Noah's Ark

[Darkhole]

I wonder, isn't it 'easy' to debunk (or not) this story by building a virtual ark?
You need a few experts, shipbuilder, some biologists, botanicals, stable builders and others.
And yes, some to make the actual simulation.
What do you think?

 

[Rasmus]

I don't think there is any need to go that far.

If you want to rely on science then it just can't be done for numerous and strikingly obvious reasons. (How did Noah get the Kangaroos? How did he build and maintain the fish tanks? There are millions and millions of different species of insects. Why didn't one half of all the animals kill and eat the other half - at least during loading and unloading or shortly after? How did the herbivores survive, if not by eating other animals? Did they just go hungry until other populations were large enough to sustain them again? What did the herbivores eat? Most plants aren't too fond about being submerged for days on end. etc. etc.)

If, however, you accept "well, God diddit" then everything is - by definition - possible.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

There's a loooong thread on this a couple pages back, if even that. The most compelling evidence against the Ark, in my view, is that it bears an uncanny resemblance to the Epic of Gilgamesh - which is fictional.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I wonder, isn't it 'easy' to debunk (or not) this story by building a virtual ark?
You need a few experts, shipbuilder, some biologists, botanicals, stable builders and others.
And yes, some to make the actual simulation.
What do you think?

You could, but ironically the Creationists have done most of the legwork for you. Check out "Noah's Ark a feasibilty study" and then look around the net for point by point debunkings of Woddmorape's claims in the book.

 

[Darkhole]

Yeah, I know.
But just putting all the animals and food in that ark must proof it's impossible.

There is one build in The Netherlands:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ews.html?in_article_id=451746&in_page_id=1811
But only a fifth of the 'original'.
He plans to build a full scale model:
http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/other_news/&articleid=259753

PS: I did a search for Noah, Noach on the forum with no result.

 

[Primus]

Could you imagine having to muck out every animal know in existence! Surely with all the methane produced in enclosed spaces it would just be a giant bomb waiting for someone to light their pipe.

 

[Meadmaker]

I like it. You could try first "building" a realistic floating zoo, and noting that things were a bit cramped and unsanitary you would note that "obviously", during the ark time animals neither ate nor excreted. When the ark still didn't fit all the animals, you could note that "obviously" the animals were shrunk to miniature size.

Or maybe, you could put forth different theories on how to make the ark "work". If you could figure out how big a realistic ark would have to be, you could use that measure to determine the size of a Biblical cubit. 18 inches is often used as a standard cubit measure, but it's actually the length from the elbow to the fingertips. Now, consider for a moment that just before the ark story, Genesis 6 talks about the giants in the Earth. Obviously, once you calculate the size the ark would have to be, you could use that to determine the size of a cubit, and it would "prove" that there were, in fact, giants in the Earth, and you could use the cubit calculation to determine the size of the giants, because obviously, Genesis was using the "giant cubit", based on the size of the giant's forearm.

I think this has real potential.

 

[bokonon]

Could you imagine having to muck out every animal know in existence! Surely with all the methane produced in enclosed spaces it would just be a giant bomb waiting for someone to light their pipe.

That's why they put the window in the back, so they could use it to rocket themselves to the top of Mt. Ararat.

 

[triadboy]

... it bears an uncanny resemblance to the Epic of Gilgamesh - which is fictional.

I think of Utnapishtim's tale as mythical - not fictional. It grew myth-wings from the real story of a devastating flood in the Tigris / Euphrates region.

 

[triadboy]

Could you imagine having to muck out every animal know in existence! Surely with all the methane produced in enclosed spaces it would just be a giant bomb waiting for someone to light their pipe.

That's not the worst of it - there was only one small window made. (18 inches square)

Genesis 6:16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it.

Can you imagine 8 faces pressed into that lone window - gasping for breath. It would be like taking a year-long drive from New York to LA in a '65 Volkswagon Beetle - you're only allowed to open the little triangle window on the passenger side - and there's a cantankerous water buffalo in the back seat with perpetual diarrhea.

Genesis 9:20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
9:21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

The first thing Noah did when he got out of the Ark was invent wine, get drunk, and get naked.

Tell me THAT trip wasn't stressful.

 

[Michael C]

I don't see any reason to bother simulating Noah's Ark. I'll settle for this interpretation:

 

[Autolite]

If, however, you accept "well, God diddit" then everything is - by definition - possible.

It's a waste of time trying to analyze the plausibility of the "Noah's Ark" scenario. Everyone with half a clue understands that it was an impossibility. One might even wonder why an omnipotent god would even bother employing Noah and his clan when the destruction of the world could have been achieved simply by willing it.

However, theists have two iron clad explanations that can be used to defeat any argument that questions their beliefs:

1. God did it.

2. God's reasons/methods are beyond the comprehension of humans.

These all inclusive "rationalizations" pretty much trump any effort to reconcile religious belief with reality...

