My Ark Challenge

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thank you, OB.

But don't worry.

Second only to creationism, the Ark story is my forte.

I'm just stirring the pot a little.

Hey bro. Yeah the Ark story is rather amazing.
I have never really studied that much on it. Here are the measurements:
Gene 6:15
And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.

The Ark measured 300 × 50 × 30 cubits (Genesis 6:15),
which is about 140 × 23 × 13.5 metres or 459 × 75 × 44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m³ (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet.

Looked for other places that use those measurements in the OT

I couldn't find another verse that mentions 300 cubits

I did find a verse that mentions a gallows 50 cubits or 75 ft high. Isn't that a little high for a hanging?
Interesting.

Ester 7:
9 And Harbonah, one of the chamberlains, said before the king,
Behold also, the gallows fifty cubits high, which Haman had made for Mordecai, who had spoken good for the king, standeth in the house of Haman. Then the king said, Hang him thereon.
10 So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. Then was the king's wrath pacified.

King Solomon's house was 30 cubits, 40 ft high

1 King 6:2
And the house which king Solomon built for the LORD,
the length thereof was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof twenty cubits, and the height thereof thirty cubits.

How did all the animals fit on Noah's Ark? - creation.com
Was the ark large enough to hold all the required animals?

The Ark measured 300 × 50 × 30 cubits (Genesis 6:15), which is about 140 × 23 × 13.5 metres or 459 × 75 × 44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m³ (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet.
To put this in perspective, this is the equivalent carrying capacity of 340 semitrailer trucks (i.e. articulated lorries), each of which can hold 37 1,200-pound slaughter steers, 90 500-pound feeder calves, 180 250-pound hogs, or 300 125-pound sheep. This would be a line six lanes wide and half a mile long.

Tabulating the total volume is fair enough, since this shows that there would be plenty of room on the Ark for the animals with plenty left over for food, range etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

Hey bro.

Hey, hey, bro!

Good to see you again!

I did find a verse that mentions a gallows 50 cubits or 75 ft high. Isn't that a little high for a hanging?

Mordecai was a Nephilim.

(Just kidding! )

 

[RealityCheck01]

Am I to understand that science cannot answer my challenge?

A question based on fantasy is not a challenge. The Ark is physically impossible (this is the Physical & Life Sciences section of the forum).
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: An Ark question based on a physically impossible Ark is a fantasy is not a challenge.

The Ark story could be a myth, so mistake ridden that it cannot be believed, a lie, maybe God is embedding lies in the universe by concealing evidence that the Ark could exist, or maybe some other option.
N.B. The last option is in present tense because every time that shipwrights have tried to build wooden ships close to the scale of the Ark, God has sabotaged them. The here-and-now lie is that the Ark must have been built of iron or steel. Or the past lie/mistake was that the Ark was made of wood.

 

[AV1611VET]

... God has sabotaged them.

Do you believe that?

If not, mind if I don't either?

 

[RealityCheck01]

Can you, for example, show me an "intellectually honest" version of academia's cherub?

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question.
Child means a human being between the stages of birth and puberty. A fetus is any prenatal animal including human beings.

 

[AV1611VET]

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.

You have trouble answering questions, don't you?

What did you major in in college?

 

[RealityCheck01]

Hey bro. Yeah the Ark story is rather amazing.

And as the "question" in the first post makes clear, physically impossible.
1) Wyoming
When skilled shipwrights building on a couple of thousands of years of collected experience, tried to build a wooden ship of a size comparable to the Ark, it needed pumps during its lifetime and eventually sank! No pumps are mentioned for the Ark.
The Ark was the first ship of its size (maybe the first ship ever?), built by a unskilled amateurs and perhaps a totally unseaworthy box (no keel mentioned for the Ark). People can make up stories about skill, pumps or a keel but that makes the Bible story lie by omission.

2) We know how many species of animals we have found so far and that there was not enough room on the Ark on them. Once again people make the Bible story lie by omission: "kinds" = whatever groups of species they want (as if Noah was too stupid to tell the difference between say a tiger and a lion!) and then imaginary and unreported "hyper-evolution" to turn Ark kinds into modern species.

3) How did koalas, NZ snails, etc., etc. get to the Ark?

4) There are many animals with specialist diets. Koalas eat living leaves (mostly eucalyptus). That requires the Ark to have a grove of eucalyptus trees! Animals with usual diets also cause problems, e.g. the maybe 20 sheep needed to feed 1 lion during the voyage.
Once again people make the Bible story lie by omission, e.g. the animals are babies, not adults.

5) How did koalas, NZ snails, etc., etc. get from the Ark back to their original lands without any traces of them along their paths?
This is where some real fictions are made up to make the Bible story lie by omission, e.g. snails cross oceans on convenient rafts or are carried by strangely not hungry birds!

