Noah’s Ark Found!!

[ideologyhunter]

I've read the versions where Ham takes Noah up the poop chute. But, a) it hasn't reached any kind of consensus among those who get PhDs in this stuff and b) my Sunday School classes aren't ready for that. Maybe in jr. high.

 

[steve_bank]

Well,t thast is what get with inbreeding. Noah and family.

Bill Cosby was discredited, but his routine on Noah was good. Should be online in full.

Phooba Phooba (sawing)
Noah!!
Phooba Phooba
Noah!!!
That you Lord?
Noah, I want you to build an ark.
Right, what's an ark?

 

[steve_bank]

I think where ever the ark could have rested, all that timber would likely be used for building their individual homes between them, their store houses/sheds,animal pens, fencing, and furniture,etc & etc..

There'd be no trace of an ark form at the spot where it would have landed. Why chop more trees when the timber is already at hand? The Lord provides.

(I didn't realise I was still logged in since my last post. )

Trees that were under water for a year?

 

[thebeave]

Well,t thast is what get with inbreeding. Noah and family.

Bill Cosby was discredited, but his routine on Noah was good. Should be online in full.

Phooba Phooba (sawing)
Noah!!
Phooba Phooba
Noah!!!
That you Lord?
Noah, I want you to build an ark.
Right, what's an ark?

I first heard that routine when I was about 7. I always thought he was saying Voova, Voova, Voova!

 

[steve_bank]

I looked at some of the technical analysis on the ark's feasibility.

As expect6ed Christians will cite analysis that supports the belief.

Generally, dimensionally the ark would have been stable meaningresistant to capsizing, tipping over.

But there are basic structural issues.

A ship of ta length would be subject ti torque, twisting. In other tan calm still waters one end of the ship can end up at different height, bending the ship.

The sheer weight of the structure and distribution of internal forces could cause structural failure.

Without iron to brace the structure not very likely to work.

Modern steel hulled ships have broken in two.

AI Overview
Yes, several 20th-century steel-hulled ships have broken in two, often driven by a combination of severe wave stress, cold temperatures, and a metallurgical issue known as brittle fracture.

AI Overview
In the 19th century, large wooden ships typically ranged from 150 to 300 feet (45 to 91 meters) in length. While smaller merchant vessels and coastal craft were much shorter, 300 feet served as the practical structural limit for ocean-going wooden hulls. Beyond this length, wood lacks the tensile strength to withstand ocean waves, causing the hull to bend and leak severely

AI Overview
According to the biblical account, Noah's Ark was 300 cubits long, which translates in modern measurements to between 450 and 510 feet (about 137 to 155 meters) depending on the ancient cubit size used

Plus the added weight of two of every animal. Drinking water for a year would be heavy.

 

[Politesse]

I looked at some of the technical analysis on the ark's feasibility.

As expect6ed Christians will cite analysis that supports the belief.

Generally, dimensionally the ark would have been stable meaningresistant to capsizing, tipping over.

But there are basic structural issues.

A ship of ta length would be subject ti torque, twisting. In other tan calm still waters one end of the ship can end up at different height, bending the ship.

The sheer weight of the structure and distribution of internal forces could cause structural failure.

Without iron to brace the structure not very likely to work.

Modern steel hulled ships have broken in two.

AI Overview
Yes, several 20th-century steel-hulled ships have broken in two, often driven by a combination of severe wave stress, cold temperatures, and a metallurgical issue known as brittle fracture.

AI Overview
In the 19th century, large wooden ships typically ranged from 150 to 300 feet (45 to 91 meters) in length. While smaller merchant vessels and coastal craft were much shorter, 300 feet served as the practical structural limit for ocean-going wooden hulls. Beyond this length, wood lacks the tensile strength to withstand ocean waves, causing the hull to bend and leak severely

AI Overview
According to the biblical account, Noah's Ark was 300 cubits long, which translates in modern measurements to between 450 and 510 feet (about 137 to 155 meters) depending on the ancient cubit size used

Plus the added weight of two of every animal. Drinking water for a year would be heavy.

