. This process is in no way teleological.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

22 Jul 2010, 8:20 pm

Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


Maybe pre-fall plants were.. faster? Harder to catch? Bigger teeth?


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

22 Jul 2010, 9:10 pm

Macbeth wrote:
Sand wrote:
Even a casual inspection of a carnivore such as a lion is clear that the entire body structure including the nervous system, the digestive system, the muscular structure and general body arrangements are those of an animal specifically structured to apprehend and consume prey. That this animal with it's carnivore dental structure would subsist on plants is one of the more amusing mis-concepts of a theory that makes no sense at all. One does not have to be a scientist to immediately perceive this.


Maybe pre-fall plants were.. faster? Harder to catch? Bigger teeth?


The prospect of mobile forests was entertained in Shakespeare's "Macbeth" but not on the basis of inherent vegetable mobility. Presuming plants developed protein muscularity for mobility and shed their cellulose structure for rigidity they would be considered animals. The digestion of plant material. as I pointed out, requires a totally different gut.



01001011
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

22 Jul 2010, 9:57 pm

Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, you would consider it impossible for a lion to live on a vegetarian diet or is it that you view the form of a lion in a teleological manner?


It is probably possible for a lion to have enough protein from vegetables to get by rather poorly but the gut of a vegetarian animal is much longer than that of a carnivore to permit a breakdown of cellulose tissue which a carnivore does not need. Also the tooth structure of a lion is formed to permit tearing and swallowing whereas a vegetarian animal has teeth formed for clipping and chewing. The muscular and nervous response of a lion is designed for hunting and capturing prey. Grazing animals have a totally different bone and muscular structure. You can drive a bulldozer down a highway but it is not designed for highway speeds and maneuverability and that is obvious from its structure. The same relationship of anatomy to function is obvious in all animals. The shape and dynamics of any living creature is formed by the strictures of function which permits evolution to modify structure to best adapt the animal to survive in its ecological niche. Those that do not conform do not survive or find another niche. Lions and lambs lie down together only with the lamb inside the lion.


We are talking about really BAD designs here lol

It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

22 Jul 2010, 10:01 pm

01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions and all carnivores will be changed to hervibores in paradise.

Isaiah 65:25 "The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent's food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain," says the LORD.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

22 Jul 2010, 10:10 pm

greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

22 Jul 2010, 10:53 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.


I wonder what dead souls have as metabolisms that they must eat at all. Eating has all sorts of consequences. Are there toilets in Heaven? I have heard that dogs and cats cannot go to heaven. Why are lions allowed in? What kind of plants are allowed in? Poison ivy? Oh well...



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

22 Jul 2010, 11:00 pm

Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.


I wonder what dead souls have as metabolisms that they must eat at all. Eating has all sorts of consequences. Are there toilets in Heaven? I have heard that dogs and cats cannot go to heaven. Why are lions allowed in? What kind of plants are allowed in? Poison ivy? Oh well...


Referring to Isaiah 65:17-25, wherein God says He will create new heavens and a new earth?



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

22 Jul 2010, 11:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.


I wonder what dead souls have as metabolisms that they must eat at all. Eating has all sorts of consequences. Are there toilets in Heaven? I have heard that dogs and cats cannot go to heaven. Why are lions allowed in? What kind of plants are allowed in? Poison ivy? Oh well...


Referring to Isaiah 65:17-25, wherein God says He will create new heavens and a new earth?


I'd rather not get into Biblical idiocies. I merely point out that being a carnivore has physical qualifications that must be recognized.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

23 Jul 2010, 12:18 am

Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.


I wonder what dead souls have as metabolisms that they must eat at all. Eating has all sorts of consequences. Are there toilets in Heaven? I have heard that dogs and cats cannot go to heaven. Why are lions allowed in? What kind of plants are allowed in? Poison ivy? Oh well...


Referring to Isaiah 65:17-25, wherein God says He will create new heavens and a new earth?


I'd rather not get into Biblical idiocies. I merely point out that being a carnivore has physical qualifications that must be recognized.


