Noah's Ark found?

[Garrette]

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.

No.

 

[Garrette]

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

No.

1. Model of what design? The bible is not specific about it.

2. As has been pointed out, the stresses do not scale up. The tests do not show what you say they show.

 

[steve s]

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.

This guy has a good summary of the passages in bible which support the view of a flat earth.

Steve S

 

[Radrook]

This guy explains the passages which that other guy quotes a reaches a different conclusion.

Does the Bible teach a flat Earth?
"We are justified in our assertion that there is no proof that the Bible teaches a false cosmology."
http://www.tektonics.org/af/earthshape.html

 

[Marduk]

I guess Radrook has me on ignore, which means hes going to be the last to know that the evangelicals were lying again
Thats as opposed to being the last to be able to accept that the evangelicals were lying again

Schadenfreude Ho

Happy Birthday, Marduk!

that was yesterday I hit two score years, only another score and ten left, but thanks

 

[dasmiller]

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

First, how do tests on ark models makeWyoming a successful ship?

Second, since the entire biblical description of the ark was the three dimensions, "gopher wood," a window, and the fact that it had 3 levels, how could anyone confidently conclude anything about the ark's structural integrity?

 

[Ladewig]

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.

Are you arguing that pre-Flood sailors mapped the Antarctic coastline?

 

[Ladewig]

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

This claim was debunked in post #323

Hold up right here. Reading this, I can see you don't quite understand the results achieved in model testing and what you can get from it.

When testing an Aeroplane in a windtunnel , yes the are testing design stability, but not of the internal design, Using solid models they are testing the Aerodynamic shape and looking at what stresses the profile create, areas of air resistance etc. What they are not testing is how well they have built the internal structure. No aircraft company in the world would design a model, test it, and then put it straight into manufacture without doing exhausting tests on actual crafts afterwards.

Having an exact model of the ark work fine in a water test does not mean the same model scaled up would work just as well, The strengths of materials do not scale like that. A model test of the Ark would tell us what kind of drag etc the ark of that design would face, but not that the wall design would hold when scaled up, or that the beams would not snap etc.

You come across the same problems in the 9/11 truth forum. truthers can not understand their "models" of the world trade centres can not accurately model the stresses the construction materials faced on that day. Dropping one cardboard box onto another and saying "see, it did not pancake" does not invalidate what happened. The same as having a wooden model of the ark and saying, see it floats fine, So it must work full size, does not make this any more true.

Engineering and science do not work that way, As much as you may like it to

 

[Marduk]

Are you arguing that pre-Flood sailors mapped the Antarctic coastline?

Hes making claims about the Piri Reis map
So obviously another large gap in his knowledge and also that shows hes using Graham Hancoock as a source
which is just laughable. I don't know anyone over the age of 20 who has a decent intelligence level that believes anything that the self confessed drug taking anarchist that is Graham Hancock claims. Even the BBC said he was dishonest

Heres the map overlain on a globe

what a few retards are claiming is that Antartica is that part attached to the bottom of south America. When in fact, its the usual method of showing a coastline on a map when the page space is limited.

 

[Meadmaker]

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

But a flat Earth would still have to hang somewhere*, so the quote from Job doesn't say anything about the shape of it, and circles are not spheres.

Moreover, though, those books were written describing the post Genesis Earth, after God rolled it up into a ball to make its current shape.

1. There were no 900 year old men on the ark.

That's true, but I'm not sure it really changes my point. I could have said "a 600 year old man who would end up living another 300 years", but the point is that in order for that to happen, things would have to be very, very, different than they are today.

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

I'm just going by the langauge of the King James Bible. If it was good enough for Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, it's good enough for me.

Where in the Bible does it say that the flood waters vanished never to be seen again?

So, where are they? Do the math. All the aquifers in the world aren't big enough to hold it, unless you are asserting the existince of some truly amazingly large underground seas down there in the Earth, mixed in with all the magma. I haven't discussed this theory with any physicists, but I suspect they would have issues with it.

