Debunking Noah, and I need some help

[Brian-M]

I know a lot of Fundies who take it literally. The flood lasted 40 actual days and 40 actual nights.

What? You're confused. Forty days and forty nights is how long it took for the flood to reach full height (Genesis 7:17-18). According to Genesis 7:24 the flood lasted a hundred and fifty days.

And according to Genesis 8, Noah then waited another forty days before sending out the dove to check to see if the land was dry. Then another seven days before sending it out again. Then he waited another seven days before sending it out a third time.

So they were in the ark for at least two hundred and four days.

 

[slingblade]

What? You're confused. Forty days and forty nights is how long it took for the flood to reach full height (Genesis 7:17-18). According to Genesis 7:24 the flood lasted a hundred and fifty days.

And according to Genesis 8, Noah then waited another forty days before sending out the dove to check to see if the land was dry. Then another seven days before sending it out again. Then he waited another seven days before sending it out a third time.

So they were in the ark for at least two hundred and four days.

Trust me, I'm not the one who's confused.

What I told you was the belief of those with whom I attended church. It is the belief of most of my family, as well. They think the flood lasted 40 days and 40 nights, and then the waters receded and land reappeared. This is the story they taught me. When I tried to tell any of them they weren't counting enough days (I was a child, remember), they told me I wasn't reading it right.

I never brought it up again. And now, the point is moot.

 

[Brian-M]

That's because most of the atmosphere is below and very little of it is above. But if the space below were full of water, then most of the atmosphere wouldn't be below. It would be just the way it is now at our current sea level: all of the atmosphere is above.

Not exactly. The diameter of the earth at sea-level would be larger, meaning that there would be a much larger surface area for the air to be spread across, and so the air would still be thinner than at current seal level.

And you'd be further away from the center of the earth. The extra mass of the water wouldn't be enough to compensate for the reduction in gravity due to the added distance, so it'd be even thinner because of the [marginally] lower gravity at sea level.

Although, you do have a point. It still wouldn't be anywhere near as thin is it currently is at those altitudes.

 

[Leumas]

Anything floating on the sea is at exactly sea level. The air immediately above the water, also, would be sea-level air.

That's because most of the atmosphere is below and very little of it is above. But if the space below were full of water, then most of the atmosphere wouldn't be below. It would be just the way it is now at our current sea level: all of the atmosphere is above.

Nevermind the bats; who carried the loa-loas?

Nope.... the density of the atmosphere is dependent on the altitude above the center of the earth....not above sea level.

We use sea level as a convenient reference point.

But the density of the atmosphere would be the same at 10 miles above the center whether there is water up to 9 miles or only 5 miles.

The density of the atmosphere depends on the gravity at that altitude.

The gravity depends on the distance from the center of the earth as well as the mass of the earth.

One caveat..... the earth would of course have more mass the more water it has. But that is not sufficient to alter the gravity by too much if the total mass of the water is small in comparison to the total mass of earth….. calcs needed here.


Also the temperature depends on the density of the air.

It is all about Boyle's law and Newton's law of Gravity.

It is not just a matter of the air we have now being pushed up and the air above it also being pushed up.... it is not a balloon.

The earth is an OPEN system.....not a closed system.

 

[slingblade]

What? You're confused. Forty days and forty nights is how long it took for the flood to reach full height (Genesis 7:17-18). According to Genesis 7:24 the flood lasted a hundred and fifty days.

And according to Genesis 8, Noah then waited another forty days before sending out the dove to check to see if the land was dry. Then another seven days before sending it out again. Then he waited another seven days before sending it out a third time.

So they were in the ark for at least two hundred and four days.

Brian, sorry; I quote you again to give evidence for my claim!

There's a Sunday School song for kids about the ark. Now, it is just a song, and so it doesn't go into a lot of detail about any of the story. But allow me to post two of the verses (I like most of you folks, and will spare you the entire, tedious song):

It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
Almost drove poor Noah crazy, crazy,
Children of the Lord.

The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
Everything was fine and dandy, dandy,
Children of the Lord.



This is the way they teach it to kids; this is the way the adults remember it.

My case, she is rest.

 

[Leumas]

Brian, sorry; I quote you again to give evidence for my claim!