Idiocies? An idiot is someone who lacks education, so it is not idiotic to know more than it is to know less. Strange paradox that having more knowledge is equivalent to lacking an education, but then again your usage of the word "idiocies" is purely for rhetorical effect and doesn't have any more meaning behind it than your feelings towards a subject.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

23 Jul 2010, 1:02 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
greenblue wrote:
01001011 wrote:
It is not difficult for a modern person to be a vegetarian but much harder for a hunter gatherer 10000 ago because there isn't much protein rich plants in the natural environment. For the same reason, I doubt whether a lion can be a natural vegetarian.

Lions will be vegans in paradise.


There have already been a couple of them in modern times.


I wonder what dead souls have as metabolisms that they must eat at all. Eating has all sorts of consequences. Are there toilets in Heaven? I have heard that dogs and cats cannot go to heaven. Why are lions allowed in? What kind of plants are allowed in? Poison ivy? Oh well...


Referring to Isaiah 65:17-25, wherein God says He will create new heavens and a new earth?


I'd rather not get into Biblical idiocies. I merely point out that being a carnivore has physical qualifications that must be recognized.


Idiocies? An idiot is someone who lacks education, so it is not idiotic to know more than it is to know less. Strange paradox that having more knowledge is equivalent to lacking an education, but then again your usage of the word "idiocies" is purely for rhetorical effect and doesn't have any more meaning behind it than your feelings towards a subject.


I clearly pointed out that the proposal that an animal constructed to be a carnivore in every detail must live as a carnivore. To declare that this creature must eat grass is absolutely and incontrovertibly idiotic. If you have a statement indicating lions would eat grass, where ever it appears, it is an idiotic statement and there is no indication from your posts it could be otherwise.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

23 Jul 2010, 1:13 am

David Catchpoole wrote:
The lion that wouldn’t eat meat

First published:
Creation ex nihilo 22(2):22–23
March 2000
by David Catchpoole

Earlier this century, A female African lion, born and raised in America, lived her entire lifetime of nine years without ever eating meat.1 In fact, her owners, Georges and Margaret Westbeau,2 alarmed by scientists’ reports that carnivorous animals cannot live without meat, went to great lengths to try to coax their unusual pet (‘Little Tyke’) to develop a taste for it. They even advertised a cash reward for anyone who could devise a meat-containing formula that the lioness would like. The curator of a New York zoo advised the Westbeaus that putting a few drops of blood in Little Tyke’s milk bottle would help in weaning her, but the lioness cub refused to touch it — even when only a single drop of blood had been added.

The more knowledgeable animal experts among the many visitors to the Westbeaus’ 100 acre (40 hectare) ranch also proffered advice, but nothing worked. Meanwhile, Little Tyke continued to do extremely well on a daily diet of cooked grain, raw eggs and milk. By four years of age she was fully grown and weighed 352 pounds (160 kg).

As Georges Westbeau writes, it was ‘a young visitor’ to Hidden Valley ranch who finally put his mind at ease in response to the question of how Little Tyke could be persuaded to eat meat (thought to be essential for carnivores to survive):

‘He turned to look at me with serious eyes, then asked, “Don’t you read your Bible’? I admitted I didn’t read it as much as I probably should. He continued, “Read Genesis 1:30, and you will get your answer.’ At my first opportunity I got my Bible and turned to the passage he had indicated. To my astonishment, I read these words: “And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.’

The owners of Little Tyke, though apparently not Christians, were so reassured by this that they no longer worried about her refusal to eat meat, and turned their attention instead to refining her ‘vegetarian’3 diet further, learning of new grains to add to the lioness’s food. These numerous grains were ground and stirred together while in the dry state, then cooked and mixed with the milk and eggs. The lioness was fed this mixture each morning and evening, and sometimes at midday as well. (To condition her teeth and gums — as she steadfastly refused all offers of bones to gnaw — Little Tyke was given heavy rubber boots to chew on, which generally lasted about three weeks.) The lioness not only survived on this diet, she thrived. One of America’s ‘most able zoo curators’ apparently said that the lioness ‘was the best of her species he had ever viewed.’

