That would be reasonable, if humans could have developed technology at an explosively rapid rate. In Genesis we also have the account of Cain and Abel, who domesticated agriculture and livestock, respectively. If Cain and Abel could do it, so could the sons of Noah.
To build a large tower would require a huge investment of time and resources (human power and animal power included, no doubt). Food production would have to be very stable in order to free up large amounts of time for workers and artisans.
But remember, you are claiming this could be done in 3 generations. Wait...sorry, 2 generations, you say.
Well, there was a big difference back then with a "generation" :
Gen 11:11
Shem lived 500 years and had other sons and daughters.
Evidence shows, to the contrary, that plant and animal domestication took thousands of years. For example, the domestication of dogs began around 100,000 years ago. Ancestors of cattle, sheep, pigs, etc, also were domesticated many thousands of years ago; this involved drastic changes in the animals' behavior, diet, and physical characteristics.
What evidence are you talking about?
Imagine that your family is the only surviving family in some global catastrophe. There are no more supermarkets or farms, much less computers and drive-in cleaners. Why would you suppose any of your previous lifestyle could be accomodated into the new? Everything you know about our society would die with you. Let's say you are an expert physicist. You won't have time to teach physics to any of your children because you will be too busy struggling to feed them. Whatever stories you tell them will be just stories.
First, someone that's a farmer post catastrophe' would not have a problem. Just start farming again. The rest of your dialogue I can't follow, it's very obscure.
What if this catastrophe was like the biblical flood? What plants would have survived after being submerged under over a mile of water for over a year? What would you eat then?
Yeah, I guess that's a real problem for God huh? Well, from my observation, it doesn't take long for vegetation to grow back even after the intense heat of a fire. So being submerged under water surely would have been a better preservative for plant life and seeds.
(After all, God said to bring animals only. He only implied that you would bring vegetation to feed them and think about saving the seeds rather than throwing them overboard.)
The above is completely wrong.
Gen 6:20-21
21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
The rest of your dialogue was interesting speculation that I really can't rebutt. Present facts, and I'll try to reply with what I understand.
Or was the garden destroyed in this flood???
I believe the garden was destroyed by drought long before the flood. For good reason.
But don't wait too long for that visit, since your kids will need to see the sword to know how such a weapon is used...wait, we said the sword was no longer there because the Garden is gone! Forgot!
You know, rather than to dump 40,000 of your supposed inconsistencies at me, why not do one at a time? I answered your first question with one answer, which works. I think it would only be fair to present one more of you "problems." Is this inundating on me supposed to make you look more intelligent or something?
As clever as you and I are, could we make up a more fascinating tale of good, evil, and old-fashioned survival skills?
You have no idea who I am, let alone my abilities for being clever. Like I said above, one at a time instead of piling crap on top of me. Because, basically, that's all I have seen here cell.
Hehehe hehe hehehehe this has been funI suppose if you like talking to yourself. Wanna let me in here or what?