Noah's Ark v Modern Science

Noah's Ark versus Modern Science...

Is it impossible to get two of every kind of animal into the ark of the size the one Noah built?

First it needs to be established that Noah didn't have to. Out of all the living creatures known to the the science of biology, 60% live in the water. Out of that remaing 40% - 70 out of every 100 are insects.

The scriptures detail the measurements of the Ark to be:

- 300 cubits long.
- 50 Cubits wide.
- 30 Cubits in height.

There isnt available a precise conversion of this cubit to relative measurment standards used today.

Basic measurement of the early Hebrew's of a cubit was the length of a man's forearm, from the inside of the elbow to the tip of the longest finger.

Problem with this method is the obvious reason it would differ amongst various individuals and confusion would result. The condition forced the adoption of a defininate standard by the person and neighbouring races. In their later history, Israel had a standardised cubit.

Noahs Ark was built many years before the Jewish race began and the standard of the latter years do not help us in our examination here.

The scriptures details reference to the cubit of a man.

It is not known if Moses meant "a cubit" was the length of a man's forearms or another means. The standard is variable and may of been either one.

If the length of the ark was 300 times the length of a man's forearm, we have one problem based on a certain set of factors.

If the cubit here intended is the entire height of a man, we have a different problem with a varring set of factors.

If it was, how tall was the man?

The ark was a ship of gigantic size, that there is no question.

To be conservative, take as a potential cubit the measurement advocated by the famous scientist and archaeologist William Mathew Petrie.

He stated the oldest standard cubit was: 22 & 1 half inches.

On this basis the Ark of Noah was:

- 562 feet & 6 inches long.
- 93 feet & 6 inches wide.
- 56 feet & 6 inches high.

Built with a flat bottom, square on both ends, straight up the sides, there was no waste in space bow or stern, having a tremendous carry capacity of a little over 2 million, 958 thousand cubic feet.

This would be a tremendous cargo carrying capacitiy. In modern terms it would take a train of almost 100 freight cars to carry this enormous load or provide this space. The ancient stories of the Ark make it much larger than this model we are using.

Archeology has uncovered evidence of the flood and Ark from the monuments and tablets of lost civilisations. These ancient civilisations were founded by Noah as only himself and the humans who acompanied him on the Ark survived the flood according to scriptures.

So there should be a common origin found. Where there is a common origin found it can always be found in their common traditions.

As Noah and his sons were the only men saved alive all through the flood according to scriptures, this gives way to them having to have populated the entire earth with their prodigy.

Common legends all point to a common origin. Some are distorted by tradition, though they all testify to two truths.

First, there was a flood, and second, there was an ark.

Babylonian accounts of the Ark differ in detail. One ancient tablet described the Ark as six stories high with a mask on top. It had a rudder to steer with and the hole was crowned by a super structure or dwelling. In addition to the builder and his wife, there was a pilot who sailed with them.

The structure was perfical cubical, being 140 cubits each way. It was constructed in six stories, each having 9 compartments.

The clay tablets containing this account of the ark was dug up by George Smith in 1870 and were dated of from the year 3000 B.C.

The Greek historian Borosus gives an exaggerated account of the Ark. He describes it as 3000 ft long, 12000 ft wide, though doesn't provide a height.

Many other accounts from the ancients could be introduced though we have established there is a common trend in accounts of the great Ark across many differnt people's.

So the question is, are the scriptures account a fairy tale or just the accurate and detail of the genuine account.

The fact is that most people who claim that two of all those animals could never had fit into the ark of Noah have two outstanding problems in supporting their argument.

1. They don't know how many animals there were in Noah's day to put on the ark.

2. They have no idea of the size of the ark.

So the argument is it is not believed that a number of animals of which they do not know could not get onto an ark the size of which they do not know.

So therefore they will base what they know on what they don't know.

Without question the Ark was the largest vessel ever floated prior to the building of giant liners of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Because of its square construction it could carry a 3rd more cargo than any modern vessel that equaled it in size and dimension's.

When modern engine room's, cruise quarters, control stations, life boats, saftey belts, cabins, gyms, knife edge bows and rounded sterns are all deducted. An ark of the size set forth in the bible; 562 ft by 93 ft by 63 ft lets say would carry a much greater load than any of these ships with the approx dimensions sailing on the sea's today.

A second factor can be found in the size of the load. This factor is variable as the factor of capacity.

The exact number of animals carried in the ark can never be determined by science. There may have been more kinds of animals living at the time of the great flood. Certain is there could not have been less than living now.

Birds, cattle or creeping things are the only orders mentioned. The others are grouped under the head. Living thing of all flesh.

Under the animal classified clean there were to be 14 (7 pairs) and 1 pair of each unclean animal.

Noah was not under the necessity of finding room for every variety and every specimen of animal and bird alive today.

When we see this, the problem of the Ark is simplified.The specific command is of each kind.

