So, how did the kangaroos get from Noah's ark to Australia? I'd never found any references in Watchtower litteratrash, until I stumbled upon this farticle "From Noah's Ark to Australia" in the 1969 Awake bound volume. Most of it is wordy and rather pointless, so I only typed two middle subheadings for consideration:
Settling in Suitable Areas
Nor is it true that the isolation of the same species in widely separated areas induces independent and diverse evolution. We find, for instance, that the alligator is isolated in two widely separated pockets: Florida in the United States, and the Yangtze River in China. But they have not evolved differently. Both are still simply alligators. Not even the most rash evolutionist would argue that they had evolved along identical lines by accident.
The alligator settled in these places because the environment suited its requirements. That is true for other species as well. It is this that makes the camel prefer the desert regions, the mountain goat the rocky hills. Similarly the walrus, manatee, yak and numerous other animals instinctively settle where conditions best favor survival. So too the Australian marsupials--the environment in Australia ideally suits them.
What is it about Australia that is so suited to the kangaroo and other members of his family? This: Australia is, for the most part, arid. That suits the kangaroo because he prospers on little or no water. By day he hides in the shade. By dusk and by night he grazes. Body liquids are obtained from the grasses and leaves he eats. Just as certain plants and animals thrive in the desert, each one by its own method of securing and conserving moisture, so too the kangaroo in the arid parts of Australia.
How Did They Reach Australia? If the marsupial in Australia are not the product of a particular king of evolution, then how did they get to Australia? If Noah's ark deposited its valuable cargo of human and animal life in what is now eastern Turkey, then how is it that we find the marsupials of Australia so far removed from that area, even granting that Australia nicely supplies their needs? How did they travel so far? How did they cross the Indian or Pacific Ocean, since there is no land bridge over these waters to Australia today?
Disembarking from Noah's ark, man, the most versatile and adaptable of earth's creatures, evetually spread out and settled widely different areas. There was hardly an environment or climate to which man did not adapt himself, even though that environment or climate may not have been especially suited to him.
However, different types of animals wandered on until they located a habitat that most suited them. Some, like the oxen, settled widely because its needs were met in many places. Others, like the alligator, settled in areas far apart. Still others, whose needs were more exacting, settled in a single area where alone they could subsist. Individual animals, or groups, of any kind failing to discover their proper environment perished and provided the fossils found far removed from living members of their kind.
This urge to migrate in search of an acceptable domicile is very common. The book Marvels and Mysteries of Our Animal World tells of many migrations, such as egrets from Asia into the United States, moose into Canada and Alaska, North American muskrats into Europe, possums into Canada, coyotes into New York, and cod into Iceland's waters--all far from their usual habitat. This source concludes: "Thus, while man ponders his chances of colonizing space, many forms of wildlife are reaching out to find new habitats on this old planet of ours." Thus, is it not reasonable to conclude that the animals released from Noah's ark would have instinctively set out in search of the kind of environment that suited their needs?
But how, you may protest, could animals such as the marsupials cross the oceans separating Australia from the other continents? There are sound reasons for believing they had no need to cross oceans. Recently the American research ship, the Oceanographer, was off Australia's west coast checking the continental shelf. Its objective was to find evidence for or against the theory of shifting continents. This is the belief that at one time all the continents were united, but have since drifted apart.
Scientific American of April 1968 reports: "After years of debate many lines of evidence now favor the idea that the present continents were once assembled into two great land masses." It also states: "There is also strong evidence for a juncture between Australia and India." Even after these land masses separated, for a time there were probably land bridges that connected different areas, such as a bridge between Siberia and Alaska, and no doubt one between Asia and Australia. The string of islands and shallow seas stretching from Malaya and embracing Indonesia and New Guinea could have comprised a wide land bridge where the crossing to Australia was made.
After reading this, are you now really convinced that Noah's ark really had Kangaroos that really hopped from Turkey to Australia?
Can anyone spot any flaws of fact or logic in these paragraphs?
I wonder why they have never reprinted these troothz in later Botchtower publicraptions?