Your Garage Best Books of the Month STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Samsung S8 Launch Starting at $39.99 Luxury Beauty Handmade Mother's Day Gifts Book House Cleaning siliconvalley siliconvalley siliconvalley  All-New Echo Dot Starting at $49.99 Kindle Oasis Nintendo Switch Shop Now disgotg_gno_17
Customer Discussions > Science forum

Building an Ark


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 716 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 8, 2012, 2:38:22 AM PST
Sceptic says:
How Long for Noah to Build the Ark?
Given a Bronze age man with a bronze axe and a wooden mallet and all the kinds of animal....Go figure
Here is AinG's answer.
Man's Pre-Flood Potential
Ever wondered what man could have accomplished in the 1,600 years before the Flood? Could Noah really have built a massive ship? If you have been influenced by evolutionary ideas, maybe you think he couldn't.
What we sometimes forget is that man at that time was a relatively recent creation of God, given a perfect brain and an immense life span. Imagine if everyone in your neighborhood was as smart as Einstein, as clever as Galileo, and as observant as Newton. Add to this nearly 1,000 years to learn, to experiment, and to increase knowledge. What could be invented?

Consider this simple historical progression. In the 1500s, mining was on the upswing and a big problem was water would flood the tunnels. A simple suction pump solved this, except, curiously, the pump did not lift water any higher than 32 feet.

In 1630 Baliani presented this problem to Galileo, who was joined in 1641 by Torricelli. Torricelli suspected the answer had to do with air pressure, and he invented the mercury barometer to prove it.

Then 1675 came along, and French astronomer Picard, using Torricelli's barometer, noticed that it glowed when shaken. Hauksbee, a pupil of Newton, discovered the glow was static electricity, which let to the invention of a basic battery that enabled Oersted to electrify a wire and produce a magnetic field.

From this, Sturgeon invented the electromagnet, which enabled Faraday to generate the electricity that von Helmholtz used to activate a tuning fork, which inspired Alexander Graham Bell in 1875 to invent the telephone!*

From 1630 to 1875 is 245 years. Allowing an average life span of 70 years, we have a little over 3 generations, which would equal only about one quarter of the life span of our pre-Flood builder Noah!

It seems clear that pre-Flood man had the intelligence, the time, and the potential to develop a world that was much more advanced than we are used to thinking about!

*Timeline from James Burke, Connections (Little and Brown Company, 1978) pp. 72-79.

Get on board the Ark! Visit ArkEncounter.com to see how you can help us raise $24.5 million in donations for an all-wood Ark in northern Kentucky.

Posted on Jan 8, 2012, 2:40:34 AM PST
Sceptic says:
It took me a moment to figure out what the heck Answers in Genesis was banging on about. In this bizarre article, AiG says the Galileo wondered why pumps could only move water upwards about 32 feet in 1630, meanders through random technological innovations, and ends up with Alexander Graham Bell inventing the telephone, and then they do some higher math and figure out that 1875 - 1630 = 245 years.
Are you as baffled as I am yet?

Then they say that in their imaginary Biblical chronology, there was 1600 years between Adam and Eve and the Flood. 1600 > 245, therefore the Ark is plausible.
Riiiiiight.Well, gosh, I think 1600 is a lot bigger than 245. If 245 years was enough to inevitably lead from mining pumps to electromagnetism and world-wide communications, then I think 1600 years was enough to go from fruit-picking to starships, therefore we ought to look for the wreckage of Noah's Ark on the largest mountain of any habitable planet in orbit around Alpha Centauri. That makes about as much sense to me.
Hey, also, if I found money this afternoon, two years is more than enough time for a dynamic, brilliant organization like AiG to raise $25 million to build their fake boat. So how come their fundraising is stalled out at $5 million, and they've had to delay and delay and delay their groundbreaking?

Posted on Jan 8, 2012, 6:17:47 AM PST
Re Smith posts, above: On reading your first post, I supposed that you had suddenly lost your mind; it wasn't until the second that I understood that your grasp on sanity is intact.

