• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

A mathematical refutation of Noah's ark

BeamMeUpScotty

Senior Veteran
Dec 15, 2004
2,384
167
56
Kanagawa, Japan
✟25,937.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Others
Just an interesting study I wanted to do.

I am using The New Oxford Annotated Bible.

In order to set some ground rules for the following discussion, I propose the following:





  • Arguments shall be based upon scripture from known and acknowledged versions of the Bible. Such arguments should be referred to by the translation, book, chapters and verse(s). Religious arguments based outside known translations of the Bible shall not be valid. (e.g., God “spiritually feeding” the animals, or “shrinking them to fit into the ark” shall not be accepted.) I will make arguments outside scriptures, but only in favor of the creationists' arguments.
  • OR, arguments shall be based upon documented sources within the scientific community, verifiable by any person who wishes to pursue the issue.
  • Mathematics, geometry, and physics shall be considered to be the same in Noah’s time as they are today.
  • Evolution shall be a moot point. It shall be assumed that all animals existing today existed in Noah’s time and that he was responsible for bringing them on the ark.
  • Water species shall be ignored. This is just to make the whole argument easier for the “creationists”. Even though salinity problems alone would have killed off tons of water species.
  • Genesis 7:2-3, in which God instructs Noah to take 7 pairs of birds and clean animals and one pair of unclean animals, shall be ignored. This is to make the creationists’ argument easier.
If you have problems with these rules or would like to add some more, let’s talk it over.

According to Panda.org, which is part of the WWF, there are two types of elephants: the Asian and the African. Obviously if we believe the Bible, there would have to be four elephants on the ark.

The Asian elephant eats around 300kg of fodder per day (see Panda.org), while fully grown African elephants eat up to 200kg of food/day (WWF). Now, we know from Gen 6:21 that Noah was commanded to take food for all the animals and his family, thus nullifying a possible miracle explanation for not needing to bring food. Now, if Noah took 4 fully grown elephants he would have needed 1,000 kg of food/day just for the elephants. However, in the interest of being conservative, lets assume that Noah had younger elephants and thus needed less food than a full grown adult. So lets assume that the elephants needed half of their adult counterparts.

Therefore, collectively, the Asian and African elephants would need approximately 500 kg of food/day. That’s 1,102.31 pounds a day!! In the interest of simplicity and being conservative in our estimates lets just say 1,000 pounds of food/day. For the year that they were on the ark, that would mean Noah and family would have needed 365,000 pounds of food for the elephants. This is 1,825 tons, which will be important later.

Next step, calculating how much space was in the ark. This has been done repeatedly so I hope there is little contention here. Gen. 6:15 says, "The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits (aprx. 450 feet), the breadth of it 50 cubits (aprx. 75 feet), and the height of it 30 cubits (aprx. 45 feet)." This is 1,518,750 cubic feet. Let’s also assume for the sake of simplicity and being conservative that the ark was a perfect box with these dimensions (i.e., no space lost at the front or back due to needing to actually float, no need for going through sea/waves, no keel, etc). Also for the sake of simplicity and conservatism, lets assume by some miracle that there was no need for floors, which would take up even more space (this caveat contradicts Gen 6:16 in which God instructs Noah to build 3 decks--but that would take away more space and seeing as there is no mention in the Bible as to how thick the floors were, we cannot calculate their volume). Thus the area of the ground floor would have been 33,750 sq. feet and that the total interior cubic feet are as stated above.

Next we need to know approximately how much space the food for the elephants would have taken up (and ignoring the fact that most of it would have gone bad eventually in a hot damp environment--remember there was only one door and a small window). Just for a side-note, I am also ignoring the fact that many animals are carnivores. That would mean that many more than just a pair of many types of animals were brought aboard that also would have to be fed during the year until the "chosen pair" could eat them. Of course the fact that these "feed" animals also needed to be kept alive, many of which were carnivores also, would have meant that even more animals would have bee needed. It’s a geometrically unsolvable problem for such a situation.

Given that, Elephants are vegetarians; so lets assume that they were fed hay for the entire year (again ignore the monumental task of growing, harvesting, and storing of such an immense amount of hay by one family). According to the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, "Regardless of bale size and stacking method, any building with 16' sidewalls will accommodate at least 1 ton of hay in every 20 square feet of floor area." This means one ton of hay needs 320 cubic feet of storage. But it does say 'at least', and of course this is assuming ideal conditions. So again for simplicity and conservatism, lets assume one ton of hay needs 300 cubic feet of storage. That means the 1,825 tons of hay needed for just the 4 elephants alone would have take up 547,500 cubic feet!! That’s about 36% of the space available on the ark, again assuming ridiculously conservative (and sometimes impossible, i.e., no floors) conditions. If we have adult elephants that eat twice as much (again at a very conservative estimate) that’s 72% of the space in the ark for the food for just 4 animals!!!! Not to mention that I haven't added the space that the actual elephants would have needed, which would have been more than just the space they physically occupy, due to the need to exercise, for instance.

