Noahs Ark and the Biblical World Wide Flood Never Happened

originally posted by: cooperton
Wood would likely have been even stronger back then,

You keep making that crap up. It's not true. Wood is wood.

Admit that wood can last in water for over 100 years.

Not wood on a boat that was made in 2400bc, and using materials from 2400bc, and using a severe lack of understanding about ship building.

Why don't you admit that Koalas have to have eucalyptus to survive?
And that Noah would have had no way to get it?
And that the Koala had no way to get to the Middle East?
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

Why don't you admit that the animals wouldn't fit on the boat?
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

Why don't you admit that the animals all needed massive amounts of fresh water?
Noah couldn't possibly collect it all and fit it on the boat.
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

a reply to: cooperton

Massive copper bolts?

originally posted by: cooperton
It wasn't modern day lol it was 1759.

Compared to 2400bc, it's modern day.

They didn't use any different sort of wood or pitch that would have given them an advantage. They still used pine pitch for ship-building in the 1700s.

Prove they only used pine pitch. And the fact remains that modern day ship builders knew what to do when making the boat and how to use the materials. Noah in 2400 bc wouldn't have.

This shows the wood for Noah's ark would have been able to preserve for over 100 years.

No. It doesn't. No comparison.

originally posted by: cooperton
The fallen angels were said to have taught the people metallurgy.

There were no nephilim. That's an unsubstantiated myth.
There was no teaching of people metallurgy or anything else.
The boats at that time did not have metal in them.

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.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
You keep making that crap up. It's not true. Wood is wood.

It's a known fact that older trees are more durable. You can literally chew through the pine wood they sell at home depot because it is farmed to be grown as quickly as possible.

Not wood on a boat that was made in 2400bc, and using materials from 2400bc, and using a severe lack of understanding about ship building.

Doesn't matter about ship-building technique, I am strictly referring to the wood, which you said would totally rot over 100 years, but the HMS Victory clearly shows that wood can last for that long.

If you can't admit this blatant empirical fact then there's no use continuing conversation

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: 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"

Only a third of it is still standing. It's a ruin.

Megalithic structures? What, like Stonehenge? It's near to me. Still standing because it's made out of ruddy great pieces of solid stone..

No, like Petra, South America, North America, etc...
How about telling the class who designed and built the coliseum?
Nobody knows.
Do you think it was built by 60,000 Jewish slaves who walked home after it was finished?
Did Nero build the aqueduct still in use today?
Why not replicated by Rome elsewhere?
It is my opinion Rome never built anything.
They only learned to inherit other civilizations and conscript it as their own.
This even includes language.
60,000 Jewish slaves built the coliseum in 8 years.....yeah, sure.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
There were no ships in that time period.

That's not what the Sumerians or Hebrews say, that's what speculative archaeologists say. The Sumerians and Hebrews agree there was ship-building knowledge before the flood

originally posted by: cooperton
It's a known fact that older trees are more durable.

Trees from 2400bc are not stronger 'back then' then trees of today.
Trees are trees.

Doesn't matter about ship-building technique,

Yes it does. NO ONE in that time period knew ANYTHING about building a ship that size. I posted a picture of big ships from that time period. They didn't know ships .. they didn't know materials. They wouldn't have known how to make the ship nor how to maintain it. It would have sat out in the elements and ROTTED after a 100 years. Left unfinished.

You fail to state how exactly Noah would be building this ship for 100 years, collecting animals world wide, collecting food supplies world wide, and collecting and storing massive amounts of fresh water for all the animals. Common sense ... HE COULDN"T DO IT. It didn't happen.

If you can't admit this blatant empirical fact then there's no use continuing conversation

... says the guy who can't admit that Koalas will die without Eucalyptus.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: cooperton
Wood would likely have been even stronger back then,

You keep making that crap up. It's not true. Wood is wood.

Admit that wood can last in water for over 100 years.

