Talk about animal cruelty and exploitation! On Ham's crackpot site, there is an article (also in Carl Wieland's idiot site) that presents a case for their vegetarian fallacy by claiming to tell of a vegetarian lion, by the name of "Little Tyke", who refuses to eat meat. She was rescued from a stressed out lioness, who was caught in the wild in the early 1900's and put into a zoo, where she develops a maddening habit of killing her own young out of insanity, and stress due to her confinement in a cage. The claim is true, but a sad story exploited by both Christian fundamentalists (including creationists) and vegans (Google Search "Little Tyke: The True Story of a Gentle Vegetarian Lioness" and you'll get a slew of sites promoting creationism and vegetarianism) who exploit this traumatized lion born with a rare severe case of meat and blood allergen deficiency, which leads her to suffer so many health problems because of it throughout the 9 years of her life, for personal gain, using her and her life story as a case for vegetarianism and the 2 young earth fallacies, the so-called future restoration of Eden, and the no death before fall fallacy. This what I call a severe case of animal cruelty and exploitation. Something that shouldn't never been done especially to a certain lion and her cubs.
That's not all, Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International also has articles that claimed to know spiders that eat pollen, a piranha that eats plants and a vulture that eats mainly palm nuts
These 3 animals are also used as a case for their vegetarian falsehood.
There are in fact only some species of jumping spiders that do eat nectar (but not pollen) in the wild. In captivity, however, they will eat a variety of everything such as bananas, marmalade, milk, egg yolk and sausages. Otherwise, no known spider is a strict vegetarian.
All three animals, the jumping spider (of some species), the Pacu (a close, yet gentler, relative of the piranha) and the Palm Nut Vulture (or Vulturine Fish Eagle) are omnivores. They eat both plants and meat. And yet, Creationists tried to use these animals to prove their empty point when they claimed that all animals were vegetarians before Adam ate the apple. Then Adam sinned afterwords and some animals would gradually become meat-eaters. Through warped scapegoat, blame-game reasoning, they assert that because Adam sinned, all creation must suffer along with Adam since he is the head of creation appointed by God, who unleashed his [sic] "righteous judgment" on all of them after Adam ate the forbidden fruit.
This falsely implies that God can judge the innocent along with the guilty, even though animals are neither evil, nor are they "moral agents" as creationists puts it. This what creationists claim is not of God's character. Creationists never get it in their heads that the only humans are moral agents and ones who did fell under God's righteous judgment were three guilty ones made up of only Adam, Eve, and the snake.
Creationists tried constantly to explain away the reasons why God gave animals sharp teeth, claws, poisons, and other offensive and defensive features on them, even though He wanted them to live in peace and eat only plants, but none of the explanations are worth digesting over (no pun intended). The only conclusion they reach is that God gave the animals all those things because he foreseen the future of a fallen world and wanted the animals to have then to help them deal with what they will face in the fallen world. In other words, He heartlessly and deliberately set all of them up for their impending downfall that occurred many years afterwords when God punishes the animals along with man for their wicked behavior by unleashing the alleged worldwide flood on them along with its devastating aftermath.
What creationists claim makes no difference. It's exactly the same as if to claimed that there was a cow or a horse who wouldn't eat plants. And that claim is surprisingly true. Here's one example: Have anyone ever hear of a cow eating a chicken and a deer eating a rabbit (Citations here.)?
(Image from Deer & Deer Hunting Forum)
Believe it or not, There is such a concept as herbivorous animals turning to scavenging meat from dead carcasses on many occasions just like the 2 animals mentioned above. Case in point: The hippo who eats dead carcasses of drowned animals floating down the river and deer such as the duiker who prey on small animals and eggs. They do this to add minerals and protein supplements to their diet. Apparently this cow shown in the video above has developed a mineral deficiency that caused it to eat something else other than grass and that's what the cow is doing in the film.
Another example of supposed vegetarians eating meat is found in Greek Mythology, where there is such a story of not one but 4 horses who wouldn't eat plants. This story is about one of the labors Heracles had to perform in penance for murdering his wife and children out of sheer madness. In this labor, Heracles had to steal the 4 wild, man-eating mares from King Diomedes, the tyrant ruler of Thrace. The horses dined only on human flesh that was given to them in a bronze manger the horses were tied to because they were all wild and uncontrollable. Peculiarly, Diomedes' mares were tamed after Heracles slew him in battle and fed his carcass to them. When they were tamed, the horses were led back to King Eurystheus, who wanted to dedicated them to Hera. In another version of the myth, the king wanted to offer the horses to Zeus on Mount Olympus. But Zeus rejected his offer and sent lions, bears, and wolves to kill them.
Some creationists are aware of this and claims that this is a direct result of living in the fictional Fallen World where animals suffer with man and plants are completely deprived of all the mineral and nutrients the animals needed to live a healthy life. Creationists, in their fairy tale world, pretends that all plants were once filled with so much nutrients, vitamins, and minerals that they caused everyone who consume them to live long lives and become gigantic— at least until the Flood came and destroy most of the plants and swept all of the fertile soil into the ocean, leaving the plants to become deprived of all the nutrients needed for everyone to live long, healthy lives and become giants. The reality is that if there ever was such a Flood, all plants, no matter how well grown and nutritious, would all be wiped off the face of the earth along with all types of soil, leaving nothing for plants to grow in. The whole world would be just a global desert with poisoned watery oasis that would support no life of any kind.
If God wanted to preserve life and yet life is wiped out, then why bother even salvaging lions and cows from the Flood?