There's a Sunday School song for kids about the ark. Now, it is just a song, and so it doesn't go into a lot of detail about any of the story. But allow me to post two of the verses (I like most of you folks, and will spare you the entire, tedious song):

It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
Almost drove poor Noah crazy, crazy,
Children of the Lord.

The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
Everything was fine and dandy, dandy,
Children of the Lord.



This is the way they teach it to kids; this is the way the adults remember it.

My case, she is rest.

This shows that most of these fundamentalist never really read the bible
Genesis:

7:17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

8:3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated

 

[Delvo]

Gewd gawd, have you guys seriously ever heard of mountain climbers getting LIGHTER as they climb?

The air pressure at sea level is directly caused by the weight of the air above pressing down, not by how close it is to the center of the world, so the decrease with altitude is due to there being less mass above, not due to distance from the world's center, which is practically unchanged. Sneak in to any introductory meteorology class on the first day; they'll probably cover bare minimal basics like that within the first few minutes. It's in the first sentence on Wikipedia's page on air pressure. I really didn't think something like this would need to be explained here.

As for reduced gravity and the "spreading out" effect with the allegedly "much" larger surface area: reality check; the data and formulas you need are all easily available...

The height of the tallest mountain is 8.848 km. The planet's mean radius 6371.047 km. So adding enough water to cover the mountains makes a new radius of 6379.895 km. That's an increase of about 0.139%; the increase in the "radius squared", which is used in gravity calculations, would be about 0.278%.

The original sphere's surface area is 510072000 km² and the new one's would be 511489739 km², which is also a 0.278% increase. That's how much more spread out the atmosphere would be over the new surface area.

The volume of the original sphere is 1083230890053 km³ and the new one's would be 1087750277728 km³, which is a 0.417% increase. The new volume added would be 4519387675.328 km³, which is 4519387675328 kg of water. Adding this to the original mass of 5973600000000000000000000 kg yields
5973600000004519387675328 kg, a 0.0000000000757% increase. The calculation for gravitational force uses a fraction with the product of the two masses on top and the square of the distance between them on bottom. So the given increases in mass and distance would change gravitational force by the ratio of the change in mass to the change in the square of the distance:
100.0000000000757/100.277949 =0.997228214... a 0.277% decrease.

This business about the animals suffocating and freezing in conditions that are in reality hardly distinguishable from present sea-level conditions at all is just not an issue at all. The story has plenty of real, actual problems. Move along to one of them.

 

[wolfgirl]

What did the lions, tigers, etc. eat? They require meat to survive, so there would have to have been enough "spare" prey animals to last the entire cruise.

Also, what about salinity? Most aquatic life requires a pretty limited salinity range. A world-wide flood would alter the salinity to the degree that neither fresh-water nor salt-water life would be okay in it.

How did someone like Noah find animals who live in all sorts of wide-ranging places across the world? Where, for example, did he find polar bears? Or platypuses (platypi?)? This seems to me to speak to the story being written by a people who were unaware that there were so very many different types of animals in so many different places. If all I thought there was in the world were the animals I saw around me in my limited geographical area, I might believe I could pile them all into a boat and repopulate the world with them. But knowing as we do today the sheer volume of animal life across the globe, it is patently obvious that this story could not possibly be true. It's a no-brainer.

 

[slingblade]

What did the lions, tigers, etc. eat? They require meat to survive, so there would have to have been enough "spare" prey animals to last the entire cruise.

Your points are very good; I just want to play with them a bit, for fun--it was the first thing that popped in my head. Okay, there's lots of space up there, I know, bear with me.

Fundie Response: The Lord sated those animals, so they felt no hunger, and there was no need to feed them. Of course the Lord pacified them! How else do you think Noah and his family lived with a boat full of man-eating animals??

Rational Response: There's no way the ark had the capacity to store enough fresh meat, without refrigeration, for months, for that many carnivores. Also, what makes you think you won't be the first thing on the menu? Followed, of course, by every other animal on that boat.

Also, what about salinity? Most aquatic life requires a pretty limited salinity range. A world-wide flood would alter the salinity to the degree that neither fresh-water nor salt-water life would be okay in it.

Fundie Response: Honey, this is GOD we're talking about; bless your heart, did you forget? He made those fishes, and he can make it so they get along just fine in whatever water he chooses for them to be in, amen.