Not wood on a boat that was made in 2400bc, and using materials from 2400bc, and using a severe lack of understanding about ship building.

Why don't you admit that Koalas have to have eucalyptus to survive?
And that Noah would have had no way to get it?
And that the Koala had no way to get to the Middle East?
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

Why don't you admit that the animals wouldn't fit on the boat?
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

Why don't you admit that the animals all needed massive amounts of fresh water?
Noah couldn't possibly collect it all and fit it on the boat.
The absolute facts were presented. Yet you fail to acknowledge them.

Why do you think your "what ifs" leave you any credibility?
I destroyed your claims on ostrich alone.
I haven't seen you admit this yet.
Why should we go further with your abundant "what ifs"?
Have you admitted your false claims about ostrich yet?
Like I said, that was low hanging fruit.
And you are categorically wrong on almost all your claims about just ostrich alone.
Or is there a source you are relying upon for all your claims and that source is wrong?

originally posted by: cooperton
That's not what the Sumerians or Hebrews say, that's what speculative archaeologists say. The Sumerians and Hebrews agree there was ship-building knowledge before the flood

No. That's what the experts in the field say. Based on EVIDENCE.

Again - 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.

And it's funny that you sneer 'speculative' at the experts who actually know what they are talking about, when you yourself have gone around here making up crap about ark-gardens and the continents being different Im 2400bc. Comical.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Trees from 2400bc are not stronger 'back then' then trees of today.
Trees are trees.

Even if they were the same as 18th century England, they can very apparently last for more than 100 years lol. Can you admit this? Just one simple admission.

Yes it does. NO ONE in that time period knew ANYTHING about building a ship that size. I posted a picture of big ships from that time period. They didn't know ships .. they didn't know materials.

That's the opposite of what the Hebrews and Sumerians said. You are believing that from a baseless misconception.

They wouldn't have known how to make the ship nor how to maintain it.

It's actually pretty obvious that pine resin would be able to protect wood lol. It is oozing out of the tree.

You fail to state how exactly Noah would be building this ship for 100 years, collecting animals world wide, collecting food supplies world wide, and collecting and storing massive amounts of fresh water for all the animals. Common sense ... HE COULDN"T DO IT. It didn't happen.

That is your belief, but it is a fact that wood can persevere for over 100 years.

... says the guy who can't admit that Koalas will die without Eucalyptus.

My source says they can eat other foliage. Why would they make this up lol

originally posted by: FlyersFan
No. That's what the experts in the field say. Based on EVIDENCE.

What's the evidence they didn't know how to build big boats? You're just guessing. The Sumerians themselves say they knew how to build it, why would they be lying? You ignore history, and gobble up secular history.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
I destroyed your claims on ostrich alone.?

What claims did you destroy. I said there are TWO species of ostrich. How did the ostrich from Africa get to the Middle East? And how did Noah take care of them when they need a gravel to eat? Noah wouldn't have known this. He would have to have had a years supply of gravel for each ostrich on the ark. The ostriches would have DIED under Noahs 'care' ... if they even got to the ark to begin with.

originally posted by: cooperton
What's the evidence they didn't know how to build big boats?

because there weren't any. And there isn't any evidence in any of the records. And that knowledge would have been passed down through the ages, but it wasn't. Because it never existed at that time.

I posted a picture of a big boat from that time period. Did you even look at it? I doubt it.

You're just guessing.

Not at all. That's what YOU do. Make up crap about 'gardens on the ark' and 'one big continent in 2400bc'.

The Sumerians themselves say they knew how to build it, why would they be lying?

You are kidding, right? They made up the story about Giglimesh. They made up stories about giants. They tell lots of tales.

You ignore history, and gobble up secular history.

Sumerian myths aren't history. I posted actual history showing Egyptian history is unbroken and shows nothing about a flood ... yet you ignore it. It's YOU who ignore history and science, instead clinging to easily debunked garbage about Nephilim and and an impossible ark.

a reply to: cooperton

"Admit that wood can last in water for over 100 years."