When one considers that there are 1.4-1.6 million known species of animals (Online Textbook), and some estimates of up to 100 million existing species, there is no physical possibility that Noah's ark ever happened. Think about how much staff and energy go into running even a small zoo. Of course, if one assumes that dinosaurs were alive at that time, then Noah would have had to deal with those rather large critters as well.

Let's discuss.
 

searchingforanswers1

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2004
1,744
45
✟2,119.00
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Married
Ok what if noah had freezers on board and he didnt really have the whole animal just the sperm and the egg. Then he wouldnt need any feed so the ark would have been plenty big enough. Then when the ark landed God use artificial means to join the sperm and the egg and presto new animals. That would solve the space problem. So dont say the global flood was not possible.
Oops, no electricity for the freezers. Well God could have used lightning for electricity.


Funny? I have heard much more convoluted reasoning from the flood believers than this to defend their position.
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
BeamMeUpScotty said:
The Asian elephant eats around 300kg of fodder per day .
Did you ever think that maybe he took a baby elephant with him that later on grew into a full sized elephant?

When it comes to food, we see God miracle of supply all the time. Look at how many people Jesus was able to feed with the little boys lunch basket. He could feed 5000 people with two fish and five loaves of bread.
 
Upvote 0

h2whoa

Ace2whoa - resident geneticist
Sep 21, 2004
2,573
286
43
Manchester, UK
✟4,091.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
searchingforanswers1 said:
Ok what if noah had freezers on board and he didnt really have the whole animal just the sperm and the egg.
Not to mention an artificial womb to carry each embryo in...

h2
 
Upvote 0

Mistermystery

Here's looking at you kid
Apr 19, 2004
4,220
169
✟5,275.00
Faith
Atheist
Some quick numbers:

There were around ~15.000 diffrent species of trilobites in the course of history with an estemated 5000 genera, wich is pretty impressive if you think that most fossils are either distroyed over the course of 500 million years,
In the phylum of Nematomorpha or round worms there's approximatly 20.000 diffrent species today,
There's were an estemated 200.000 diffrent dinos allthough this is not entirely certain. Could be more, could be less,
There are more then 65.000 diffrent crabs, scorpions etc etc,
There are currently at this moment more then a million insects (with a.o. an estemated ~150.000 diffrent species of butterflies today), and I'm not counting the ones that were in the rest of history,
There are aroud a 1000 diffrent species of bats.
-- oh and we still haven't got a definition of "kinds"
There are 5 species of sea cows
There are 6 hyraxes
There are around 2500 species of rodents
There are 3 diffrent species of duckbilled platypusses
IIRC 3 diffrent species of zebras
and tons of animals we have yet to discover either those who are alive today or those who are extinct.

dum dum dum
 
Upvote 0

NamesAreHardToPick

All That You Can Leave Behind
Oct 7, 2004
1,202
120
✟24,443.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
JohnR7 said:
Did you ever think that maybe he took a baby elephant with him that later on grew into a full sized elephant?
This I can believe.

When it comes to food, we see God miracle of supply all the time. Look at how many people Jesus was able to feed with the little boys lunch basket. He could feed 5000 people with two fish and five loaves of bread.
Yeah, let me see if Jesus will divide my sandwich into many pieces ...





Nope. Jesus must not love me as much as Noah.
 
Upvote 0

awstar

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
477
83
✟34,835.00
Faith
Methodist

How many original finches did Darwin need to sell his story on how all the different varieties populated the different Galapagos islands? Seems to me this is one argument where evolutionists and creationists can agree, that only two of a super species are needed to produce a variety of species as they migrate to different geographical areas. Which means the very first premise in the OP is wrong. Only two "whatevers" that African and Indian elephants "evolved" from were needed to be on the Ark. And if God can feed millions of people in the desert for forty years on day at a time, why not a few animals for one year?
 
Upvote 0

Mistermystery

Here's looking at you kid
Apr 19, 2004
4,220
169
✟5,275.00
Faith
Atheist
awstar said:
How many original finches did Darwin need to sell his story on how all the different varieties populated the different Galapagos islands?
I did not use the word variations, I did not talk about finches or whatever. I am talking about species here.