Of course, world geography could have been different back then. The mountains might not have been as tall, or the oceans as deep. The extent of dry land in Noah's day might have been much smaller, so less additional water was needed. In this theory, God releases all the water from above the dome of the sky, which is enough to flood all the existing dry land. Then, he raises the mountains higher and digs deeper valleys and ocean trenches, causing the land to reappear above the surface of the water. This is certainly plausible, and solves a real problem with the flood narrative. Most of the time when water recedes, it either drains to a lower place, as when a river in flood gradually sends the water down to the ocean, or it evaporates. However, with the worldwide flood, there was no lower place, and any evaporation would just fall back to Earth as rain. The apparent recession may simply have been the result of divine reshaping of the land to lower the level of ocean trenches to store all the water.

Of course, another possibility is that God let the water flow over the edge of the world until enough had vanished, and then He rolled the Earth into a ball when there was just the right amount of water left.

*unless it's elephants all the way down.

 

[tsig]

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.

That's because you don't know the properties of gopher wood. While it splits at the touch with the grain when you put two edges together it bonds instantly at the molecular level making the hull basically a one piece construction.

Of course all the animals were taken in DNA form so Noah really only had a bunch of test tubes to tend.

Remember that the logic of men does not apply to god.

(you saw it here first folks)

 

[Pup]

Of course all the animals were taken in DNA form so Noah really only had a bunch of test tubes to tend.

Remember that the logic of men does not apply to god.

(you saw it here first folks)

The sad thing is that that's a more "logical" answer to my questions in Post #511 than anything the literal-flood people seem to have come up with.

 

[Complexity]

I guess Radrook has me on ignore, which means hes going to be the last to know that the evangelicals were lying againThats as opposed to being the last to be able to accept that the evangelicals were lying again

Schadenfreude Ho

Oh, Radrook knows.

In his heart of hearts, he's known all along.

 

[Complexity]

That's because you don't know the properties of gopher wood.

I fear my post was too subtle. Read it again. Pretend you're 15 and a guy.


In the morning.

 

[I Ratant]

I guess Radrook has me on ignore, which means hes going to be the last to know that the evangelicals were lying again
Thats as opposed to being the last to be able to accept that the evangelicals were lying again

Schadenfreude Ho




that was yesterday I hit two score years, only another score and ten left, but thanks

.
The first was easy.
The second took some effort, but, I ain't looking forward to many more "happy returns of the day".

 

[I Ratant]

I fear my post was too subtle. Read it again. Pretend you're 15 and a guy.


In the morning.

.
That was a subtle, fer shure. I wondered how many would finger it out.

 

[rwguinn]

I fear my post was too subtle. Read it again. Pretend you're 15 and a guy.


In the morning.

After "a night to remember" if you only could...
I do like the " bonds instantly at the molecular level making the hull basically a one piece construction" bit. tsig may be on to something here

 

[I Ratant]

That's because you don't know the properties of gopher wood. While it splits at the touch with the grain when you put two edges together it bonds instantly at the molecular level making the hull basically a one piece construction.

Of course all the animals were taken in DNA form so Noah really only had a bunch of test tubes to tend.

Remember that the logic of men does not apply to god.

(you saw it here first folks)

.
The typical construction practices of other areas at that time used planking -sewed- together with caulking between the seams.
For a boat the size of the Ark, this would be totally inadequate, as it results in a very flexible and leaky structure.
In Mesopotamia at that time the usual vessel was a coracle, or a platform supported by inflated animal skins.
No "decks", just the platform.
The Ark as described is an anachronism, not physically possible.

 

[Complexity]

.
That was a subtle, fer shure. I wondered how many would finger it out.

Well at least we know now how the pieces stuck together.

 

[Marduk]

.

In Mesopotamia at that time the usual vessel was a coracle, or a platform supported by inflated animal skins.

Large boats and barges existed made of reeds at the time in Mesopotamia,
http://www.egyptorigins.org/mesoboats.htm
they are what the Biblical Ark is based on, hence the original claim in the original story that the Ark was made from Ziusudras reed hut. Of course in the original story from Atrahasis the flood was a river flood, it didn't become global until Gilgamesh