Nor is this all. Consider the _vast difficulties_ the universal flood theory has to contend with, all of which are removed by the theory we have adopted. 1. _There is the quantity of water required._ If all over the earth the water rose twenty-two feet six inches above the tops of the highest mountains, the quantity of water required would be eight times the whole quantity of water now existing. Where all this could have come from first and gone to afterwards, are prodigious stumbling-blocks. Of course we can resort to miracle; but this is not the way to get rid of difficulty in a manly and honest spirit. 2. _Then consider the number of animals the ark must have contained._ There are 1,000 species of mammalia, 5,000 species of birds, 2,000 species of reptiles, and 120,000 well-ascertained and distinct species of insects. Do we pretend that all these were housed and fed for nearly thirteen months in a vessel that was only 450 feet long, 75 feet broad, and 45 feet high; and that such a vessel contained room for them, and their food, besides that of man, for such a long period. The little toys of Noah’s ark are certainly pretty, but very mischievous, and most of the popular notions of the flood have grown up from our nurseries as much from the use of this toy in this case, as from the reading of Paradise Lost in the other: and the result is, the Bible is made responsible for it all. 3. Then consider the subsequent distribution of animals: the polar bear and the tropical elephant, the ferocious tiger and a young fawn, going out together in order, and without violence: of course we can suppose another miracle to repress passions and violence. Besides which, in addition to the fauna, the animal kingdom, we must ask what became of the flora or vegetable kingdom during this period, if the flood were universal? We have at least twenty-five botanical provinces, with their peculiar and numberless farms of vegetable life; what became of them? Were they preserved in the ark, or under the water?—for such questions must be answered by those who charge us with inconsistency in attempting to reconcile the facts of science with the words of Scripture. And as a last difficulty, (suggested first, I believe, by Dr. Pye Smith, and which I shall therefore state in _his_ words, lest it should seem that I use “plainness of speech,”) let us look at the descent from Ararat out of the ark, into Armenia, with all these animals, birds, insects, plants and trees. “That mountain is 17,000 feet high, and perpetual snow covers about 5,000 feet from its summit. If the water rose, at its liquid temperature, so as to overflow that summit, the snows and icy masses would be melted; and on the retiring of the flood, the exposed mountain would present its pinnacles and ridges, dreadful precipices of naked rock, adown which the four men and the four women, and with hardly any exception the quadrupeds, would have found it utterly impossible to descend.