They discovered those very problems when they were trying to build the Ark Encounter Park; their ark is reinforced with steel beams and concrete pillars, and most certainly will not float should there be another flood.

And this flood, you know. Not eaay on the suppoet beams. Creationists propose that essentially all of the deformations of the land geologists normally ascribe to millions of years of plate tectonics, including the breakup of Pangea, happened in forty days. Talk about stormy seas!

 

[Bronzeage]

I've read the versions where Ham takes Noah up the poop chute. But, a) it hasn't reached any kind of consensus among those who get PhDs in this stuff and b) my Sunday School classes aren't ready for that. Maybe in jr. high.

Yes, that is the original story. Of course, anyone who spends that much time on a ship has to acquire some naval traditions.

 

[WAB]

Didn't Churchill say the navy was "naught but buggery and the lash"?

 

[DBT]

Stories that are still being believed in this day and age. The power of faith at work.

 

[steve_bank]

The idea of Noah being about a drunk and his dumb sons got me thinking.

Jews have humor and witty stories. They make fun of themselves. You can look at the Jewish comics in the last century.

In dramatizations and recreations of the bible Jews are one dimensional wooden cut out characters.

The Noah tale could very well have been written as a humorous story. Same with Jonah.

Noah may been referring to an actual Jew. The true meaning of the story may never be known.

When you think about it is a plot from a comedy TV s or movie. A drunk hears god tell him to build a huge boat.

 

[DBT]

Getting drunk may be the only way to deal with Yahweh the God of Love.

 

[Learner]

I looked at some of the technical analysis on the ark's feasibility.

As expect6ed Christians will cite analysis that supports the belief.

Generally, dimensionally the ark would have been stable meaningresistant to capsizing, tipping over.

But there are basic structural issues.

A ship of ta length would be subject ti torque, twisting. In other tan calm still waters one end of the ship can end up at different height, bending the ship.

The sheer weight of the structure and distribution of internal forces could cause structural failure.

Without iron to brace the structure not very likely to work.

Modern steel hulled ships have broken in two.

I could agree, but what are you (plural) actually opposing?

You see...your viewpoint is strictly in terms of the claim and the belief that God is "non-existent" i.e. the ARK from your atheistic perspective should undoubtedly be a flawed possibility since the attempt to build one, in your mind, is designed by man! Quite misleading... leading to false illustrations of the biblical belief (what else is new).

There is the conflation of different arguments. If you (plural) can think for a moment. We are claiming the blueprints for the ARK would be of a superior build design to man.

AI Overview
Yes, several 20th-century steel-hulled ships have broken in two, often driven by a combination of severe wave stress, cold temperatures, and a metallurgical issue known as brittle fracture.

AI Overview
In the 19th century, large wooden ships typically ranged from 150 to 300 feet (45 to 91 meters) in length. While smaller merchant vessels and coastal craft were much shorter, 300 feet served as the practical structural limit for ocean-going wooden hulls. Beyond this length, wood lacks the tensile strength to withstand ocean waves, causing the hull to bend and leak severely

AI Overview
According to the biblical account, Noah's Ark was 300 cubits long, which translates in modern measurements to between 450 and 510 feet (about 137 to 155 meters) depending on the ancient cubit size used

Plus the added weight of two of every animal. Drinking water for a year would be heavy.

Bitumen is interesting in itself...it was understood thousands of years ago. Just to mention...Did you know: you can process wood to be several times stronger than steel?

Um yes (before you ask)...God would know how to build an ARK with the structural integrity to withstand the flood.

Think again about the biblical claim and adjust correctly what you (plural) think we believe of the ARK...
...we are NOT arguing the ARK described in the bible would be structurally designed by mere mortals!

God did it!

 

[Ovazor]

No. Materials have certain properties, and no matter who does the design, one cannot make the structure stronger than the materials allow.