Of course it can. A ship being seaworthy is another thing entirely.

Which you conveniently ignore.

a reply to: cooperton

"My source says they can eat other foliage. Why would they make this up lol"

What source? They can eat other foliage but without eucalyptus they will quickly die. Or are the many sources for that making it up?

Like you are doing?

originally posted by: cooperton
That's the opposite of what the Hebrews and Sumerians said. You are believing that from a baseless misconception.

No. It's a fact.

It's actually pretty obvious that pine resin would be able to protect wood lol. It is oozing out of the tree.

Noah wouldn't have known how to make it. Noah wouldn't have known how to apply it. Noah wouldn't have known how to maintain the boat. So no, a coating of pine resin wouldn't protect the boat left in the elements for a hundred years back in 2400 bc Mesopotamia.

That is your belief,

No. It's a fact. You fail to state how exactly Noah would be building this ship for 100 years, collecting animals world wide, collecting food supplies world wide, and collecting and storing massive amounts of fresh water for all the animals. Common sense ... HE COULDN"T DO IT ALL. It didn't happen

but it is a fact that wood can persevere for over 100 years.

Not a boat built by 4 nonship builders in 2400bc, using materials from that time period, and leaving it out in the elements. It would rot.

My source says they can eat other foliage. Why would they make this up lol

CAN eat other things .. nibble on them. But they HAVE TO have eucalyptus as their main diet to survive. You continually fail to tell the whole story. It proves your narrative completely wrong.

READ IT

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.".

What Do Koalas Eat
Britannica Koalas
Save the Koala

Never addressed. The fresh water problem that also proves Noahs Flood didn't happen. The amount of fresh water that the ark would have had to carry was massive. More than the ark could hold and more than it could manage. And there is no way that Noah and his three sons could have collected that much fresh water. They wouldn't have had the time and they wouldn't have had the ability and they wouldn't have had a fresh water source big enough to pull from. Massive amounts of water on the ark would also have unbalanced the ark and the first big wave that hit it would have flipped/sunk it.

Animals need FRESH WATER to survive. ALL animals do. And lots of it. Gallons and gallons and gallons. And no, they don't get it all through their food.

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: FlyersFan
No. It's a fact. You fail to state how exactly Noah would be building this ship for 100 years, collecting animals world wide, collecting food supplies world wide, and collecting and storing massive amounts of fresh water for all the animals. Common sense ... HE COULDN"T DO IT ALL. It didn't happen

Yeah he had the apex God of the universe helping him. How weak do you think God is? Sheesh, that's the secular leaven I am referring to. It's a slippery slope until you incidentally think God is totally powerless.

"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.".

What Do Koalas Eat
Britannica Koalas
Save the Koala

Ok once and for all I am putting this to rest. Here is a peer-reviewed study that say that koalas do eat other types of plants:

"More recently, it has been argued, on the basis of the large number of (plant) species from which koalas are now known to feed, that they are perhaps more generalist feeders than has been previously recognised. That koalas should eat the foliage of so many different species is not surprising – they do not select food on the basis of its taxonomy. Rather, a koala could be expected to eat any foliage with the appropriate morphology and chemistry to allow it to be recognised as palatable food.
link

I love the part where they say "that koalas should eat the foliage of so many different species is not surprising, like Farmer and I have been saying the whole time.

So now, can you admit that Koalas eat other plants besides eucalypts? Or let's put it in the words of the people who have done the research, do you admit that "a koala could be expected to eat any foliage with the appropriate morphology ad chemistry to allow it to be recognised as palatable food"?

Never addressed. I love this one. Semi-aquatic hippos that HAVE to have fresh water daily to wade in up to their noses for long periods of time. Without it, their skin splits wide open, bleeding happens, infection sets in, and they die.

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.