Noahs Ark and the Biblical World Wide Flood Never Happened

originally posted by: Waterglass
I don't know about the Ark but it could be a fairy tale to tie up loose ends in history 1000's of years ago.

The evidence shows it most likely came from the pagan Sumerian myths and was reworked by the Hebrews to fit their own monotheistic religion. So the pagan Sumerians had some reason for making up the myth that started it all.

More science proving that the flood couldn't have happened as the Bible says -
The air itself would have been made unbreathable.

Unbreathable Air

The conventional flood story states that the flood waters came from rain that lasted 40 days and 40 nights (Genesis 7:12).[note 1] Rain appears when the atmosphere can no longer support water in the vapor phase and it becomes saturated. Normally, the atmosphere is on the brink of saturation, and the variations in temperature and pressure caused by weather fronts are capable of altering the threshold at which precipitation will form quite easily. What about the amount of water vapor suspended in air needed for the 4.5 billion cubic kilometers of water needed for the global flood? The water vapor currently in the air is only around 2 to 3 percent on average, with a maximum of 4% limited by temperature and pressure.[6] The change in atmospheric conditions required to support enough vapor for 112 million cubic kilometers of rain per day — about 120,000 times more than the current daily rainfall worldwide[7] — would have rendered the air unbreathable.

Indeed, the atmosphere really couldn't sustain that much water even under the most extreme temperature and pressure conditions the planet can produce. If the conditions were right for that much water to be in the atmosphere, humans and virtually every other animal would have drowned through the simple act of breathing, as well as turning the earth into the equivalent of a pressure cooker with atmospheric pressure at nearly a thousand psi instead of the standard 14.7 or so that we have today. In fact, the pressure would have to be at least a thousand atmospheres to fit the 15 kilograms of water per cubic meter required to produce that much rain, which is 1) greater than the pressure at the bottom of the ocean and 2) enough to crush a human so five of them would fit in a soda can. Barring the goddidit escape hatch (a tried and tested fallback for creationists everywhere), this is impossible.

Great civilizations continued on uninterrupted by the alleged flood.

Things That Happened UNINTERRUPTED During the Alleged Time of Noahs Ark

The previous millennium had seen the emergence of advanced, urbanized civilizations, new bronze metallurgy extending the productivity of agricultural work, and highly developed ways of communication in the form of writing. In the 3rd millennium BCE, the growth of these riches, both intellectually and physically, became a source of contention on a political stage, and rulers sought the accumulation of more wealth and more power. Along with this came the first appearances of mega-architecture, imperialism, organized absolutism and internal revolution.

The civilizations of Sumer and Akkad in Mesopotamia became a collection of volatile city-states in which warfare was common. Uninterrupted conflicts drained all available resources, energies and populations. In this millennium, larger empires succeeded the last, and conquerors grew in stature until the great Sargon of Akkad made a bunch of tedious videos pushed his empire to the whole of Mesopotamia and beyond. It would not be surpassed in size until Assyrian times 1500 years later.

In the Old Kingdom of Egypt, the idea of absolute ambition was further defined by conquerors. Military expeditions were sent throughout the kingdom to bring back thousands of slaves at a time. The Egyptian pyramids were constructed during this millennium and would remain the tallest and largest human constructions for thousands of years. Also in Egypt, pharaohs began to posture themselves as living Gods made of an essence different from that of other human beings. Even in Europe, which was still largely neolithic during the same period of time, the builders of megaliths were constructing giant monuments of their own. In the Near East and the Occident during the 3rd millennium BCE, limits were being pushed by architects and rulers.

No food for the animals after the flood. IMPOSSIBLE.

Post Flood Animal Survival

After the flood, the animals on the ark would have faced extreme difficulties. Populations of less than 20 members are almost certainly doomed to extinction.[36] After the ark, there would have been 2 of most animals and 7[note 3] of a few select mammals plus 14 of all birds.[37] These animals would have faced some of the harshest conditions the world has ever known. A flood of 376 days[38] would have killed all plant life, while ocean currents between 40 to 80 meters per second would have swept everything away and buried the earth under a layer of sediment.[35] That's not even considering how long it would have taken the waters to recede. Because the entire planet is now water, the floodwater can't drain anywhere, and can only be removed with evaporation. Based on the 2mm/day evaporation rate of water, it would have taken *4 billion and 420 million* days for the floodwaters to all evaporate. If the earth is covered in water for 12.1 million years, everything we know and love as an animal is most definitely dead, including Noah.[39]