As well as Little Tyke, the Westbeaus cared for a menagerie of other animals at their ranch. A large number of the many visitors to Hidden Valley were motivated by the prospect of seeing ‘the lion that lives with the lamb’ — a situation similar to the prophecies of Isaiah 11:6. The sight of the lioness living placidly alongside sheep, cattle, and peafowl made a profound impression on many visitors. Television footage4 and newspaper photos of Little Tyke also moved many people, such as one who wrote, ‘Nothing has made me happier than your picture of the lion and the lamb. It has helped me believe in the Bible.’

In the light of Little Tyke’s situation, along with anecdotes of other carnivorous animals surviving on vegetarian diets,5 it is certainly easier to relate to the Genesis account of animals living solely on plants before Adam’s Fall.6

Mr Westbeau’s observation of the lioness that ‘To condition her stomach she would spend an hour at a time eating the succulent tall grass in the fields’, is also a vivid reminder of the prophecies of Isaiah 11:7 and 65:25, ‘… the lion will eat straw like the ox.’

References and notes

1. Westbeau, G., Little Tyke: the story of a gentle vegetarian lioness, Theosophical Publishing House, IL, USA, 1986. (Information is drawn from pp. 3–6, 17, 32–35, 59–60, 113–114.)
2. The lioness had been given to the Westbeaus as a badly mauled one-day-old cub, by the zoo where her mother was kept. The mother had killed all cubs from her four earlier pregnancies immediately after birth. This time though, anxious zoo attendants were standing by, ready to scramble to rescue the offspring at the moment of delivery. With ‘Little Tyke’ they succeeded — but not before the mother’s quick and powerful jaws had injured the cub’s right front leg.
3. Many people would include eggs in ‘vegetarian’ diets today, if unfertilised, as no killing of animals is involved. Though it seems unlikely that eggs (or milk for adult animals) were part of the pre-Fall diet, the point to note here is that lions do not need meat to survive. Many plants are now extinct; it is highly likely that there were very rich protein sources in the pre-Fall / pre-Flood plant kingdom.
4. Sadly, while in Hollywood for filming of a nation-wide television broadcast, Little Tyke contracted pneumonia, and she died a few weeks later.
5. While living in Indonesia in the 1980s, several families told me that they never fed meat to their pet dogs — though it is possible that bones might have been present in the scraps fed to them. Other reports suggest that this is a widespread phenomenon in that country.
6. The Bible does not give us details of how the change from plant-eating to meat-eating has occurred after the Fall; one possibility is by divine ‘redesign’. Hence, even if lions today did need meat to survive, it would not invalidate Genesis. See Creation Ministries’ The Creation Answers Book for a fuller discussion.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

23 Jul 2010, 1:37 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
David Catchpoole wrote:
The lion that wouldn’t eat meat

First published:
Creation ex nihilo 22(2):22–23
March 2000
by David Catchpoole

Earlier this century, A female African lion, born and raised in America, lived her entire lifetime of nine years without ever eating meat.1 In fact, her owners, Georges and Margaret Westbeau,2 alarmed by scientists’ reports that carnivorous animals cannot live without meat, went to great lengths to try to coax their unusual pet (‘Little Tyke’) to develop a taste for it. They even advertised a cash reward for anyone who could devise a meat-containing formula that the lioness would like. The curator of a New York zoo advised the Westbeaus that putting a few drops of blood in Little Tyke’s milk bottle would help in weaning her, but the lioness cub refused to touch it — even when only a single drop of blood had been added.

The more knowledgeable animal experts among the many visitors to the Westbeaus’ 100 acre (40 hectare) ranch also proffered advice, but nothing worked. Meanwhile, Little Tyke continued to do extremely well on a daily diet of cooked grain, raw eggs and milk. By four years of age she was fully grown and weighed 352 pounds (160 kg).

