Noahs Ark and the Biblical World Wide Flood Never Happened

a reply to: cooperton

Ahem. HMS Victory is and has been in dry dock for decades. It's not sailing anywhere!

How about you admitting you are wrong?

PS - I have actually been on it.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk...

Not in service since 1812.

Noahs Ark couldn't have held all the fresh water that would have been needed for the animals. Heck, Noah couldn't have collected all the water that would have been needed either. 16 million animals - 2 of each of 8 million species. And that's being generous with the number of species that would have to be represented on the ark..

Livestock Water Requirements
How much water should dogs and cats drink
How much water does an elephant drink a day
How much water does a deer drink a day
How much water do lions drink a day
How much water do bears drink a day?
How much food and water does wildlife need?

Watering the Animals - More proof Noahs Flood Didn't Happen

Each animal would have to be provided with sufficient fresh water each day. If we say that watering an animal took only 20 seconds then that gives us 88 human-hours of work watering animals per day.

More problematic would be the source of the water itself.

If the flood waters were used, some method of purification would be needed to remove the silt, salt, and other high concentrations of toxins. Distillation would require a tremendous quantity of fuel and labour. Filtering it through sand would be painfully slow and would require tons upon tons of sand weighing a minimum of 90 pounds per cubic foot[15] The sand would then have to be changed periodically due to mineral buildup. Solar distillation would require sunlight, which would be lacking for the first forty days of rains, and vast surface areas for water to evaporate and condense. Chemical purification and boiling, ignoring the impossible logistics, would do nothing to diminish the toxic levels of minerals. No matter the purification method, a method to move thousands of gallons per day, from the waterline to upper levels, would be needed.

Storing water from before the flood would have been even more absurd. Assume that at least 100 of the animals had at a minimum the water requirements of a goat. A goat requires more than two gallons of water per day to survive.[16] Water weighs about eight pounds per gallon. For these 100 animals alone, 200 gallons of water would be needed each day, weighing in excess of 1600 pounds. To last 376 days, 75,200 gallons, weighing almost eighty tons would have to be brought aboard and stored, without compromising the buoyancy and stability of the Ark — for just these 100 animals.

It is conceivable that a system of ducts could have captured rainwater and watered the animals for the first forty days of heavy rains. However, the problem remains that 336 days of water would need to be stored, purified, and/or captured. Only by heavy, regular rains would this be conceivable, which of course contradicts the statement that the rains stopped on the fortieth day.

originally posted by: cooperton
Take teak wood for example:

Noah supposedly used GOPHER WOOD. Not teak wood.

Also take the obvious example that there are wooden boats on earth today that are hundreds of years old:

Noahs boat was supposedly made of gopher wood and it supposedly took 100 years to build. Being out in the elements for 100 years ... it would have rotted before they could have finished. Pine resin or not. And they didn't have any of the boat materials that we have today to make things last. It would have been just four guys who knew nothing about boats working with ancient materials.

Facts on Gopher Wood

SPEAKING OF WATER.
Like I said before about the HIPPOS.

HIPPOS

There are two species of hippos, so both species would have to have been on the boat. And they are EXTREMELY aggressive. How exactly would Noah and his sons, who knew NOTHING about the animals, handle them to get them to the Middle East and then onto the boat? They eat grasses. How'd Noah get a years supply of grasses for each of the four hippos and keep it fresh? Each hippo eats 80 pounds of grass each night along with fruit. That's 320 pounds of grass for each day plus fruit ... for a whole year. That's a lot of grass! 116,800 pounds of grass for the hippos alone that Noah would have had to gather and keep fresh for a year on the boat. How'd he do that when he was supposedly spending all day every day for decades upon decades building the darn thing?

Hippos NEED fish to eat the growths off their skin. How did Noah make this happen?

More importantly, they are SEMI-AQUATIC. They HAVE to have fresh water to be puds in AND they have to have land as well. There was no fresh water ponds on the Ark for the hippo to sit in and submerge up to their noses for long periods of time. This is not a 'they like to do' .. it's a 'they NEED to do' because of their skin. So how did the four hippos have land AND water to live in ... fresh water daily since they'd poop and pee in their tanks of fresh water each day??

Hippos. More proof Noahs ark didn't happen.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Ahem. HMS Victory is and has been in dry dock for decades. It's not sailing anywhere!
.

A modern day boat made with modern craftsmanship and modern materials.
With constant upkeep with modern understandings and modern materials.
Not even close to being a boat made with primitive materials
in 2400 bc by four men who knew nothing about boats, in a time period
that knew nothing about boats bigger than a little fishing boat.

No comparison.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

Ahem. HMS Victory is and has been in dry dock for decades. It's not sailing anywhere!

How about you admitting you are wrong?

PS - I have actually been on it.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk...

Not in service since 1812.

S.S. Willets Point (United States): Launched in 1838, this Staten Island Ferry served New York City for over 90 years before becoming a museum ship. Now a National Historic Landmark, it underwent extensive restoration and was reclassified as an operational vessel in 2012.