The post-flood herbivores would have had absolutely nothing to eat; most of them would have starved to death. Creationists claim that the great flood deposited meters of sediment all over the earth.[40] Seeds heavier than silt particles would have been the first to settle, buried far deeper than the few inches of depth that seeds need to sprout.[20] The few seeds that did get buried close enough to the surface to sprout would not provide nearly enough vegetation to sustain every herbivore on the ark. Many animals feed on large trees or their fruit, so these would have to fast a long time after the flood ended.[note 4]

The carnivores and omnivores on Noah's Ark would have a viable source of food, for a while at least: the other animals on the ark. The carnivores and the omnivores would have quickly eaten all the herbivores and then within a couple of months would turned on each other (The carnage!) and also eventually have starved to death. The creationist explanations for this make no sense; they claim that carnivores ate corpses, fungi, and even vegetables! Animals will rarely eat corpses more than a month old. The claim that these animals would have gladly eaten corpses that were over a year old and most likely buried under meters of sediment is beyond reason. Most carnivores are unable to eat vegetables (if it were then it would already be a part of their natural diet and thus they wouldn't be carnivores in the first place), and fungi do not grow too prolifically in the Middle East.

After the floodwaters subsided, the animals would have had severe trouble finding fresh water and would have died of dehydration. The flood would have salinated the soil, so all water runoff would have had high concentrations of salt. Most animals, unless they are specially adapted, cannot and will not drink salt water.[41]

The survivors of the ark would also have faced extreme difficulties breeding. The flood would have destroyed the structures necessary for reproduction. Avian species like the eagle require high trees to make their nests in.[42] These would not exist for many years after the flood, by which time the reproductive fitness of the birds would have deteriorated, leading to the extinction of that kind.

ALL plant life would have been wiped out. Nothing for animals or humans to eat.

Post Flood Plant Survival

In line with the usual bias that people totally forget about non-animals when it comes to talking about life (i.e., Plantae, Fungi, Protista, Archaea, Bacteria, or whatever the current version of taxonomical structure says), no one thinks what happens to the plants? Apart from the context of feeding the animals, plants are almost completely ignored. This might be hand-waved, as the story concludes with Noah sending out a dove to search for land. It subsequently returned with an olive branch (Genesis 8:10), as if somehow the plants had all miraculously survived and the water left no mark as it drained away (one of the massive plot holes in the Genesis story). Often enough, plants do survive intense flooding, and flood plains may even benefit from it. However, with the massive turbulence, excessive sediment, the 8.84 km depth of water[note 5] that would have blocked out all sunlight to the dry land, and the year-long duration of the flood, this simply doesn't work. Everything would have been completely wiped out.

After this, many species of non-animal life would go extinct as at no point in the story is Noah concerned with preserving seeds, cultivating bacteria or keeping specimens of fungi. Assuming he was, and that this was just left out of the Bible for some reason, then that only heaps more work onto an already hilariously implausible task. Plant life would undoubtedly have been eradicated along with animal life on Earth, so the only hope for any future plant life would have been from any seeds that had survived. Seeds of land plants tend to spontaneously germinate in water and, without good soil to embed in, die pretty quickly. Aquatic plants have mixed results when their seeds are stored in water: while they are certainly in the right environment, many do not remain viable after more than 6-7 months soaking in water without germinating — so how could they possibly have survived the flood?[43]

Even then, assuming that seeds survived, the conditions would almost certainly not have been amenable for the regrowth of vegetation. The masses of silt and debris would have been fairly uniform across the world — the flood was global, remember? — yet different plants have adapted for different conditions and different soil types. In order to reproduce and spread, many plants need a symbiotic relationship with animals or insects for pollination and seed dispersal. Often this can be remarkably specific, with only one species of plant working with one species of insect. While some plant species can pollinate and disperse seed just with the wind, an environment reduced to only a few individuals spread across the entire planet, in hostile conditions, is hardly conducive to this.