Rational Response: Yes, this is true.

How did someone like Noah find animals who live in all sorts of wide-ranging places across the world? Where, for example, did he find polar bears? Or platypuses (platypi?)? This seems to me to speak to the story being written by a people who were unaware that there were so very many different types of animals in so many different places. If all I thought there was in the world were the animals I saw around me in my limited geographical area, I might believe I could pile them all into a boat and repopulate the world with them. But knowing as we do today the sheer volume of animal life across the globe, it is patently obvious that this story could not possibly be true. It's a no-brainer.

Fundie Response: The Lord compelled all those animals to go to Noah, and he made it possible for them to get there. Some of them, he sent up to the highest mountains, and the ark just swung by and picked them up before the water covered them. Others, he just had walk or fly to where Noah was. Remember: with God all things are possible!

Rational Response: Indeed, a no-brainer; that's what it seems to take....

 

[Mudcat]

If all I thought there was in the world were the animals I saw around me in my limited geographical area, I might believe I could pile them all into a boat and repopulate the world with them.

Even with those concessions the whole idea is unworkable.

 

[Brian-M]

Gewd gawd, have you guys seriously ever heard of mountain climbers getting LIGHTER as they climb?

According to Wikipedia, a mountaineer (or his equipment) at the top of Mount Everest would theoretically weigh 0.28% less than at sea level. Not really enough to notice (especially when you factor in reduced buoyancy due to lower air pressure), but measurable with sensitive instruments.

Remember, your weight is approximately proportional to (mass_you * mass_earth) / distance²
(With distance being measured from the center of your mass to the center of Earth's mass. This is only an approximate value because the earth isn't a uniform mass.)

Trust me, I'm not the one who's confused.

What I told you was the belief of those with whom I attended church.

Fair enough. I guess I was confused as to who was confused over this.

Brian, sorry; I quote you again to give evidence for my claim!

There's a Sunday School song for kids about the ark. Now, it is just a song, and so it doesn't go into a lot of detail about any of the story. But allow me to post two of the verses (I like most of you folks, and will spare you the entire, tedious song):

It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
It rained, it rained for forty nights and daysies, daysies,
Almost drove poor Noah crazy, crazy,
Children of the Lord.

The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
The sun came out and dried up the landy, landy,
Everything was fine and dandy, dandy,
Children of the Lord.



This is the way they teach it to kids; this is the way the adults remember it.

My case, she is rest.

Of course, the song makes no mention of the time frame required to dry out the landy, landy, so it doesn't go against the scriptures on that point. (But I can understand how people could get the impression it happened quickly.)

On the other hand, The Bible doesn't claim that it actually rained for the forty days and forty nights, only that the flood came and the waters rose for forty days. But I suppose earlier verses about opening up the sluices [? can't be bothered to check if that's the right word] of the heavens could be used to justify the claim of rain.

 

[David Swidler]

So, Rabbi, oh Rabbi!

I has a question.

I heard a very long time ago that the expression "40 days and 40 nights" wasn't literal, but essentially meant "a very long time." I was told it meant this to the "Hebrew people."

I know a lot of Fundies who take it literally. The flood lasted 40 actual days and 40 actual nights.

What's the story, Rabbi? Can you help a poor gal understand?

I love this question, mostly because I've been exploring the number 40 (among others) in Biblical (and post-Biblical) Jewish sources. The Tanakh (and Talmud, following its lead) use numbers as shorthand for conveying more complex ideas.

The number 40 is used in contexts of starting over, of new opportunities (or the consequences of missing them): the flood, the number of years in the wilderness, the reigns of David and Solomon, the tranquil periods in the book of Judges, to name but a few (it might even be a specific reference to the 40 weeks of (typical) human gestation). It carries over in Jewish law, too: the minimum volume for a valid mikveh (ritual bath) is 40 se'ah; immersion in a mikveh "resets" a person or object's ritual status for certain purposes.

The significance of the number doesn't really make or break the literal interpretation, but it does strengthen the contention that the Biblical flood story is intended as a symbolic narrative.

 

[Mudcat]

but it does strengthen the contention that the Biblical flood story is intended as a symbolic narrative.

