Science falsely so called documentary

[Brightmoon]

Back to the sea ? Fraid not ! The ocean is already full . Overfilling the ocean is the only way you’ll drown a continent.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then tell us your personal version of the flood. You can't complain about strawman arguments if you do not clearly present your beliefs.

I've been hoping that critics would read the story carefully, thus saving me from doing it again. But let's take one point of contention, regarding the ark. The story says that the ark "went on the flood", meaning is was carried along in relatively calm waters. It didn't matter how fast the water was moving if the ark was moving at the same speed. Even a flimsy craft would survive many miles of such movement.

I've been in a hot air balloon travelling at 20 mph (according to our pilot). One passenger was smoking and the smoke hung around the basket as if we were in a closed room.

In addition the ark, as built and as loaded, would have floated very low in the water, protected from surface waves and swells, if indeed there were any of significance.

Critics and believers alike can't seem to shake the many artist's renderings of ark and storm; a shiplike craft riding high on a tempest tossed sea. In truth the waters that flooded the Mesopotamian Plain would have been calm and flat moving a large ominous looking floating warehouse gently along on it's slowly rising tide-like waters.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Wooden shipbuilding with large boats not even the size of the ark ,has been tried during the 19th century iirc and it failed miserably even with iron or steel bracing . Wooden boats flex and that flexing causes them to leak . The larger the boat the larger the flexing. It doesn’t matter what shape the boat is either. 19th century scientists understood shipbuilding and the failure was the material- wood.

The ark wasn't a ship (for the umpteenth time).Ships are built to navigate, which means often fighting against the dynamics of the sea. The ark merely drifted along with the movements of the waters, thus none of the stresses that ships have to overcome. Commercial ship design is often a compromise taking into consideration elements such as speed, cargo capacity, costs, etc. that the ark didn't have to face.

 

[VirOptimus]

List your questions, but one at a time please.

Thats not how it works either. You present what happened and the support for that, then I will ask questions.

 

[Speedwell]

I've been hoping that critics would read the story carefully, thus saving me from doing it again. But let's take one point of contention, regarding the ark. The story says that the ark "went on the flood", meaning is was carried along in relatively calm waters. It didn't matter how fast the water was moving if the ark was moving at the same speed. Even a flimsy craft would survive many miles of such movement.

I've been in a hot air balloon travelling at 20 mph (according to our pilot). One passenger was smoking and the smoke hung around the basket as if we were in a closed room.

In addition the ark, as built and as loaded, would have floated very low in the water, protected from surface waves and swells, if indeed there were any of significance.

Critics and believers alike can't seem to shake the many artist's renderings of ark and storm; a shiplike craft riding high on a tempest tossed sea. In truth the waters that flooded the Mesopotamian Plain would have been calm and flat moving a large ominous looking floating warehouse gently along on it's slowly rising tide-like waters.

I thought the idea that The Flood covered the entire terrestrial globe to some depth was absolutely non-negotiable for YECs.

 

[Brightmoon]

The ark wasn't a ship (for the umpteenth time).Ships are built to navigate, which means often fighting against the dynamics of the sea. The ark merely drifted along with the movements of the waters, thus none of the stresses that ships have to overcome. Commercial ship design is often a compromise taking into consideration elements such as speed, cargo capacity, costs, etc. that the ark didn't have to face.

Cargo capacity had to be taken into consideration, so you’re wrong there. I also emphasized that even though they use ship building techniques that it didn’t have to be a boat of some kind. Nothing that size built of wood is going to be seaworthy. And using Bronze Age or Iron Age technology only makes that situation worse

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Thats not how it works either. You present what happened and the support for that, then I will ask questions.

The story is there for you to read. I'll defer to the story. Read it carefully, then ask your questions.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I thought the idea that The Flood covered the entire terrestrial globe to some depth was absolutely non-negotiable for YECs.

This is true (I'm an OEC however). I only referenced the flood waters at the probable site of the ark. The seawater was coming onto the land from all directions, which helps to account for the lack of evidence.

 

[VirOptimus]

The story is there for you to read. I'll defer to the story. Read it carefully, then ask your questions.

The story is clearly a myth, and not meant to be taken literaly.

If you claim it happened then support it with facts and evidence. But it didnt happen so you wont as you cant.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Cargo capacity had to be taken into consideration, so you’re wrong there. I also emphasized that even though they use ship building techniques that it didn’t have to be a boat of some kind. Nothing that size built of wood is going to be seaworthy. And using Bronze Age or Iron Age technology only makes that situation worse

The ark had a huge cargo capacity which can be reasonably calculated. As stated before the ark didn't have to be "seaworthy" according to normal ship standards as it wasn't ship; and it wasn't constructed like a ship. Once again I refer you to the actual story (note that the story hasn't changed in 4000 or so years).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The story is clearly a myth, and not meant to be taken literaly.

If you claim it happened then support it with facts and evidence. But it didnt happen so you wont as you cant.

It's only a 'myth' in the minds of unbelievers, and those with limited reading comprehension i.e. the incessant insistence that the ark was a "ship".

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And can you imagine the ammonia smell of stale animal urine with only one window.

Several thing mitigate this problem. First and foremost is the 'maintenance rations' all the animals would have been placed on. Metabolisms slows, thus manure and urine don't have the volume or the 'punch' of a working animal. Ventilation is an easy fix. I manage an apartment building roughly a third the size of the ark. When the furnace is fired the draft draws fresh air from every point of infiltration in the entire building. In fact builders in the past weren't concerned about air leaks as this was the source of fresh air during the heating season, powered by the draft from the heating source. The ark wasn't just a big wooden box. It was a complicated structure that dealt with all these contingencies.