Bateau Koben (Denmark): Dating back to around 1844, this Baltic fishing boat boasts a long and intriguing history. Originally used for cod fishing, it survived two world wars and even served as a smuggling vessel at one point. Now meticulously restored and operated by volunteers, it still occasionally sails and participates in maritime events.

also checkout the Oseberg ship, it's a wooden ship found from 900AD with many of its wood components still intact.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

A modern day boat made with modern craftsmanship and modern materials.
With constant upkeep with modern understandings and modern materials.
Not even close to being a boat made with primitive materials
in 2400 bc by four men who knew nothing about boats, in a time period
that knew nothing about boats bigger than a little fishing boat.

No comparison.

You're not including that there was Better wood back then for sure. That's likely how the Viking boat from the 800's was able to preserve all this time, old-growth wood is much more resilient.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Noah supposedly used GOPHER WOOD. Not teak wood.

Whatever type of wood it was, I'm sure it was renowned for ship-building in their time. Gofer is merely the phonetic translation of the Hebrew, it was likely some sort of strong hardwood that was weather-resilient.

National Center for Science Education - The Impossible Voyage of Noahs Ark

On the other hand, in an era when hollowed-out logs and reed rafts were the extent of marine transport, a vessel so massive appeared that the likes of it would not be seen again until the mid-nineteenth century AD. Before he could even contemplate such a project, Noah would have needed a thorough education in naval architecture and in fields that would not arise for thousands of years such as physics, calculus, mechanics, and structural analysis. There was no shipbuilding tradition behind him, no experienced craftspeople to offer advice. Where did he learn the framing procedure for such a Brobdingnagian structure? How could he anticipate the effects of roll, pitch, yaw, and slamming in a rough sea? How did he solve the differential equations for bending moment, torque, and shear stress?

So Noah grabbed his tools and went to work. LaHaye and Morris tell us that Noah and his three sons could have built the entire thing by themselves in a mere eighty-one years (p. 248). This includes not merely framing up a hull but: building docks, scaffolds, workshops; fitting together the incredible maze of cages and crates; gathering provisions for the coming voyage; harvesting the timber and producing all the various types of lumber from bird cage bars to the huge keelson beams—not to mention wrestling the very heavy, clumsy planks for the ship into their exact location and fastening them. What's worse, by the time the job was finished, the earlier phases would be rotting away—a difficulty often faced by builders of wooden ships, whose work took only four or five years (Thrower, p. 32).

How did he learn when to fell a tree and how to dry it properly to prevent rot and splitting, when the larger beams might take several years to cure (cf. Dumas and Gille, p. 322)? Did the local reed-raft builder have equipment to steam heat a plank so it could be forced into the proper position? A shipyard in nineteenth-century Maine would have been overwhelmed by the size and complexity of this job, yet Noah still supposedly found enough time to hold revivals and preach doomsday throughout the land (Segraves, pp. 87-90).

God told the patriarch to coat the ark, both inside and out, all 229,500 square feet of it, with pitch, and, in fact, this was a common practice in ancient times. But when Noah hurried to the corner hardware store, the shelf was bare, for pitch is a naturally occurring hydrocarbon similar to petroleum (Rosenfeld, p. 126), and we know that oil, tar, and coal deposits were formed when organic matter was buried and subjected to extreme pressure during the flood (Whitcomb and Morris, pp. 277-278, 434-436), so none of it existed in the prediluvian world. Morris (1976, p. 182) tries to say that the word for "pitch" merely means "covering," but not only do all other Bible dictionaries and commentaries translate it "pitch" or "bitumen," but creationist Nathan M. Meyer reveals that all the wood recovered by arkaeologists on Mt. Ararat is "saturated with pitch" (p. 85). Thus it seems that God accommodated Noah by creating an antediluvian tar pit just for the occasion, and we have another miracle.

a reply to: FlyersFan

But you admit that wood boats can last for over 100 years right?

a reply to: cooperton

Both extensively restored.

Better wood? You made that up.

How about you admitting you were wrong about HMS Victory?

Can you do that?

originally posted by: cooperton
S.S. Willets Point (United States)
Bateau Koben (Denmark)

Irrelevant. Modern boats with modern materials and modern upkeep. Can't be compared to 2400bc boats and those materials and the extreme conditions it would have endured sitting out for 100 years.

Oseberg ship, it's a wooden ship found from 900AD

Irrelevant. 2400bc and 900ad are different - different materials and different craftsmanship AND more importantly it wasn't sitting out in the Mesopotamian weather for 100 years. It was buried and protected.

You're not including that there was Better wood back then for sure.

No. Wood is wood. Trees weren't 'better' in 2400bc. You are making that up.

Whatever type of wood it was I'm sure it was renowned for ship-building in their time.

There were no ships in that time period. There were just boats. Small little boats .
THIS is a big boat from that time period.
It's out of Egypt, where they knew how to build boats. Not out of Mesopotamia
where they didn't build boats.

a reply to: cooperton

Relatively modern construction though?

Not wood and pine resin.

Apples and oranges.

originally posted by: cooperton
But you admit that wood boats can last for over 100 years right?