In short, the problems with the animals are actually the least of the problems with the flood story. Plants are the first rung of the trophic scale, directly photosynthesising solar energy into food, and as a byproduct are what convert choking carbon dioxide into breathable oxygen. Without the ability to sustain a full plant-based biosphere throughout the flood, Noah's task would be futile!

a reply to: InachMarbank

And 80 mile meteorite would leave such vast destruction, and yes, HEAT, not sure much on Earth would have survived.

a reply to: FlyersFan

What did the animals et. al. eat for 40 days and nights?

Grains. Seeds.

So plants weren't specifically called out. Perhaps because they didn't need to be, it was implicit.

originally posted by: ventian
a reply to: FlyersFan

Marine fossils all over everest? A man being helped by literal God Almighty couldn't achieve the task of building a boat? Care to take a stab at Moses' staff next? It's why it is called faith and belief. Believe it or not, you have put your faith in a god, you probably don't know it though.

2 Cor 4:4

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Everyone on this planet serves a god. Most hate The Lord so they unintentionally side with the god of this world and get passively brainwashed by his minions running this place.

Isaiah 5:20

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

I don't claim to know a great deal about science, 5 years ago I knew a great deal more about it than Scripture, though. Here's where I'm at in my understanding, coming from one side to the other. I'm willing to bet most anyone on this site would lie to their parent's faces if it meant they would collect a liveable income. Lie by omission to strangers? I bet the percentage goes up. The very fact that marketing, (an entire profession built on lying and brainwashing), exists provides plenty of evidence for this hypothtical. You could even send me an 100 thousand dollar grant to do a study to prove my hypothesis, if you just find it too hard to believe.

Stop wasting time trying to evangelize unbelief and look for God.
James 4:8

Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you.

P.S. I too like The Flyers.

I have to agree with your post because over the years I have read about many archaeological digs of some very important finds - that could have provided some very interesting information - that somehow got covered up/never heard from again. In addition, I have always tried to look beyond their written word in an effort to see if they might have connections with the same people we see today controlling the world narrative to get their global agenda in place. Now, I am not meaning to be judgmental at all but I did happen to notice something a bit odd (maybe). David Montgomery, the geomorphologist who published the book discounting the Noah flood story and who was mentioned in the beginning of this thread, married Anne Biklé, another writer/researcher. Could there be any hidden agenda's in his "findings"?

Anne:

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
What did the animals et. al. eat for 40 days and nights?
Grains. Seeds.

they were actually on the ark ... supposedly ... for much longer.
They couldn't get off the ark for something like a year.
Flood waters had to recede and dry land had to appear.

Some of the animals were plant eaters. SPECIFIC plants
that didn't grow where Noah supposedly lived. That only
grew in the regions they came from: Koalas eat only eucalyptus
leaves, a species not normally found in the Middle East;
Pandas prefer bamboo, which has the same problem. ETC ETC

And many of the animals were meat eaters.
Where'd they get the meat.

Having enough food and water for the animals for a year
was impossible.

Anthropologists have discovered flood myths in nearly every society on Earth including but not limited to Greeks, Native Americans, Polynesians, Aboriginals, Celtics, Norse, Irish, and Mesoamericans.

POOP and PEE

The myth of Noahs Ark as Literal History

Living in piles of their own dung is very unhealthy for most animals, and before long their health would suffer. The animals on Noah’s ark would have to have their cages cleaned periodically. In most places that care for animals, this is done once a day. Eight people cleaning 16,000 cages a day is absurd. A healthy human, working hard, can clean roughly 100 or so “average” cages or stables in a really tough workday. Remembering the above, we also had to allocate time to providing water and food.

Let’s take a closer look at what it takes to clean an animal’s cage.

Setting the estimate low we could say the process of removing the dung took 60 seconds for a large cage, 10 seconds for a small cage. We could say the average time spent per cage would be 30 seconds.

The dung would have to be thrown overboard eventually, so, again setting the estimate low, we could say the cleaner would have to empty his waste container only every 20 cages.

The time taken to empty the waste overboard would vary on the position of the cage being cleaned. The ones working on the deck below the water would take longer to empty their waste than the ones on the upper decks, while the ones working in the center of the ark would take longer to empty their waste than the ones on the edge. Setting the estimate low again we are looking at 3 minutes to empty waste.

Calculating this out we are looking at 17 human hours of labor removing dung.

Of course, if Noah had built various magical machines (mostly powered inclined planes and those “screw” things), the disposal of the poop would have been a bit easier.