Seems to me this is one argument where evolutionists and creationists can agree, that only two of a super species are needed to produce a variety of species as they migrate to different geographical areas.
Not in 4000 years or whatever crazy story you want to stick on it.

Which means the very first premise in the OP is wrong. Only two "whatevers" that African and Indian elephants "evolved" from were needed to be on the Ark.
Zoom! Why don't we see *that* kind of evolution happening today? I mean, what you are proposing is so much more then what the theory of evolution says.
 
Upvote 0

Pete Harcoff

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce
Jun 30, 2002
8,304
72
✟9,884.00
Faith
Other Religion
awstar said:
And if God can feed millions of people in the desert for forty years on day at a time, why not a few animals for one year?

Because by arbitrarily invoking God to solve problems of the flood, you render it completely untenable for scientific inquiry. You enter the realm of philosophy/theology where all ideas become equal.
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
NamesAreHardToPick said:
Yeah, let me see if Jesus will divide my sandwich into many pieces ...
Believe what you want, I see God's miracle of supply all the time. He provides for me abundantly above and beyond all that I would ever ask or even think to ask for. He does not deny me of any good thing.

I know that God is no respecter of persons. What He will do for one person, He will do for another. We may have different gifts, talents and abilities. But He wants to provides for us all the same and He does not want to deny us of any good thing. It is up to us if we want to allow Him to work in our lives or not.
 
Upvote 0

awstar

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
477
83
✟34,835.00
Faith
Methodist
Pete Harcoff said:
Because by arbitrarily invoking God to solve problems of the flood, you render it completely untenable for scientific inquiry. You enter the realm of philosophy/theology where all ideas become equal.

If you limit my invokation of a supernatural power as a reasonable explanation how -- and more importantly to humans -- why things happened to get us to where we are, then you limit yourself to knowing truth. Just because you don't believe in God's intervention in this world affairs doesn't limit Him from doing so. We'll never come to a mutual understanding and agreement if you close you mind to the most obvious explanation.
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The Seeker said:
If Noah took baby animals, what raised them? Some animal behaviours, which are vital for survival, are learnt from parents.
The animals Noah took on the Ark were domestic. Is it not like you could go to your local grocery story for some pork chops. The animals that Noah took on the Ark were the animals he needed to keep him and his family alive.
 
Upvote 0
T

The Seeker

Guest
The point is that if you accept an omnipotent God, who can go against accepted laws of physics, mathematics and even logic, then anything could be true, from Christianity to Scientology to Last Thursdayism
 
Upvote 0
T

The Seeker

Guest
JohnR7 said:
The animals Noah took on the Ark were domestic. Is it not like you could go to your local grocery story for some pork chops. The animals that Noah took on the Ark were the animals he needed to keep him and his family alive.
If they were domestic, how would they survive in the wild? And how did the cheetahs help to keep Noah and his family alive?
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The Seeker said:
If they were domestic, how would they survive in the wild? And how did the cheetahs help to keep Noah and his family alive?
Who said they had to survive in the wild and where does the Bible say anything about cheetahs on the Ark?
 
Upvote 0

Pete Harcoff

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce
Jun 30, 2002
8,304
72
✟9,884.00
Faith
Other Religion
awstar said:
If you limit my invokation of a supernatural power as a reasonable explanation how -- and more importantly to humans -- why things happened to get us to where we are, then you limit yourself to knowing truth.

Science doesn't answer why (in a philosophical sense). It answers how.

Just because you don't believe in God's intervention in this world affairs doesn't limit Him from doing so. We'll never come to a mutual understanding and agreement if you close you mind to the most obvious explanation.

The problem is that God's intervention is not testable.

Try this experiment (credit to lucaspa for originally posting it). Suppose I want to determine what makes plants grow. I can take various natural components (i.e. air, water, seeds, earth, sunlight) and experiment with different combinations to determine which are required for plant growth.

Now suppose I want to find out if God is required for plant growth. How could I test it? I'd need to set up an experiment where I deliberately exclude God from one of the tests, while deliberately including God in another. But since I have no power over God, such an experiment is impossible.

This is why science can't arbitrarily invoke supernatural explanations. You simply can't test them against anything.
 
Upvote 0

Herman Hedning

Hiking is fun
Mar 2, 2004
503,928
1,577
N 57° 44', E 12° 00'
Visit site
✟790,560.00
Faith
Humanist
JohnR7 said:
Who said they had to survive in the wild and where does the Bible say anything about cheetahs on the Ark?
Aha! So the original cat kind was the house cat and lions and tigers microevolved from a pair of those during the course of a few years. And wolves and jackals microevelved from a pair of cockerspaniels. Neat! That certainly explains everything.
 
Upvote 0