If it is so than why promote the stupid story? The only reasons why symbology has any meaning of any kind what so ever is because human beings assign it the same. The story the bible the entire frigging religion is devoid of any meaning.

 

[David Swidler]

If it is so than why promote the stupid story? The only reasons why symbology has any meaning of any kind what so ever is because human beings assign it the same. The story the bible the entire frigging religion is devoid of any meaning.

Because you say so?

 

[Corsair 115]

Also, what about salinity? Most aquatic life requires a pretty limited salinity range. A world-wide flood would alter the salinity to the degree that neither fresh-water nor salt-water life would be okay in it.

Well, the answer to that is pretty simple: God simply changed the laws of chemistry. After all, He did change the laws of physics. Remember how before the flood there were no rainbows, but then afterwards there were? That means the refraction of light did not happen before the flood but did start happening afterwards. So God made a change to the laws of physics. If He can do that, then changing the laws of chemistry to eliminate salinity issues ought to be no problem at all.

 

[Mudcat]

Because you say so?

Because it doesn't provide anything of practical use*, never has and never will and is so demonstrably wrong on so many accounts. Being part of the system, you should know best what the flaws of the system are.

_{*I don't really get it so please explain it to me in a way that I can understand. Seems the whole point is to praise and worship some supreme being you seem to saying doesn't necessarily exist in reality.}

And to be completely honest with you I'm surprised it lasted five years, never mind five thousand. You had a good* run of it, you had your fifteen minutes of fame but for crying out loud have the dignity to know when to bow out with grace.

_{* with varying meaning of the word 'good'. I imagines if the Caaninites were still around 'good' wouldn't be what they'd call it.}

 

[Leumas]

Gewd gawd, have you guys seriously ever heard of mountain climbers getting LIGHTER as they climb?
[snip]

Noooooo..... you obviously know a lot more about this than I. I cannot have this...... so [hands over eyes] You must be wrong...I don't want to see[/hands over eyes]

My Pride and Ego and wishful thinking of being right no matter what evidence is presented PREVENT me from accepting your argument.

Why should I look at it....obviously you have your supporters here at JREF and you just want to persecute me.

Since I cannot come up with some bizarre apologetics for why your math just does not apply, I am just going to not listen….oh wait…. I just thought of one…… Laws of physics do not apply to anything I argue….so I am right regardless since I have special circumstances.

So ..........no..... no.... no..... YOU ARE WRONG.




Seriously though.... Ok you have convinced me... I was wrong


[back peddling mode] I really meant it as a joke I forgot to have my irony quotes around the whole thing. I did not quite mean it the way you thought I meant it I actually meant it the way you wrote it but you did not understand me [/back peddling mode]

 

[Leumas]

Because it doesn't provide anything of practical use*, never has and never will and is so demonstrably wrong on so many accounts. Being part of the system, you should know best what the flaws of the system are.

_{*I don't really get it so please explain it to me in a way that I can understand. Seems the whole point is to praise and worship some supreme being you seem to saying doesn't necessarily exist in reality.}

It all depends on your VANTAGE POINT.

If you are the priests and descendents of Aaron (Levites) or the Cohenim, it has MAJOR practical use.

It empowers you to make people to give you the best of their harvest and fruit and even their children to serve you. They cloth you and feed you and house you and respect you and elevate you and build things for you and listen to you and have you adjudicate among them.

So how else can a worthless lazy parasite make good (for himself that is) in life?

How cushy it would be to DUPE people into giving you the best of everything they have in return for a promise of return on their investment when they are dead.

The ultimate sham..... give me your money and I will return it to you a thousand fold when you are on the other side of this life..... prove me a swindler if you can.

And to be completely honest with you I'm surprised it lasted five years, never mind five thousand. You had a good* run of it, you had your fifteen minutes of fame but for crying out loud have the dignity to know when to bow out with grace.

Parasites are rampant. A good parasitic survival strategy is to not kill your host off. So if a parasite can find a way to squeeze the host for as much as he can but keep the balance of actually still keeping the host alive then that is perfect parasitism.

Also the action of the parasite can actually make the host unaware of the loss to it.

For example take a leach.... to make the host not feel the bite and also to keep the blood from clotting it exudes chemicals that affect the puncture zone where it is anesthetized and kept hemorrhaging.

