It’s funny. If there is some implication or meaning it escapes me as far as politics or theology, but I can say that biblical sources put the life of Noah and his flood roughly 4-6 thousand years ago, and the supposed remains of Noah’s ark radio carbon date to around that age.
The mass extinction of dinosaurs occurred prior to the time of Noah. Now- a “young earth creationist” might argue against the physical evidence, and we can argue that the Bible as well as societies around the globe have concepts and reports of giant lizards and creatures which one might postulate meant that perhaps some form of something we might call a “dinosaur” persisted- the Loch Ness monster and other tales including those from modern villages in Afghanistan show that even in the modern world there is anecdotal suggestion that “giants lizards” and such creatures walk the earth despite lack of physical evidence proving it conclusively. If we choose to take that tact we can still offer a simple argument.
We know the minimum size of various dinosaurs based off their fossils. We know the size of the ark as prescribed in the tale of Noah. We know that many creatures simply wouldn’t fit even if we assume that two of every other animal on earth could fit somehow.
It would be reasonable to assume that a god would not instruct Noah to build an ark that was not large enough to hold a creature unless that creature was excluded from the the ones said god wanted on the ark. A clear implication being that those creatures were not included and we can take “2 of every animal” to mean “two of every animal (that will fit)” or “two of every animal (I send you)” or some other variant.
Simply put the Bible says little about the bowel movements of some of the most important persons within. We know little of what hand they used to scratch their nose or if they ever even did. We are not generally privy to who was a “top” or “bottom” and who’s anus was hairy or every cold and malady suffered or wether Moses was a “morning person” or if Jobs farts stank particularly badly. There are huge swaths of information left out of the Bible of one takes it as a factual account. This is true of most stories, biographies, and histories. So much is unknown to the chronicler or is left out because reading every minute detail spanning thousands of years and thousand or more lives wouldn’t leave much time for anything else not to mention that it is probably hard to follow and rather dull.
So one might interpret that dinosaurs were already extinct or that they were not intended to be on the ark or that the directions given to Noah were more specific than what was recorded for us to read or that some sort of divine “magic” or power was used to tie up all the loose ends. We happen to know that by biblical account, God is fully capable of creating or destroying species at will. Whatever method is used to enact the will of an all powerful being would to our best understanding, follow their whim or purpose. We can say that the fire and floods and all such spectacle might be performative. For our benefit. An all powerful being doesn’t need a flood to wash away the wicked or what not. The wicked could just vanish, any evidence or memory could vanish. Any manner of mechanism could be employed. A flood, having one guy build a boat and all that- not necessary for an all powerful being.
So why would it be done? Well- we might argue for our perception. All these elements are easily understandable to early humans and are grand and narrative. Allowing Noah to survive or allowing the story to be told and recorded on a book that an all powerful all seeing being would know would be used and read and studied for thousands of years or more- one could argue that there is some specific purpose, an ends to the exact manner things were done or the way things were recorded. The event or the retelling of the event and it’s specific details are somehow necessary or desirable to whatever plans or devices or whims suit an all powerful being.
In fact- if one assumes the existence of an all powerful being- how do we know that the earth and all creation including us didn’t just come to exist 10 seconds or so ago? How do we know that yesterday or any part of your entire life actually happened and that a god doesn’t destroy the universe and create an entirely new one every day or every second? That the world just came to exist today at 3am eastern time and everything in it was made and all of us have memories of a long life that never happened and things we never did and a human history that was just created right now? Those who believe or can entertain the idea the world is a simulation can’t refute it. In a simulation a “god” would be whoever might control that simulation and the only bounds to their power would be the constraints of the system running the simulation. No different than playing a videogame where a side character remembers vividly all the adventures you and they had but never happened or never happened to…
.. the entity that is them but perhaps a different instance or even a discreet set of code and variables which was styled and named the same but has no other connection- but that is irrelevant to them if they were created to believe and “remember” events that never occurred. Reality may or may not be subjective but our perspective in reality is subjective as near as we can figure. So we don’t really know and once we start throwing around hypotheticals concerning divine and unlimited power we can create any scenario we want and there can be no proof or disproof as the nature of divine power and perfection of being would mean that any proof or evidence would exist because it was intended to exist and any contradictions would be intentional and for some purpose.
As a generally say on the topic of religion and science and gods and such- the concept of divinity escapes scientific process because you are dealing with the search for a willful entity that can control what you might find..
.. at its discretion. Meaning you cannot prove such an entity exists unless it wants you to do so at that time and place. One cannot speculate on the intentions or motivations or thought processes of a perfect and all powerful entity because that entity is in theory so foreign to our existence that other than potentially existing in the same macro reality we would have no point to relate. An amoeba cannot grasp the concept of a corporation let alone hope to start its own and create the worlds leading corporation of its type. Even if you tried to teach it, it’s life would be over before you could finish a short explanation of the idea- and if we take some hypothetical where you could communicate the information- how would an amoeba begin to grasp that? It doesn’t have a concept of currency or legal protections and market or economy. The idea of using work to not reproduce or see to biological needs as a means to gain success in reproduction and providing for needs is an alien and..
… likely unfathomable or foolish concept to the amoeba. And what if you managed to relate the advantages? A home, a car and television and sound system- are any of these things an amoeba understands or would take joy or motivation from? Likely not. So some all powerful being that is immortal and perfect is likely unfathomable and I relatable human perception. Their goals and methods and moods and cognition- why they do anything and why they choose to do it certain ways- it would t make sense most likely to a human brain.
The mass extinction of dinosaurs occurred prior to the time of Noah. Now- a “young earth creationist” might argue against the physical evidence, and we can argue that the Bible as well as societies around the globe have concepts and reports of giant lizards and creatures which one might postulate meant that perhaps some form of something we might call a “dinosaur” persisted- the Loch Ness monster and other tales including those from modern villages in Afghanistan show that even in the modern world there is anecdotal suggestion that “giants lizards” and such creatures walk the earth despite lack of physical evidence proving it conclusively. If we choose to take that tact we can still offer a simple argument.
It would be reasonable to assume that a god would not instruct Noah to build an ark that was not large enough to hold a creature unless that creature was excluded from the the ones said god wanted on the ark. A clear implication being that those creatures were not included and we can take “2 of every animal” to mean “two of every animal (that will fit)” or “two of every animal (I send you)” or some other variant.
As a generally say on the topic of religion and science and gods and such- the concept of divinity escapes scientific process because you are dealing with the search for a willful entity that can control what you might find..