 

[Speedwell]

Several thing mitigate this problem. First and foremost is the 'maintenance rations' all the animals would have been placed on. Metabolisms slows, thus manure and urine don't have the volume or the 'punch' of a working animal. Ventilation is an easy fix. I manage an apartment building roughly the size of the ark. When the furnace is fired the draft draws fresh air from every point of infiltration in the entire building. In fact builders in the past weren't concerned about air leaks as this was the source of fresh air during the heating season, powered by the draft from the heating source. The ark wasn't just a big wooden box. It was a complicated structure that dealt with all these contingencies.

I read the story; none of that was in it.

 

[VirOptimus]

It's only a 'myth' in the minds of unbelievers, and those with limited reading comprehension i.e. the incessant insistence that the ark was a "ship".

I see, it was hot air all along. Just as I predicted.

 

[tas8831]

I've been hoping that critics would read the story carefully, thus saving me from doing it again.

Ironic.

The story says that the ark "went on the flood", meaning is was carried along in relatively calm waters.

I wish you bible experts could get your stories straight - I have been on forums in which creationists claim that the flood was fairly violent, what with waters from the deep (whatever those were) bursting forth and the like.
It seems like creationists employ whichever scenario they need at the time, premised on their ever-changing "interpretations" of the ancient tall tales.

It didn't matter how fast the water was moving if the ark was moving at the same speed. Even a flimsy craft would survive many miles of such movement.

And yet the ark came pretty much right back to where it was 'launched'.
Almost as if the Hebrew numerologists that copied pre-existing flood myths were entirely unaware of the lands beyond their ability to travel by foot to.

I've been in a hot air balloon travelling at 20 mph (according to our pilot). One passenger was smoking and the smoke hung around the basket as if we were in a closed room.

If the air mass you were in was going 20 mph, makes sense. I had creationist flat earthers wonder why you don't feel wind in your face when in an airplane 'supposedly' going hundreds of miles per hour...

In addition the ark, as built and as loaded,

Correction - as it is believed without evidence to have been built.

would have floated very low in the water, protected from surface waves and swells, if indeed there were any of significance.

Right.... I mean there are no waves of significance on the oceans of the world today, so why would the flood in which the ENTIRE world was covered with water be at all affected by the forces that produce large waves, so no problems for a wooden boat whose instructions for construction made no mention of internal bracing and the like. Never mind that the largest real wooden boat required metal bracing and pumps to keep it from sinking....

In truth the waters that flooded the Mesopotamian Plain would have been calm and flat moving a large ominous looking floating warehouse gently along on it's slowly rising tide-like waters.

Your mere opinion, which differs from other creationists and self-acclaimed bible experts.

 

[tas8831]

I read the story; none of that was in it.

Amazing how readily the religionist will extra-biblical to try to save their myths.

 

[tas8831]

Funny - if this much speculation, unsupported assertion/guesswork, and 'just so story-telling' was presented for evolution, these people would be justified in their skepticism...

Several thing mitigate this problem. First and foremost is the 'maintenance rations' all the animals would have been placed on.

Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.

Metabolisms slows,

Explain and provide Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.

thus manure and urine don't have the volume or the 'punch' of a working animal. Ventilation is an easy fix. I manage an apartment building roughly the size of the ark. When the furnace is fired the draft draws fresh air from every point of infiltration in the entire building. In fact builders in the past weren't concerned about air leaks as this was the source of fresh air during the heating season, powered by the draft from the heating source.

Cool - is this building half under water and made of wood to float for a year?

The ark wasn't just a big wooden box. It was a complicated structure that dealt with all these contingencies.

Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Ironic.

I wish you bible experts could get your stories straight - I have been on forums in which creationists claim that the flood was fairly violent, what with waters from the deep (whatever those were) bursting forth and the like.
It seems like creationists employ whichever scenario they need at the time, premised on their ever-changing "interpretations" of the ancient tall tales.

And yet the ark came pretty much right back to where it was 'launched'.
Almost as if the Hebrew numerologists that copied pre-existing flood myths were entirely unaware of the lands beyond their ability to travel by foot to.

If the air mass you were in was going 20 mph, makes sense. I had creationist flat earthers wonder why you don't feel wind in your face when in an airplane 'supposedly' going hundreds of miles per hour...

Correction - as it is believed without evidence to have been built.

Right.... I mean there are no waves of significance on the oceans of the world today, so why would the flood in which the ENTIRE world was covered with water be at all affected by the forces that produce large waves, so no problems for a wooden boat whose instructions for construction made no mention of internal bracing and the like. Never mind that the largest real wooden boat required metal bracing and pumps to keep it from sinking....
Your mere opinion, which differs from other creationists and self-acclaimed bible experts.

You don't understand. I am the only expert.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I read the story; none of that was in it.

Did you read between the lines? Actually all you need to do is expound on what is written. For example I think we can safely assume that Noah was wearing clothes, although the story failed to mention this 'important detail'. The story isn't a course in ark-building, just a brief account with a few important details to get us started.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Funny - if this much speculation, unsupported assertion/guesswork, and 'just so story-telling' was presented for evolution, these people would be justified in their skepticism...
Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.

Explain and provide Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.



Cool - is this building half under water and made of wood to float for a year?
Chapter, verse, and corroborating evidence please.

It's all there...between the lines.