In general, I don't concern myself with issues such as how such a thing could have been built, operated, and maintained; there is more than enough evidence that the whole tale is fiction, as you showed in your posts in A Falisifiable Scientific Creationist Theory, p. 244, and I showed in mine of p. 105 of the same thread. Which, unfortunately, does not keep people from believing in mythology...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 6:58:27 AM PST
Sceptic says:
Well spotted!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 9:03:44 AM PST
Angelus1967 says:
"Dr." Paul - Do you **really** believe this hogwash? There has mever, ever, ever been a person who lived for over 200 years, not has anything ever been found to substatiate any of the stories of the flood that Noah supposedly built an Ark for. Mankind did not have a 'perfect brain and immense lifespan', those are all bible stories cobbled together for lessons of one kind or another, be it the power of faith or any of another dozens of life lessons.
That is all completely absurd.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 9:05:16 AM PST
Angelus1967 says:
Oh CRUD! Sorry Dr. Paul, I got sucked in. I figured that out after I saw your second post and I apologize...profusely! 8' )

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 9:17:10 AM PST
Sceptic says:
OK!

Posted on Jan 8, 2012, 11:22:06 AM PST
noman says:
Ya' know, that would make an interesting experiment along the lines of Kon-Tiki. Actually build a boat using materials, tools and knowledge of the period & best biblical instructions and put it in the water. I'm thinking more along the lines of the (Discovery?) channel special on the (possible) historical Noah (King & merchant) who got caught in a flood and then had to flee his creditors to avoid being sold into slavery. I've always liked physical anthropology (from an amateur standpoint) and it would be neat to see what was and was not possible.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 11:29:46 AM PST
Angelus1967 says:
Some guy in the Netherlands has done that...although I am pretty sure he didn't load the 2x2 on it! Here's one of the stories on it:
http://www.squidoo.com/noahsarkreplica

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 11:36:18 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 11:40:21 AM PST
Bubba says:
He built his "ark" on top of surplus steel barges and it has a steel frame -- both of which are MAJOR structural items and neither of which would have been available at that time. It would also need propulsion, either with an engine on the "ark" or from tug boats; also not available at that time.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 11:39:19 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 11:40:16 AM PST
Sceptic says:
I agree totally. Practical archaeology.
How about also an "Eden project". A boat big enough, using modern technology, with all species/kinds in viable numbers to survive. How enourmous would that have to be?

Posted on Jan 8, 2012, 12:51:30 PM PST
noman says:
Here's the video I was thinking of. Discovery Channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyq48bTLQ5s

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 2:18:08 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 2:26:12 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 2:42:17 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 2:43:33 PM PST
noman says:
RE: "MFEH says:..." <completely missing the point>

"...So, what did you learn or contributed to our knowledge other than misleading others?
Picking on Noah and his Ark?

Could you build a paper Ark, for God's sake?"

**The problem is *NOT* whether Dr. Paul S. J. Smith could build a paper ark, but could *anyone* (baring supernatural/magic assistance which is outside the purview of science.) could build an ark as delineated in the Christian Bible. My suggestion was:
1) Build an ark a) according to biblical plans and/or b) best available ship building knowledge of the time using tools and materials available
2) See if it will float
3) See how long it will float
4) Above with max cargo of people/animals

Not sure how that's "picking on Noah and his Ark" to simply see if the darn thing can be built and will float. Frankly the scientific consensus appears to be no it can't. More interestingly I note that among all the Ark recreations that appear to exist, no one is actually putting them in the water.

"The impossible voyage of Noah's Ark"
http://ncse.com/cej/4/1/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 3:05:35 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jan 8, 2012, 3:06:45 PM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 3:55:15 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 4:10:07 PM PST
noman says:
RE: "Mohamed F. El-Hewie says:
noman wrote:"Frankly the scientific consensus appears to be no it can't. "
===============================
The science you learned all your life is the product of ancient beliefs.

Had you been born in Noah's times, you would have believed that your mere survival depends entirely on unseen spirits. You cannot claim any superiority over ancient folks because their beliefs sound remotely congruent with yours."