Kind is species and may generally be described as those that can cross breed with fertility. Between any two kind there is a line of demarcation closley drawn and none may cross that line. The living things which can cross breed or hybridise with fertility are all related to that genus or kind and undoubtedly arose from the same parent ancestral stalk.

The many varieties we see today have come by the process of mutation.

Is this evolution?

Evolution is transmutation as long as the mutant or varient or variety under discussion does not cross that line of demarcation and become some other kind it is just development and growth - it is not evolution.

There is a tendancy to variation in every species.

The law of Mendel is based on observation of this process.

A common example of this process we can site is the dahlia (flower).

The dahlia reproduces from a root clump which is erroneously called the bulb which it is not as its name suggests at all. This root clump reproduces true to its type.

If you have red dahlia's in your garden this year and you save the root clumps to plant the following season. From the root clumps of the res dahlia, you would get red dahlia's of that type and variety.

However the dahlia also produces seeds. Whn the seeds are planted from a red dahlia, you may get a dozen different color's of dahlia. None of which will be red.

Of these mutants or varieties, about 2% will fix themselves as a new type and develop a root clump. That is established. Thus new varieties of dahlias are added to the market year to year.

These new dahlia additions remain dahlia's. They don't evolve into onions or potatoes e.c.t.

As long as the dahlia produces new kinds of dahlia and not something else, we are dealing with mutation. When the dahlia from infinate number of changes that is not a dahlia, we will then have a case of transmutation - that would be evolution.

As far as the the records of science go, there is no evidence of transmutation ever occuring one time, one place in history.

The theory of evolution is just that. A 'theory' with no facts to back it up.

If Noah took into his ark a pair of pure strain of every available creature. The varieties would have arisen by process of mutation.

Species are few, varieties are many.

Animals such as ducks and crocodiles would have survived outside the Ark as the water ecosystem provided a sufficient live food base for those alike.

If half the ark had been filled with food and 14 individuals of every true species inhabiting the world were stored in the other half section of the ark. There would have been an average of 175 cubic feet of space for every individual.

A 200 pound man requires only 15 cubic feet space of living quarters.

Noah may not have had to provide space of that accord for every animal.

Noah had 120 years by most estimates to prepare for food provisions.

Although the builder was Noah, the architect was God. The scientific accuracy of the ark is attested by its dimensions. The ancients did not build ships like the 'ark'.

The ark was exactly 6 times long as it was wide. Upon these identical proportions, naval vessels are built today. In the days of the second world war, the pride of the Navy was the USS New Mexico (BB-40) and that great ship was built on the dimensions of Noah's Ark. Same is true with modern aircraft carriers today.

The ancients did not follow this plan. The ancient phoenicians were the fathers of navigation and ship craft and according to records thry built a boat twice as long as its width.

When Rome entered the first punic wars, she had a fleet of 330 vessels. These were built after a plan which varied from a length of 110 feet, with a width of 11 feet to a maximum of 130 feet long to 12 feet wide or a general rule of ten times the width of the length.

None of the ancients seemed to construct on the dimensions of the Ark.

However modern science figured out in time for WWII that the dimensions for ship building given by God to Noah were the ideal for contruction.

There are also Christians that believe dinosaurs were on the ark...

I have read that there were Velociraptors on the Ark and they caused all kinds of mayhem.

the bible is a fairy tale

the word theory has 2 meanings

in science the theory of evolution has a set of principles that explain facts.

a theory in the bible is some desert goat herder telling you about the voices he heard in his head.

check this out, it is all you need to know about the bible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E
 

Maybe he did hear voices in his head. They had some really good peyote back in those days. You could wander the desert for days really doing some deep soul searching while tripping your balls off.

There is no doubt there were flying reindeer on Noah's Ark.  Otherwise, Santa Clause wouldn't be able to get around the world on Jesus's birthday to deliver toys to all the children who have been nice.

 

i always wondered if any of the animals suffered from an impalement type injury from being packed in that thing so tightly with the two unicorns.  does the bible mention this?

Noah's arc is a crock of bullshit.

But, the universality of cataclysmic flood "myths" across the globe is incredibly strong evidence that these are not myths at all and may be based on real events. Ancient civilizations may well have been lost as well.

I remember being a kid and watching the movie, in search of noahs ark in 1978 or something.  we all had a debate with our 12 yr old brain power afterwords and decided the whole thing was shit.

in order to not believe in evolution, you would have to believe noah got 2 of every species on that ship.  there are over 100 species of horses, i could go on and on, but i think i make my point.

on a side note, is there any place that lists which stories are supposed to be taken literally and which ones arent?  whenever you ask a religious person about something that doesnt make sense or is contradictory, they always say, thats not supposed to be taken literally.

if you believe a man rose from the dead, then ole Noah craming two of every creature into the ark seems like no big deal

Bingo!   Also, creatures evolve their species, therefore you wouldn't need every specific type of monkey, amphibian, reptile, bird, etc.  They will eventually spawn new types of species due to adaptation much like we see today. Humans are doing the same thing w/ so many bi-racial marriages. Different looks, styles, skin colors mixing, etc.