6) The Ark not existing today is not really a problem - it was made of wood and wood rots!

7) There is no genetic evidence of a human or animal genetic bottleneck corresponding to the Ark voyage. 8 people are not enough to produce a genetically healthy population.
People make the Bible story dubious, e.g. God did something to conceal that evidence. This is a reasonable omission since children not being born with defects would not be observed. The only omission is God not telling the author(s) of the story what was done.

 

[RealityCheck01]

What did you major in in college?

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Yet another irrelevant question (my college major) to derail from his other derails!

 

[AV1611VET]

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Yet another irrelevant question (my college major) to derail from his other derails!

Does your REPLY button work?

Your posting style is an eyesore.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Do you believe that?

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant question about the Ark being a myth, mistake, lie, concealed by lies or other options.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Does your REPLY button work?

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: A lie that I do know how to reply to a post when I relied - as in this reply.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Yet another irrelevant question (my college major) to derail from his other derails!

 

[AV1611VET]

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant question about the Ark being a myth, mistake, lie, concealed by lies or other options.

-- What?

RC, do you have any answers for my OP as I wrote it?

If not, are you here just to play BMOC with your academics?

If you are, you're not impressing me one bit.

I eat academians for breakfast.

 

[AV1611VET]

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: A lie that I do know how to reply to a post when I relied - as in this reply.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Yet another irrelevant question (my college major) to derail from his other derails!

Mamma LaRosa --

I guess I'm just going to have to consider the source for awhile until you get tired and move on.

 

[RealityCheck01]

RC, do you have any answers for my OP as I wrote it?

I gave the answer (magic , myth, lies, etc.).
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: The physical reasons why your question is a fantasy.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: An Ark question based on a physically impossible Ark is a fantasy is not a challenge.

18 June 2018 AV1611VET: A lie that I do know how to reply to a post when I relied - as in this reply.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant "academia's cherub" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Irrelevant and ignorant "child in the womb" versus "fetus" question that does not make the Ark physically possible.
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: Yet another irrelevant question (my college major) to derail from his other derails!

 

[RealityCheck01]

Mamma LaRosa.

Are you ever going to address:
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: A lie that I do know how to reply to a post when I relied - as in this reply.
Written in a tab with the title "Reply To ...." after pressing the Reply button which is how I did the relies to your posts.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you ever going to address:
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: A lie that I do know how to reply to a post when I relied - as in this reply.
Written in a tab with the title "Reply To ...." after pressing the Reply button which is how I did the relies to your posts.

Forget it, RC.

As far as you're concerned, I'm in READ ONLY mode.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Forget it, RC. ...

That is unfortunate that you do not want to easily fix an obvious lie when it will stay around forever.

 

[Colter]

A question based on fantasy is not a challenge. The Ark is physically impossible (this is the Physical & Life Sciences section of the forum).
18 June 2018 AV1611VET: An Ark question based on a physically impossible Ark is a fantasy is not a challenge.

The Ark story could be a myth, so mistake ridden that it cannot be believed, a lie, maybe God is embedding lies in the universe by concealing evidence that the Ark could exist, or maybe some other option.
N.B. The last option is in present tense because every time that shipwrights have tried to build wooden ships close to the scale of the Ark, God has sabotaged them. The here-and-now lie is that the Ark must have been built of iron or steel. Or the past lie/mistake was that the Ark was made of wood.

We can determine the motive of the myth of the flood by considering what it accomplishes.

 

[AV1611VET]

We can determine the motive of the myth of the flood by considering what it accomplishes.

If my challenge questions go unanswered, why should I even think people can determine the motive of the myth [sic], let alone their ability to ascertain what it accomplishes?

 

[DogmaHunter]

If my challenge questions go unanswered, why should I even think people can determine the motive of the myth [sic], let alone their ability to ascertain what it accomplishes?

I don't even have a reason to consider that a fruitfull exercise with merrit....

The "motive", as far as I am concerned, can simply be "because they believed it".
And what they believed, turned out to be wrong.

Like so many people's beliefs (religious and otherwise) have turned out to be wrong.
Eventhough there's certainly cases to be made that claim the opposite, I have no issue with assuming that the authors / early followers of these religious stories were sincere.

I mean, many people, entire empires even, have believed quite a few ridiculous things over the millenia. Some of which were many times more ridiculous then impossible floods with impossible boats. Take scientology for example... I think most of us here, creationists and atheists alike, are able to agree that the lore of scientology is pretty ridiculous, right?

Yet scientologists are very sincere in there beliefs. With Tom Cruise leading the pack and being dead serious about having achieved the rank of "Operating Thetan", which should technically allow him to manipulate space and time.

Considering the precendents of the human capability of sincerely believing ridiculously false things en masse, I don't think this particular story requires some extra-ordinary explanation for its existance.