Noah's Ark found?

[TimCallahan]

. . .On a separate note, the 700 Club newscaster (not Pat Robertson) gave the typical cherry picked full of poor logic reasons one should believe the Bible. He noted geologists would say there was no evidence of a worldwide flood, biologists would say all the species wouldn't fit on the ark, but anthropologists find flood stories all over the world. Wel;l d'uh, floods are common.

Then he went on to describe an Aztec flood story that included everything in the Noah story up to the sending out a dove which didn't return indicating the water had receded. Ooooh, we should be impressed at this magical coincidence. Just ignore all the science because a coincidence in two ancient myths translated thousands of years later sound similar. Never mind all the other aspects of Aztec belief, the multiple gods, the different creation story, .....

But it is even worse than that. As I looked for confirmation of this Aztec flood myth to see how close the real story was to the 700 Club's version, it turns out there are many Mesoamerica flood myths, many versions of the same myths, the flood myth in question isn't some major Aztec myth and certainly not in the version repeated on the 700 Club. And what do you know? There are myths which were altered to include Christian themes!


Just ignore all evidence that disproves your beliefs and grossly distort evidence to make it fit. What fools.

Yeah, he definitely fudged the so-called Aztec story. Here's what I found at www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Deluge(mythology)#Aztec

Aztec
There are several variants of the Aztec Flood story. One of the more famous is that of Nota, the Aztec version of Noah. However, this story is controversial for several reasons, especially because it was recorded by Spanish scribes well after Christian culture had a chance to interact with Aztec civilization. When the Sun Age came, there had passed 400 years. Then came 200 years, then 76. Then all mankind was lost and drowned and turned to fishes. The water and the sky drew near each other. In a single day all was lost. But before the Flood began, Titlachahuan had warned the man Nota and his wife Nena, saying, 'Make no more pulque, but hollow a great cypress, into which you shall enter the month Tozoztli. The waters shall near the sky.' They entered, and when Titlachahuan had shut them in he said to the man, 'Thou shalt eat but a single ear of maize, and thy wife but one also'. And when they had each eaten one ear of maize, they prepared to go forth, for the water was tranquil.
— Ancient Aztec document Codex Chimalpopoca, translated by Abbé Charles Étienne Brasseur de Bourbourg.

Inca
In Inca mythology, the god Viracocha, the creator of civilization, destroyed the giants, as well as the other inhabitants around Lake Titicaca with a Great Flood, and two people repopulated the earth. They survived sealed in caves.

Maya

The Subsiding of the Waters of the Deluge, by Cole Thomas, 1829
In Maya mythology, from the Popol Vuh, Part 1, Chapter 3, Huracan ("one-legged") was a wind and storm god. It is from his name that the English word hurricane is derived. Huracan caused the Great Flood (of resin) after the first humans angered the gods because, being made of wood, they were unable to engage in worship. Huracan lived in the windy mists above the floodwaters and spoke "earth" until land came up again from the seas. Humans had become monkeys, but later, real people would emerge, and three men and four women repopulate the world after the flood.
Add to these many dissimilarities the fact there was no native flood myth among the Celtic, Teutonic, Slavic, Baltic, Finno-Ugric and Altaic peoples, who, taken together comprise the peoples of Europe north of the Mediterranean and most of the land mass of Asia north of the Indian subcontinent, and the evidence of a grand, universal flood myth erodes considerably. Add to this the fact that the only universal flood myth in China is found among an ethnic group speaking a language similar to Thai and who apparently emigrated from Southeast Asia, and the there's even more erosion.

Flood myths are also scarce in Africa. The only flood myth in Egypt involves a flood of soporific mandrake beer, poured out by the gods to cover Egypt, that the goddess Hat-hor - who was on a rampage and was about to destroy the human race - drank up. After drinking up all the mandrake beer, she tottered off to bed, slept and forgot about exterminating the human race.

So the 700 Club's one great "proof" disintegrates under even slight scrutiny.

 

[TimCallahan]

In rethinking my proposed genetic drift experiment I thought about the fact that a lot of species simply don't have members in the habitat of eastern Turkey / Armenia, the jaguar for example. However, since there are still a few Asiatic lions, they, along with tigers, could be tested. Wild asses also should show the same pattern of genetic drift. The red fox (Vulpes vulpes)would be another candidate, particularly since it's found both in Europe and the Americas. We could probably find a few more species. So, 154 and Radrook, would you be willing to abide by the results of such a genetic drift test? I would.

 

[Radrook]

Okay, your reference to differences between the pre and post flood climates and, particularly, you reference to "original biblical kinds" (hilited) sounds like classic YEC arguments. Yet you say you aren't a YEC. Can you see why this might be confusing?

Not at all. Do my of evolutionist arguments make me an full-fledged abiogenesis evolutionist? One can accept certain parts while rejecting others. Similarly, accepting certain conditions on earth after it ws formed doesn't necessitate a belief in a young earth. If it does, pray tell, how?

Part of honest, ethical argumentation is self-disclosure and transptarency. For example: I accept evolutionary theory and I don't believe in God. In your case, I get what appears to be a mix of old earth and young earth creationism. For example, you seem to be arguing for a universal flood. However OEC generally argues that the flood was local and limited. Could you clarify your position please?