As Georges Westbeau writes, it was ‘a young visitor’ to Hidden Valley ranch who finally put his mind at ease in response to the question of how Little Tyke could be persuaded to eat meat (thought to be essential for carnivores to survive):

‘He turned to look at me with serious eyes, then asked, “Don’t you read your Bible’? I admitted I didn’t read it as much as I probably should. He continued, “Read Genesis 1:30, and you will get your answer.’ At my first opportunity I got my Bible and turned to the passage he had indicated. To my astonishment, I read these words: “And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.’

The owners of Little Tyke, though apparently not Christians, were so reassured by this that they no longer worried about her refusal to eat meat, and turned their attention instead to refining her ‘vegetarian’3 diet further, learning of new grains to add to the lioness’s food. These numerous grains were ground and stirred together while in the dry state, then cooked and mixed with the milk and eggs. The lioness was fed this mixture each morning and evening, and sometimes at midday as well. (To condition her teeth and gums — as she steadfastly refused all offers of bones to gnaw — Little Tyke was given heavy rubber boots to chew on, which generally lasted about three weeks.) The lioness not only survived on this diet, she thrived. One of America’s ‘most able zoo curators’ apparently said that the lioness ‘was the best of her species he had ever viewed.’

As well as Little Tyke, the Westbeaus cared for a menagerie of other animals at their ranch. A large number of the many visitors to Hidden Valley were motivated by the prospect of seeing ‘the lion that lives with the lamb’ — a situation similar to the prophecies of Isaiah 11:6. The sight of the lioness living placidly alongside sheep, cattle, and peafowl made a profound impression on many visitors. Television footage4 and newspaper photos of Little Tyke also moved many people, such as one who wrote, ‘Nothing has made me happier than your picture of the lion and the lamb. It has helped me believe in the Bible.’

In the light of Little Tyke’s situation, along with anecdotes of other carnivorous animals surviving on vegetarian diets,5 it is certainly easier to relate to the Genesis account of animals living solely on plants before Adam’s Fall.6

Mr Westbeau’s observation of the lioness that ‘To condition her stomach she would spend an hour at a time eating the succulent tall grass in the fields’, is also a vivid reminder of the prophecies of Isaiah 11:7 and 65:25, ‘… the lion will eat straw like the ox.’

References and notes

1. Westbeau, G., Little Tyke: the story of a gentle vegetarian lioness, Theosophical Publishing House, IL, USA, 1986. (Information is drawn from pp. 3–6, 17, 32–35, 59–60, 113–114.)
2. The lioness had been given to the Westbeaus as a badly mauled one-day-old cub, by the zoo where her mother was kept. The mother had killed all cubs from her four earlier pregnancies immediately after birth. This time though, anxious zoo attendants were standing by, ready to scramble to rescue the offspring at the moment of delivery. With ‘Little Tyke’ they succeeded — but not before the mother’s quick and powerful jaws had injured the cub’s right front leg.
3. Many people would include eggs in ‘vegetarian’ diets today, if unfertilised, as no killing of animals is involved. Though it seems unlikely that eggs (or milk for adult animals) were part of the pre-Fall diet, the point to note here is that lions do not need meat to survive. Many plants are now extinct; it is highly likely that there were very rich protein sources in the pre-Fall / pre-Flood plant kingdom.
4. Sadly, while in Hollywood for filming of a nation-wide television broadcast, Little Tyke contracted pneumonia, and she died a few weeks later.
5. While living in Indonesia in the 1980s, several families told me that they never fed meat to their pet dogs — though it is possible that bones might have been present in the scraps fed to them. Other reports suggest that this is a widespread phenomenon in that country.
6. The Bible does not give us details of how the change from plant-eating to meat-eating has occurred after the Fall; one possibility is by divine ‘redesign’. Hence, even if lions today did need meat to survive, it would not invalidate Genesis. See Creation Ministries’ The Creation Answers Book for a fuller discussion.


You have clearly identified yourself. I can make no further comments.