I remember reading in Dawkins’ The God Delusion about a virus that infects a certain type of ant and takes over its brain to the extent where the ant becomes a zombie under the control of the parasite. When the parasite has completed its life cycle and it is time for it to infect a cow as part of its reproduction cycle it forces the ant to climb up a blade of grass to get eaten by the cow (along with the grass) where it completes its life cycle to be excreted in the cows excrement where its progeny then infect more ants.

So you see.... the reason it lasted 5000 years is due to PERFECT PARASITIC STRATEGIES and the ability to HIJACK the brain of the dupes to the extent of making them do anything willingly and in a balanced strategy of keeping the host "happy" for as long as s/he is needed.

_{* with varying meaning of the word 'good'. Imagine if the Canaanites were still around 'good' wouldn't be what they'd call it.}

As a matter of fact the Canaanite are still around…. They are among the Sephardic Jews (not Ashkenazi), the Lebanese, the Palestinians, the Jordanians and even Tunisians (Remember Hannibal and Carthage)

Of course many of these places were also invaded and inhabited and intermarried by Greeks, Romans, Persians, Babylonians, Egyptians, French/Anglos, Arabs, Turks, and in Israel recently Poles, Germanics, and Khazars (Ashkenazi Jews) and even Ethiopians (Falasha).


All you have to do to hear the Canaanite language is listen to the Bible being read in proper Hebrew. Seeing the Canaanite language is a little tricky…. The Block Hebrew alephbet (the one you see in the Torah scrolls) is in fact Aramaic not original Canaanite…..but Aramaic stems from the Canaanite alphabet.

Just like Chaucer’s English would be unintelligible to English speakers today, so did the Canaanite language change into Aramaic and other Middle Eastern dialects and modern Hebrew.


Have a look at these two books (you should read the first one):

• The Invention of the Jewish People
• In The Beginning

 

[Leumas]

Your points are very good; I just want to play with them a bit, for fun--it was the first thing that popped in my head. Okay, there's lots of space up there, I know, bear with me.

Fundie Response: The Lord sated those animals, so they felt no hunger, and there was no need to feed them. Of course the Lord pacified them! How else do you think Noah and his family lived with a boat full of man-eating animals??

Rational Response: There's no way the ark had the capacity to store enough fresh meat, without refrigeration, for months, for that many carnivores. Also, what makes you think you won't be the first thing on the menu? Followed, of course, by every other animal on that boat.



Fundie Response: Honey, this is GOD we're talking about; bless your heart, did you forget? He made those fishes, and he can make it so they get along just fine in whatever water he chooses for them to be in, amen.

Rational Response: Yes, this is true.



Fundie Response: The Lord compelled all those animals to go to Noah, and he made it possible for them to get there. Some of them, he sent up to the highest mountains, and the ark just swung by and picked them up before the water covered them. Others, he just had walk or fly to where Noah was. Remember: with God all things are possible!

Rational Response: Indeed, a no-brainer; that's what it seems to take....

What escapes them with that kind of reasoning is ....If God was going to pull all these interferences and special actions to make the story possible then

• Why didn't god just do it all if he was going to interfere so much
• Why didn't he just think it and there...it is done
• Why didn't he just vanish all the bad ones and keep all the good ones without all that DRAMA and animal Exoduses and genocide of children, toddlers, suckling babies and unborn infants.
• Why didn't god just whisk away all the ones he wanted to save then flood everything then put them back
• Why didn't god use the Moses trick and just split the flood waters around the people he wanted to save and do away with all that ark impossible rubbish for which he had to pull so many miracles to make it work...why not just pull an easy ONE miracle of splitting the waters around the ordained survivors

Better still....why didn't god just "EDUCATE" (or brain wash them) all these people to be better..... I don't think killing them is any less interfering with their free will than brain washing them...no?

Even more..... why not send Jesus to be DROWNED and redeem them..... can't Jesus die more than once? Why is Jesus allowed only TWO comings....why not 3 or 5 or as many as it bloody would need?

 

[tsig]

Because you say so?

His authority seems just as valid as yours but you don't need an appeal to authority to see that god drowning everyone in a moment of pique and saving all animals and some people on a boat is false.