Actually, I was simply seeking opinions on the support given for the seaworthiness of the vessel described.. The reason I asked is because many here were calling the vessel unseaworthy. So I figured that such certainty could easily produce an interestesting counterargument to the data I posted and was curious about the response. This inquiry has been interpreted as an effort to prove the existence of God, a defense of the flood account, and even a defence of the young earth concept.

 

[Complexity]

This inquiry has correctly been interpreted as an effort to prove the existence of God, a defense of the flood account, and even a defence of the young earth concept.

Improved the clarity for you (by adding the word in red, in case it wasn't obvious).

 

[John Jones]

Not at all. Do my of evolutionist arguments make me an full-fledged abiogenesis evolutionist?

Huh?

I can't be sure what - if any - point you're trying to make.

You seem to be dodging every cogent argument.

 

[I Ratant]

Tap dancing and hand waving out of every corner he's talked himself into, I give you, ladies and gentleman, the one and only (thank God) RADROOK!
.
No, don't throw the tomatoes.

 

[Vortigern99]

Here are two paragraphs from the NCSE (pp. 4 & 5), discussing the size of the ship:

Finally, our farmer-turned-architect had to confront the gravest difficulty of all: in the words of A. M. Robb, there was an "upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight" (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that "a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging' " (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water.

John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that "six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction" (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage.​

 

[rwguinn]

Here are two paragraphs from the NCSE (pp. 4 & 5), discussing the size of the ship:

Finally, our farmer-turned-architect had to confront the gravest difficulty of all: in the words of A. M. Robb, there was an "upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight" (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that "a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging' " (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water.

John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that "six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction" (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage.​

As was alluded to elsewhere, the special Gopher wood used must have come from a magical grove, and God had to turn all other woods into DU or something extremely massive, so that all current boats would sink, rather than float.
Or perhaps the rain that fell was less dense than regular water, allowing the ark to float (it being of some special low density) and all others to sink.
That would also explain where all the water went--it escaped into space due to being so light...

 

[dasmiller]

Here are two paragraphs from the NCSE (pp. 4 & 5), discussing the size of the ship:

Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage.​

It's also worth noting that the 329' USS Wyoming had iron reinforcement and, even so, had severe structural problems. It sank in a storm. Citing Wyoming to show that an Ark-sized wooden ship is feasible (and some sites do this) is like citing Titanic to show that passenger liners can be iceberg-proof.

 

[Complexity]

Gopher wood

Perhaps we're not being literal enough.

I'm not sure how you can you make something waterproof from gopher wood, not even if it is in the morning and you have a whole bunch of them.

 

[Meadmaker]

Thought for the day. If I could find a literalist, I think I would like to ask him if the world was spherical back in Noah's day. AFter all, the Bible doesn't say that the Earth is round. It probably alludes to a flat Earth. I know it mentions the "four corners" of the world. Besides, obviously, the world then was very different than now, what with the water that was outside of the dome of the sky, and enough of it to flood mountaintops, and animals converging on Palestine for a boat ride with 900 year old men and all the rest.

So, what's the purpose of such a question? The story of Noah is a case which, in order to be true, would have to involve some major league miraculous divine intervention. God would have to suspend the laws of physics in a huge way to make this flood happen, and large wooden boats full of animals seaworthy, and goodness knows what else to make a worldwide flood. This isn't just parting some reedy old marsh. This is the big time.

A God who can do that, could do pretty much anything, such as, for example, roll up the world into a ball, after it had been flat all the time. In other words, that suggestion wouldn't alter anything in the Bible, and wouldn't be any less plausible than suspended sky water suddenly dropping from the sky, but drying up very slowly, and vanishing never to be seen again. Despite that, I am sure that no Bible believer would take such a suggestion seriously. It would be a nice way of illustrating how selective people are in allowing the omnipotent God to fool with nature. Oh, sure, he could make it rain for fourty days and nights at such an incredible pace to flood the world, and he could surely keep a gopherwood boat afloat, but changing the shape of the world? Don't be ridiculous.

You could probably even phrase it in such a way that the flat Earth theory "solves" one or more of the issues that people who take the Bible a bit less seriously often bring up.

 

[Marduk]

Thought for the day. If I could find a literalist, I think I would like to ask him if the world was spherical back in Noah's day. AFter all, the Bible doesn't say that the Earth is round. It probably alludes to a flat Earth.

AAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[I Ratant]

I talked to an "engineer" intensely interested and defending the bible on Compuserve's Religion forum many years back that maintained that the earth WAS flat, until enough people decided it was spherical.
He was also deeply into the "pre-Adamic civilization", which among things provided Adam's kids with wives.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Woulda been much cooler if it was Noah's submarine.

 

[Marduk]

Aaand

Its a hoax

I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark. I and my partners invested $100,000 in this expedition (described below) which they have retained, despite their promise and our requests to return it, since it was not used for the expedition. The information given below is my opinion based on what I have seen and heard (from others who claim to have been eyewitnesses or know the exact details).