 

[Loss Leader]

I wonder, isn't it 'easy' to debunk (or not) this story by building a virtual ark?
You need a few experts, shipbuilder, some biologists, botanicals, stable builders and others.
And yes, some to make the actual simulation.
What do you think?

If God performed miracles by bringing together all the animals and making it rain more water than the earth actually has, it would be simple for him to solve all of the impossibilities surrounding the building of an ark.

As has been said, once you accept that God can do anything, no amount of data can falsify that statement.

However, it now appears obvious to me that the sudden flooding of the Black Sea through the Bosporus 7,500 years ago was the source of the myth.

 

[ksbluesfan]

I wonder, isn't it 'easy' to debunk (or not) this story by building a virtual ark?
You need a few experts, shipbuilder, some biologists, botanicals, stable builders and others.
And yes, some to make the actual simulation.
What do you think?

This has a lot of potential as a new reality TV series. I think it would be a hoot.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

However, it now appears obvious to me that the sudden flooding of the Black Sea through the Bosporus 7,500 years ago was the source of the myth.

As much as I appreciate Bob Ballard's work and think this find is fascinating, I'm not sure it's the source of the primordial flood myth. For one thing around 5-6,000 years separate that event from the Noah narrative that's a rather long "telephone" line. I'm more inclined to think it's a story that developed in Sumer or Akkad from a flooding of the Tigris and/or Euphrates.

 

[bokonon]

I wonder, isn't it 'easy' to debunk (or not) this story by building a virtual ark?
You need a few experts, shipbuilder, some biologists, botanicals, stable builders and others.
And yes, some to make the actual simulation.
What do you think?

This has a lot of potential as a new reality TV series. I think it would be a hoot.

Probably not. I'm no engineer, but I think shipbuilders have demonstrated to their own satisfaction that a wooden boat of that size would break apart on the open sea. Plus, I don't think you can buy "gopherwood" at the local Home Depot, and you may not be able to buy it anywhere at all.

 

[Radrook]

I don't think there is any need to go that far.

If you want to rely on science then it just can't be done for numerous and strikingly obvious reasons. (How did Noah get the Kangaroos? How did he build and maintain the fish tanks? There are millions and millions of different species of insects. Why didn't one half of all the animals kill and eat the other half - at least during loading and unloading or shortly after? How did the herbivores survive, if not by eating other animals? Did they just go hungry until other populations were large enough to sustain them again? What did the herbivores eat? Most plants aren't too fond about being submerged for days on end. etc. etc.)

If, however, you accept "well, God diddit" then everything is - by definition - possible.

In that case it would be your account and would have nothing to do with what the Bible describes.


BTW

A lot of things formerly considered impossible are now taken as commonplace and woud have us appear to be gods to our primitive ancestors. In fact, I can imagine a primitive saying after being told about all the seemingly miraculous things being done today:

"Of course if the gods "us from their standpoint" are put into the story then anything is possible."

 

[Radrook]

It's a waste of time trying to analyze the plausibility of the "Noah's Ark" scenario. Everyone with half a clue understands that it was an impossibility. One might even wonder why an omnipotent god would even bother employing Noah and his clan when the destruction of the world could have been achieved simply by willing it.

However, theists have two iron clad explanations that can be used to defeat any argument that questions their beliefs:

1. God did it.

2. God's reasons/methods are beyond the comprehension of humans.

These all inclusive "rationalizations" pretty much trump any effort to reconcile religious belief with reality...

Nowhere in the Bible is that idea that God is beyond all comnprehension taught. If indeed he were beyond all comprehension then any attempt at communication would be futile and he would not attempt it. However, in the Bible he is described as constantly communicating with humans. So that particular idea is YOURS not the Bible's.

BTW

If indeed someone has used that incomprehension argument then that person doesn't qualify to teach anyone about God since he is in need of being taught himself.

 

[Radrook]

Could you imagine having to muck out every animal know in existence! Surely with all the methane produced in enclosed spaces it would just be a giant bomb waiting for someone to light their pipe.

All the animal species in existence now were not in existence at that time. That's basic.

BTW
There are plenty of websites which explain in detail how the animals could have been adequately cared for by the few people on board. Also the ventilation "problem" mentioned by another skeptic is discussed and a detailed explanation strictly from a practicality standpoint given. But that's for you to google not me.

 

[Radrook]

....


The first thing Noah did when he got out of the Ark was invent wine, get drunk, and get naked.

Tell me THAT trip wasn't stressful.

The first thing he did was give thanx for having been preserved alive. VBuilding an alter and offering up animal sacrifice. Nopwhere in the Bible does it say that he imediately began making wine nor that Noah invented wine. Skills learned in the preflood world could be used in the post flood one. Neither does it say that he drank because he was stressed. People drink wine for celebration reasons and being human sometimes go overboard when celebrating. Neither does it say that he drank it imediately after the flood. As for nakedness,
the sin was in the behavior of his son Ham and his grandson Caanan who began to mock
him.

So I guess you are writing your own Bible as you go along.