An alternative explanation is that each animal cleaned its own enclosure periodically. However, given the lack of opposable thumbs for most of the species on the ark, this explanation is implausible.

Certainly since Scripture related nothing about the places which we said were set apart for the excrement of the animals, but tradition preserves some things, it will appear opportune that silence has been maintained on this about which reason may sufficiently teach of its importance. And because it could less worthily be fitted to a spiritual meaning, rightly, therefore, Scripture, which rather fits its narratives to allegorical meanings, was silent about this.

ORIGIN (AD 184/5-253/4)[17]

Animals also pee. Animals on the top deck would not need to have their urine dealt with because the decks could theoretically be slanted so the urine would flow out into the ocean. (God must have supplied really detailed blueprints for Noah to get all this right.) The urine on the bottom decks, however, would have to be manually removed or else it would build up and sink the ship. Say there were only 10,000 animals on the bottom two decks. Say, setting the estimate low, each animal only peed on average one fourth of a cup per day. That gives us 2500 cups (165 gallons) of urine that needed to be bilge pumped per day.

Now, reasonably, the most a person can carry[note 5] is about eight gallons per trip.[note 6] That results in roughly twenty trips per day of “piss duty”.

A little something on the amount of food and water that would have to have been stored on board for the animals -

CLICK HERE

Feeding mammals requires about 15 kcal/kg of body weight per day (that varies widely: for shrews, for example, it's on the order of 250 kcal/kg. That is, 1600 tons of animals would consume something on the order of 32,000,000 kcal/day, probably more because the vast majority of genera are physically much smaller than humans. For six months, that would come to at least 4,800,000,000 kcal. Even if the food were entirely fat (the most calorie-dense food), that would require 53,333 kg (roughly 56 tons) of food. But since ungulates mostly eat grass or hay, we're talking a lot more food--each elephant consumes 65+ kg of forage a day and other large ungulates consume some tens of kg of food per day--the four elephants (two genera) alone would consume 260 kg daily, or more than 50 tons during six months. For that matter, since the Flood followed the Fall, many "kinds" would have to consume meat, which you can't preserve that long except by drying, requiring enormous amounts of fresh water in addition to that consumed by most animals--mammals require perhaps three liters of water per 100 kg per day. Those poor elephants have to consume among them some 750 liters (200 gallons) of water per day. Assuming the oceans were so diluted by the rain as to make the water potable (highly unlikely), the ability of the ark to carry cargo would be less--only about 98% of my original estimate.

a reply to: Untun

As I said, a common story because water and floods are common to most groups of people on the planet.

What is the purpose of lying about a world wide flood or was it just a fairytale all societies wanted to tell their children?

originally posted by: Untun
What is the purpose of lying about a world wide flood or was it just a fairytale all societies wanted to tell their children?

I'm sure each group had their own reason for creating the myths that they do.
The reason for the Noahs Ark myth is pretty clear ... behave as we tell you that
God wants you to behave or else God will wipe you out. Control.

a reply to: FlyersFan

It sounds like something you shouldn't let yoursefl be deceived by.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Probably because the stories were already written down in the Mesopotamian libraries. The writers of Genesis wanted to put their own spin on the story, and fit it into their own narrative of continuity from the first human to their own tribes, making the city folks with their agriculture look bad (think of the Cain story, and his line, where farming and city building came from, according to Genesis).

Dna is a double helix - the animals went into the ark 2×2

Or it was until, www.bbc.co.uk... .

They created a 3 pronged monster , a moonchild that Crowley would be proud of .
m.youtube.com...

Do not mess with the book , do not add or subtract was the warning , and here we are , genes have been switched from 10,6,6,5 to 10 6,6,6 .

And under patient law all those injected are no longer human


.

Never a flood



I have seen deeper and scarier than that street ,first hand and if you dig down in a lot of places you will find traces of a civilisation buried in Mud

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: FlyersFan

Not impossible.

We have an arc with DNA of all known species on Earth.

Plant, animal, virii and bacteria.

Maybe the arc in the past was like the arc we have now. What may have survived of the story to tell to primatives that 'devolved' after the cataclysm.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
We have an arc with DNA of all known species on Earth.

THAT ark is entirely possible because it is the right size and has the right people working on it etc etc. Noahs ark, as told by the Bible, is impossible. I've given six pages of scientific information showing that.