To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake. The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut’s men to the site saw the wood, but couldn’t get inside because of the severe weather conditions. During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters – something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubabyazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it.

http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2010/04/noahs-ark-paleobabble-update
What you saying now Radrook ?

 

[TimCallahan]

Happy Birthday, Marduk!

 

[devnull]

Aaand

Its a hoax

I, for one, are deeply, *deeply*, shocked.

 

[Radrook]

Thought for the day. If I could find a literalist, I think I would like to ask him if the world was spherical back in Noah's day. After all, the Bible doesn't say that the Earth is round. It probably alludes to a flat Earth. I know it mentions the "four corners" of the world.

The same way modern people allude to the ends of the earth, being all ears, having green thumb, and being as sharp as a whip and we understand them not as literal but as idiomatic expressions.
Actually the Bible does describe the earth as spherical and appearing to hover in space as if on nothing.

Job 26:
7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hang Earth the earth upon nothing.

Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth....ends of ts

Even people today use non literal expressions such as "the ends of the earth." It's just an idiomatic expression just like "he is all ears" "I have a green thumb" They felt blue"

Besides, obviously, the world then was very different than now, what with the water that was outside of the dome of the sky, and enough of it to flood mountaintops, and animals pended by nothing.converging on Palestine for a boat ride with 900 year old men and all the rest.

More inacuracies:

1. There were no 900 year old men on the ark.
2. The flood wasn't caused only by rain. Fountains of watery deep are involved.

Genesis
7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month – on that day all the fountains of the great deep 10 burst open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.

3. You are certain it was gopher wood when even the translators who are experts in the language are uncertain.

The Jewish Encyclopedia says that the identification of gopher with cypress is arbitrary and unsatisfactory. It says such identification “rests on the mere assumption that the roots of these two words are akin. According to P. de Lagarde, gofer stands for gofrit, meaning originally pine, from old Bactrian vohukereti, and later also sulfur, on account of the likeness in appearance which sulfur bears to pine-resin.http://www.creationtips.com/gopher_wood.html”

So, what's the purpose of such a question? The story of Noah is a case which, in order to be true, would have to involve some major league miraculous divine intervention. God would have to suspend the laws of physics in a huge way to make this flood happen, and large wooden boats full of animals seaworthy, and goodness knows what else to make a worldwide flood. This isn't just parting some reedy old marsh. This is the big time.

A God who can do that, could do pretty much anything, such as, for example, roll up the world into a ball, after it had been flat all the time. In other words, that suggestion wouldn't alter anything in the Bible, and wouldn't be any less plausible than suspended sky water suddenly dropping from the sky, but drying up very slowly, and vanishing never to be seen again. ?[/quotelood waters vanis]

Another misrepresentation!
Where in the Bible does it say that the flood waters vanished never to be seen again? It merely says they receded until dry land appeared. Have you ever considered why Antarctica is under water? Obviously it had been seen above water by humans since someone drew a map of its shoreline which is now submerged under ocean and ice. Which means of course that humans were on earth before it was submerged.


Or better yet, why is 75 percent of the earth surface covered by water?. Add to that the vast amount of water represented by the ice caps and there it is! The rest could have receded due to slow collapse of the oceanic crust under the weight or by seeping into the ground through cracks crevasses and caves to become aquifers.

Where did all of the Flood waters go? The most logical answer in light of the Scriptures appears to be that God made room for the waters by adjusting the Earth’s topography. Much of the water from the Flood likely has retreated into the deeper ocean trenches—valleys that, in places, are over seven miles deep. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1803

Despite that, I am sure that no Bible believer would take such a suggestion seriously

.

This one is unbelievable!
So the millions who believe in the Noachian Flood aren't Bible believers? Weird concept!
JWs alone number more than six million. Not to mention the Pentecostals and other such fundamentalist groups.

It would be a nice way of illustrating how selective people are in allowing the omnipotent God to fool with nature. Oh, sure, he could make it rain for forty days and nights at such an incredible pace to flood the world, and he could surely keep a gopher wood boat afloat, but changing the shape of the world? Don't be ridiculous.

Again! The pace seems incredible to you because you are ignorant of what the account really says, The flood didn't depend on rain alone. Read the account for crying out loud! Your issue with the gopher wood is easily dismissed because no one is really sure that the word translated as "gopher wood" is really referring to gopher wood.

You could probably even phrase it in such a way that the flat Earth theory "solves" one or more of the issues that people who take the Bible a bit less seriously often bring up.

Flat earth theory? Your last sentence is nonsensical.


Anyway you asked

So, what's the purpose of such a question?

Curiosity.


BTW
Your laid back glib remarks would be far more convincing if they were accurate.

 

[Radrook]

It's also worth noting that the 329' USS Wyoming had iron reinforcement and, even so, had severe structural problems. It sank in a storm. Citing Wyoming to show that an Ark-sized wooden ship is feasible (and some sites do this) is like citing Titanic to show that passenger liners can be iceberg-proof.

Yet the results of the tests done on the ark models when placed under the stresses you mention speak otherewise.

 

[Orphia Nay]

They haven't found Noah's Ark, they've found a Fail Boat.