**Which is even less relevant than the last post. What Noah did or did not believe is beside the point. It's a purely engineering question...Could the ark, as described in the bible with tools and techniques of the time, be built and would it float? The second question, (assuming yes to Q1) what's the max. cargo/endurance of the vessel and crew? While no one has built a working ark replica, there's a fair amount of data on wooden ships and livestock carrying capacity. Using that information and what is known of ship building of the period the answer is not simply no but <!!!!> NO!. However it would be interesting to duplicate what is possible and see how well it matches models.

You are:
Not. Even. Wrong.
again.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 5:19:34 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 5:19:47 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 7:01:55 PM PST
Papawaron says:
A good review of Christian Physics, Mohamed......not a lot different than German Physics in the thirties.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 7:09:51 PM PST
Yog-Sothoth says:
noman: "It's a purely engineering question...Could the ark, as described in the bible with tools and techniques of the time, be built and would it float?"

Perhaps - if this question, as asked by Noah (Bill Cosby) can be answered: "Riiiight....what's a cubit?"

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2012, 8:23:57 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2012, 8:24:40 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jan 8, 2012, 11:04:00 PM PST
Sceptic says:
So tell us MH :- What great scientific discoveries did Moses,Muhammad and Jesus make?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2012, 12:09:24 AM PST
Re el-Hewie, 1-8 8:23 PM: "his wish that the bible was untrue." No need to wish this; it's a done deal [1].

1. McKinsey, Biblical Errancy. A bug list running over 800 pages.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2012, 12:10:08 AM PST
noman says:
RE: "Mohamed F. El-Hewie says:
noman poses a common problem with atheists by asking an engineering question about a biblical story while Sir Isaac Newton relied entirely on the Bible in formulating the three laws of physical sciences. Newton's laws erected the discipline of engineering in its modern state. "

**Wow...you...are...not...even...wrong. Do you just make stuff up or you have help? For example, assuming you were correct about how Newton developed the calculus (you are not, but let's pretend) you have forgotten Leibniz, who took in many ways a different track in developing the calculus. And it's his basic notation still in use. Returning to your original statement...do you have anything to back up that statement? There's a pretty fair documentation for the development of Newton's idea (all those notebooks in the British Museum and such) so you should have no trouble documenting your claim. Please provide notebook and page numbers with perhaps a brief excerpt from each. **

RE: "...Further, noman wishes that his question should be addressed by someone who could fund the Ark project such that noman could fulfill his wish that the bible was untrue..."

** Why would I care if the bible is true or untrue? Nothing I can do about it either way. I never understood the thinking that assumes God is going to alter the universe to suit thousands of prayers sent up at random. The universe would get just a tad chaotic if God was changing things every few seconds because some hairless biped was sending up a burnt offering or on his/her knees praying. And what do you do when the prayers conflict? At any rate, since I find trying to untangle such philosophical concepts both mind numbingly Byzantine and futile I don't worry about them. Instead I concentrate on things that are productive and soluble. Like how big can you build an ark? As for the money...I think a Kon-tiki type project is perfectly feasible and fundable to investigate the state of maritime art at that period. However, turn it around... people are already putting money into creationist theme parks with land locked arks. Why not actually build one and prove the doubters wrong?
1) Don't care if the bible is right or wrong. In either case the scientific method works and will keep on working.
2) No skin off my nose if the ark floats or sinks. It's an interesting experiment, but not in my field so my interest is only mild.
3) In terms of methodology, I am very interested. If you want to know how many teeth a horse has, catch a few and count the teeth. If you claim that an ark was built carrying two of each animal (or 7 pair clean, two unclean...or something like that.) then build the feckin' boat, load it with livestock and see if it floats. If it floats....huzzaa...score one for the good guys. If it sinks (as I think it will), that simply means that boat, built that way doesn't work and it's back to the drawing board. But *that* is the was science works and *this* is the science forum.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2012, 3:12:51 AM PST
I am only not down-voting Hewie's post about Galileo, Newton, and Einstein because if it becomes hidden, it might be less obvious to casual observers exactly how "eccentric" Hewie's orbit is...
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 29 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  45
Total posts:  716
Initial post:  Jan 8, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 11, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers