The Ark, the Flooding, and, Earth's Mass ?...

[CerebralEcstasy]

But coincidence is not supportive of the Biblical story. There are many examples of catastrophic floods in history, and easy explanations that do not require supernatural intervention to find their causes. There is increasing evidence supporting the notion that the Black Sea Flood did indeed occur around 5000-7000 years ago, right when modern man was exanding throughout the world. Given the fact that living next to this large sea would have been very advantageous to beings that were becoming sophisticated social groups with advanced methods of hunting and fishing, this catastrophe alone would have seemingly "killed virtually all of humanity" and would naturally find its way into historical lore that was just beginning then on the edge of recorded history.

 

There are numerous examples that have been found of glacial warming floods that defy imagination like the Hudson River Valley, and Missoula, Montana, showing these to be unimaginable, but actually quite easy to produce, leading one to more likely conclude that there may have been even earlier events that could have become part of human oral history long before any written historical evidence would have been produced.

 

Its also notable that these geological events provide a solid model for predicting what would have happened in a "global flood" showing that the "reforming" of entire mountain ranges as described above would have required supernatural intervention to occur.

 

Less awe inspiring, but just as interesting,

Buffy

 

Agreed, it is an interesting subject for certain.

 

I suspect this could be better laid to rest if one of the archaelogical finds were to unearth the ark. A boat at the top of one 'mountain of Ararat' would succinctly put the matter to rest.

[Buffy]

I suspect this could be better laid to rest if one of the archaelogical finds were to unearth the ark. A boat at the top of one 'mountain of Ararat' would succinctly put the matter to rest.

Sure, but as with most conspiracy theories myths, this one is "safe" because its highly unlikely that anything made of wood would survive 5000 years, unless it had been almost immediately sunk in a peat bog or other oddity of nature that would preserve it, which is of course highly unlikely....

 

A good conspiracy is unprovable. I mean, if you can prove it, it means they screwed up somewhere along the line, :D

Buffy

[tmaromine]

@CraigD: I'll read some more on the Hydroplate theory... A local flood could very well have occurred, but I believe the Bible says it as worldwide, and over Everest – no local flood could cover Everest. ;) And in any manner, a flood of any Earthly form couldn't've been predicted in those times, making time to build a vessel...

 

~~~

 

@InfiniteNow: For Noah, a ship was easier. :D

 

 

tmaromine,

Please read original response. This is why religion frustrates so many scientists so very frequently.

 

Step 1: Ask question.

Step 2: Receive answer.

Step 3: Ignore answer, ask question again until preconceived notions are acquiesed.

Rince, lather, repeat...

 

So: I ask, I receive, I re-ask, I accept it somewhat, repeat until assurance ? Like what I'm doing now ?..

 

~~~

 

@CerebralEcstasy: Long indeed. ;)

 

That whole thing is mostly saying, that there were no clouds, and no precipitation. . .but rather a 'glassed' Earth. Oh, and no rainbow.

 

If that much water – especially as vapour – were floating in the atmosphere, could not some rainbow, or light fracturing be seen ?

 

And, pretend Earth is not affected by radiation any more, at least on our ground level: could a human today in the modern world last 900 years, and presumably more, since we're in an age of medicine ? I don't think radiation is what's killing us so fast... (7,000 years ago, or so, did the preChrist world have an accurate calendar ?, did they borrow from the Egyptians ? These 600 and 900 year lifespans aren't misinterpreted, are they ?)

 

Even reservoired, does Earth simply have enough water to raise sea levels another 8km ?... From sea level, up in the atmosphere 8km would be a larger volume than if we started at sea level and went into the Earth, since Earth is a sphere. So for that much water to come out from underneath, wouldn't there be some big holes, or some thing ?

 

~~~

 

@Boerseun:

I don't think there's a big mystery here.

 

I well agree with you. . .but everyone doesn't.

 

~~~

 

@CerebralEcstasy:

Further to the statement that flood myths are global...I pilfered the following information.

 

 

A Whole World Destroyed! - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site

(I tried to copy the table, but it didn't post well)

 

 

If you notice....while all of them differ in 1-10......all of them state there was a destruction by a flood, and that only a small amount of mankind survived.

 

Interesting coincidence that all of these peoples, from different areas of the world have this parallel in each of their legends.