[Quote: Originally Posted by Crowkillers] There are also Christians that believe dinosaurs were on the ark...

 

In short - if dinosaurs were extinct before the deluge, then the enormous force from a coastless current would have destroyed any fossilized remains. Based on the laws of science, dinosaurs could not have perished prior to the event in question.
 
By design of Christian belief, science has not just endorsed and supported this version, though driven it. Thus being the reason as to why you would have heard talk of their inclusion on the Ark from Christian voice.
 
The very presence of dinosaur fossils today is (in part) evidence of the existence up to the time of the flood.
 
All dinosaurs hatched from eggs. The largest dinosaur eggs are about the size of a soccer ball.
 
The healthiest of any species of animal are the young babies. They are stronger, speediant and more apt to reproduce. They also sleep more, and eat less. These would have been the ideal target for their transportation on the Ark.
 
There are only about 30 different "kinds" of dinosaurs (there are many more species). It wouldn't have been required to take Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurus and Camarasaurus on the Ark. It would only require two members of the Sauropod kind.
 
There would be about 60 dinosaurs total (two of each of the 30 kind) on the Ark.
 
Mainstream dinosaurs of attraction such as T-rex and Brachiosaurus in relation to their size are not a true representative of the vast number of dinosaur species. The majority of dinosaurs were no larger than today's domesticated house cat.

its bs if they believe the ark occurred within the last 6000 years.  dinosaurs went extinct a long time before that

now im starting to wonder if this is a joke.  i really hope you arent serious.  you really believe there are no fossil from before the flood?  let me guess, you also do not believe in carbon dating

Carbon dating kind of a fairy tale to thier shane old buddy.  How are we supposed to believe some old fossils are billions of years old ?  

I know evolution is such a joke...I mean who has watched MUTANT PLANTET on Disc Science, those dudes must be describing lies...What animal/species evolves from conditions created by environment????  I doubt that madadascar, let alone certain species can evolve, since that is so much a part of africa, or hell those mountains in Japan must never have allowed certain species to develop or evolve ...
If I believed in religious concepts I'd say the hawaii'n Islands don't exist, but they do so maybe the volcanoes created can discount those issues...If that's the case then maybe species of different DNA replications allowed for the certain species to dominate....I'm only talking some science/dna shit so discount my observations since it clearly doesn't hold up to thousands of years of philophy/writings that when written believed the earth was flat and was the center of the galaxy .....
Fuck only if I could prove the Earth was the center of the galaxy, though I have scientific data that those thoughts are so far from the truth,  but Hell I still believe so please call me an IDIOT

Ignorance of science is TRULY NO PROOF OF GOD I actually think it disproves any religious belief, and for those who really think god exists, I quote Stephen Colbert "if god didn't create god then oh shit who did"?????

If you understand the billions of stars in our own galaxy and understand the billions of galaxies then maybe I could listen to your viewpoint, but most god "believers" don't comprehend this complex I have little belief they comprehend the complexity of Life
Since I don't believe in GOD I ask those who do to please explain who taught them to believe in his existence....Also I ask have you read 1984 by Orwell??? You probably learned in a church and by your parents, damn dude that shit must be true since I've never heard of a church or someone's parents lie

C'mon all you follower's please explain your ignorance!!! WHY???

 But Noah forgot the unicorns  We got the green alligators and long neck geese humped back camel and the chimpanzee . But those dam unicorns were out playing and Noah had to close the door thats why we have no unicorns

I know how would a green alligator in dark swampy waters continue to thrive, or a geese w/ a long neck allowing it to dive deeper for fish, or hell a camel that could hold more water in a desert exist??? Fucking amazing that survival of the fittest seems to fit every mold of evolution I guess god created the shit, since the short necked geese are now extinct as well as camels w/ 1 hump!!!! God created it all so don't question my reasoning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD90xcg6UaA

Jersey...
How did my lab evolve from a wolf??? I know he wasn't a unicorn w/ his long stick horn, but songs and fables just provide me w/ more ignorance of the ignorant man

I guess those who believe god created everything cannot be persuaded w/ science since yes the shit may have existed at 1 time, but evolution and evolution's survival of the fittest may have washed them out...Do you find a unicorn or a swampy green alligator in the year 2011??? I don't doubt that crazy useless shit existed, but as darwin explained only the strong survive
So the pointless unicorn is no where to be seen, yet the dark green alligator in swamps is a beast only to be seen! Maybe your better question is "why my dog barks" but since my lab doesn't I wonder why you think unintelligent animals only fit your bill....They don't and many survive from the environment, evolution, so why do you sing about the belief of a unicorn, that doesn't exist????

so carbon dating only works up to a certain pt in time then it becomes unreliable?

ive asked this in another thread,

can any ID (intelligent designer) explain vestigial organs or carbon monoxide (CO) poising?