Unless you want to go all the way of "it was a miracle" - in which case you could as well claim that the ark was made of folded newspapers and miraculously stayed together and afloat.

 

[brewer]

On the bright side..............

 

[ideologyhunter]

God did it!

Well, congratulations. You have found the perfect refuge in any debate.
With that motto, any fairy tale can be justified, and all reasonable objections can be waved away.
It's almost as if we haven't learned anything since Bible times. God did it. Wheeeee!!!

 

[Learner]

God did it!

Well, congratulations. You have found the perfect refuge in any debate.
With that motto, any fairy tale can be justified, and all reasonable objections can be waved away.
It's almost as if we haven't learned anything since Bible times. God did it. Wheeeee!!!

Lol, we both have a sense of humour...but yes indeed any fairy tale can be "justified".

...however, similar to my previous point above: about biblical viewpoints between us...
...if the bible was true, you would still say the same thing. I.e. " the bible is fairy tale, etc..& etc.. "

 

[ideologyhunter]

God did it!

Well, congratulations. You have found the perfect refuge in any debate.
With that motto, any fairy tale can be justified, and all reasonable objections can be waved away.
It's almost as if we haven't learned anything since Bible times. God did it. Wheeeee!!!

Lol, we both have a sense of humour...but yes indeed any fairy tale can be "justified".

...however, similar to my previous point above: about biblical viewpoints between us...
...if the bible was true, you would still say the same thing. I.e. " the bible is fairy tale, etc..& etc.. "

OK; my point is that "God did it!" is a discussion ender. You get that, right? There's nothing after that anyone can say, because "God did it!" is an announcement that there are no possible credibility issues from your perspective. As has been said before, there is no limit to the craziness or myth-based origin of a claim that can't be glossed over by faith. You see it as a strength. I see it as an abdication.

 

[Learner]

No. Materials have certain properties, and no matter who does the design, one cannot make the structure stronger than the materials allow.

That's funny, I agree with the above and say the same thing. We may disagree with where the limits lay.

Unless you want to go all the way of "it was a miracle" - in which case you could as well claim that the ark was made of folded newspapers and miraculously stayed together and afloat.

This is very much the same argument error as the previous above, : "We could as well have claimed the ark was made of folded paper.etc.." , would only be seen that way to you, and since that line is a nonexistent theist claim, then obviously ...theists don't use your example to analogously demonstrate the ark argument the way you do, or think it can.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So, Noah was a known drunk and ran the ark aground. Did he get a DUI?

Okay, but in Noah's defense, you try a 40-day and 40-night road trip in cramped quarters with your entire family and see if you don't turn to alcohol and trying to scare them away with your junk. I mean, I've personally done a 4-day vacation in Maine that almost ended in divorce and that was supposed to be a celebration, not an apocalypse. Now imagine an order of magnitude or more in road-trip time and the added pressure of an Almighty Wrathful Yahweh trying to convince you that your sons will be the fathers and role models of the rest of humankind going forward, until perhaps there is another Earth-scale mass murder if they or their grandkids fuck up. Wouldn't you lose your mind, too?

 

[Ovazor]

No. Materials have certain properties, and no matter who does the design, one cannot make the structure stronger than the materials allow.

That's funny, I agree with the above and say the same thing. We may disagree with where the limits lay.

Unless you want to go all the way of "it was a miracle" - in which case you could as well claim that the ark was made of folded newspapers and miraculously stayed together and afloat.

This is very much the same argument error as the previous above, : "We could as well have claimed the ark was made of folded paper.etc.." , would only be seen that way to you, and since that line is a nonexistent theist claim, then obviously ...theists don't use your example to analogously demonstrate the ark argument the way you do, or think it can.

No, my response was to your claim that "the blueprints for the ARK would be of a superior build design to man", my point being that the blueprints alone, no matter how perfect, could have made the ark feasible. You need to invoke a miracle - and if you invoke a miracle, then anything goes.