Not wooden boats made in 2400bc using 2400bc materials and sitting out in Mesopotamian weather for 100 years. No.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: cooperton
Healthier, stronger wood, and pitch would have allowed it to survive

Nope. Not for a hundred years. It would have rotted in the environment and the length of time. Even strong healthy wood for backyard fences that have been treated to withstand the environment don't last much more than 10-15 years.

What? Go outside to a pine forest and you'll see every tree is dripping with fresh resin ready to be made into pitch.

Were there mountains of pine forests for Noah and his sons to go harvest in Mesopotamia ? They were awfully busy little beavers ... traveling the world to collect animals and food, and at the same time spending a hundred years building a boat they knew nothing about AND collecting resin from trees. Pfffft. Nope.

You can re-apply coats. especially thicker cuts will be able to last longer. Even thin 1" fence boards of Acacia or cedar can last up to 25 years, much thicker wood will last even longer especially with water-proofing treatment

You are making that up. You have no idea how long wild unprocessed pine resin lasts on wood that is subjected to the elements for 100 years. And 25 years isn't 100 years.

"Koalas like a change, too, and sometimes they will eat from other trees such as wattle, tea tree or paperbark."

NIBBLING on other things is NOT the same as eating from a food source that they HAVE TO HAVE. What part of the don't you get? They will DIE without eucalyptus specifically.

bescienced.com...

"Because koalas are so specialized in their diet, they can face serious consequences if they are deprived of eucalyptus leaves. Generally, they can only survive a few days without eucalyptus before experiencing nutritional deficiencies and dehydration. If food deprivation continues, they can suffer from liver and digestive system diseases, and ultimately, death.".

Really poor analysis.
Today all commerce, including wood products, are based upon the principle of planned obsolescence.
Let me give an example.
An historical example.
The concrete we use falls apart.
Yet the Colliseum still stands today from concrete used thousands of years ago.
Megalithic all over the world, including the America's, north and south, that we have no technology nor methods of construction to replicate.
From the ark to this day we have regressed in engineering skillsets.

Yet we are more proud and boisterous than any of the generations before us.
Let's face it.
Without Google maps half of us could not find their way home from work.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Not wood and pine resin.

You know ... the Bible doesn't actually say 'pine resin'. It says PITCH. That's different. "Pitch" is a naturally occurring hydrocarbon similar to petroleum made by oil, tar, and coal deposits. So continued claims of 'pine pitch' may be inaccurate.

This Christian Site tries to claim it was pine pitch because back then they didn't know how to harvest real petroleum based pitch. Look at the process Noah would have had to go through to get 'pine pitch'. It's not pine sap simply collected from a forest. The tree has to be cut down, and things burned and boiled, etc etc. LONG process to get supposed 'pine pitch' instead of the petroleum pitch.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

I've been to the Colliseum.

It's made of stone, not concrete.

Epic fail.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

Both extensively restored.

Better wood? You made that up.

How about you admitting you were wrong about HMS Victory?

Can you do that?

Its years of service were 1759-1922, that's over 163 years of activity for a wooden boat

So can you admit wood boats last over 100 years?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

I've been to the Colliseum.

It's made of stone, not concrete.

Epic fail.

Your idea of "epic fail" is hyperbolic at best and flat out wrong in reality. The Coliseum did use concrete in its construction

originally posted by: FlyersFan
You know ... the Bible doesn't actually say 'pine resin'. It says PITCH. That's different. "Pitch" is a naturally occurring hydrocarbon similar to petroleum made by oil, tar, and coal deposits. So continued claims of 'pine pitch' may be inaccurate.

Pitch refers to tree resin in ancient context

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

I've been to the Colliseum.

It's made of stone, not concrete.

Epic fail.

What kind of concrete was used in the Colosseum?



Romans made a revolution in the civil engineering world by inventing the “Roman Concrete”. Until the discovery of Portland cement in the 19th century, it was the strongest and best building material(11). Roman concrete was primarily “pit sand”, which is a form of grained volcanic sand combined with limestone (11).

Also, carry your thought further.
Why is it still standing?
As well as all the other megalithic structures the world over.
You are living in the home depot reality

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Not wooden boats made in 2400bc using 2400bc materials and sitting out in Mesopotamian weather for 100 years. No.

It wasn't sitting in water, it was dry docked until the flood. Also, a Viking ship from 800AD was found with the wood still preserved.

Can you admit wood can last over 100 years?

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation

Also, carry your thought further.
Why is it still standing?
As well as all the other megalithic structures the world over.
You are living in the home depot reality

Yeah part of the secular mythos we are taught in school is to think older civilizations were just stupid and we're super smart. It creates a hubris that prevents history from being perceived the way it actually happened.

a reply to: cooperton

No, last in actual service in 1812.

Flagship in name only. Or do you think it saw action in WW1?

www.bbc.co.uk...

Concrete foundations.


And:

"As a result of this plunder, and also because of fires and earthquakes, two thirds of the original have been destroyed, so that the present Colosseum is only a shadow of its former self, a noble ruin."

Next?