 

By different peoples from different areas of the world having the same myth, I don't know if you're supporting the idea that some real world-flood occurred or not (I'd assume not, by your use of 'myth' ?). . .but, someone hearing a storey of a god flooding the planet, and then a great flood occurs in their own civilisation, quite definitely seems like they simply thought they saw the whole world flooding in front of them, and more simply said that a deity flooded the world.

 

~~~

 

@Buffy: So, you're pretty much saying that, they saw a flood that caused great disaster, and figured for themselves that it was the work of a deity ?..

 

~~~

 

@CraigD:

In my experience, a vessel resting on soon-to-be-flooded ground is not a good place to be in a flood. Massive floods usually involve strong currents and large amounts of floating debris. Photos of the aftermaths of modern floods typically include spectacular examples of the fate of boats swept up in them, which usually involves some sort of being dashed to bits and washed into a debris pile. Though I’ve known some people who have survived floods clinging to small boats, their experiences were more along the line of surviving a boat wreck than a comfortable, planned boat ride.

 

But say a football field of a boat was built, could it not be "large enough" (does that even have any thing to do with whether ship lasts in the water ?) to stay afloat, even after hit by some giant wave ?, and it also was rather flat at the bottom, from depictions I've seen of it, so could that help it ?

 

If these stories are reasonable accurate retelling of actual events, you’d expect the survivors to be those who fled to high ground, not those who boarded a huge boat in the flood’s path. As none of the flood stories I’ve read describe Noah or his equivalent having cleared the surrounding country of debris, built barriers to lessen floodwater speed, etc., I wonder how realistic their narative could be. In short, using ancient ship building materials and techniques, is it even possible to build a large vessel that could survive a flood like the Missoula flood or the Black Sea deluge?

 

Now, remember, we're speaking of God's flood: there is no high grounds, for there shall be no ground. ;) :phones:

 

Sounds like a great MythBusters episode idea, except for the possible show-canceled-due-to-angry-religionists consequences.

 

(Twitches.) There would most definitely be some religionists... In my opinion – besides for those bibliteralists (er, Bible literists :D ), does one storey like this being refuted make someone think they have to throw their faith away ? It's just some 'God killing all mankind with some water and saving all animals and like 8 people', and, it isn't the only storey that has some 'heroism' or whatever in it ! I really wouldn't mind peoples' believes which differ from mine. . .but (pretending) if a Mythbusters ArkFlood-refuting show were to air, and then some religionist wanted it to not, it is being arrogant, by believing that everyone else must believe like you, and that no one should be allowed to see any thing that tries to deter the "truth". This part of peoples' beliefs, I've had enough of...

 

~~~

 

@CerebralEcstasy and Buddy:

 

I heard that the Ark had a steel haul ?, but that would've very likely rusted 'by now', if it even existed, aye ?...

 

I like the conspiracy-being-able-to-be-proved line. ;)

[CraigD]

But say a football field of a boat was built, could it not be "large enough" (does that even have any thing to do with whether ship lasts in the water ?) to stay afloat, even after hit by some giant wave ?, and it also was rather flat at the bottom, from depictions I've seen of it, so could that help it ?

The main peril to a boat in flood conditions is not giant waves, but being driven by strong current into protruding or submerged hazards, and either broken by the pressure of the current or by large debris carried by it. The large a vessel of a given material is, the greater its vulnerability to such hazards. So, had Noah’s Ark-building instructions been based on sound engineering, they would have called for making many small boats to survive the initial deluge, then be gathered and lashed together when these hazards has passed.

I heard that the Ark had a steel haul ?

Genesis 6:14 is pretty explicit about God’s construction orders for Noah – a hull made of gopherwood, sealed with pitch (tar). As the wikipedia link explains, there’s little consensus among bible scholars about what “gopherwood” actually is, but it’s likely safe to assume that it isn’t steel. Given that the period generally ascribed to the Noah story is thought to be around 3500 BC, the transition from the stone age to the Bronze age, the best metal Noah could have managed would have been bronze, and that only for small parts and tools, if at all. It would be another thousand years before even royalty had small iron weapons, with steel in any quantity not appearing for another two thousand, at the earliest.

 

Most of the images we now have of Noah’s Ark depict it having a curved, plank-clad hull with a small superstructure, similar to the sort built by post-1000 AD Europeans, except without masts or sails, like this

This is almost certainly a relic of the post-1000 AD artists who made these images lack of knowledge of the appearance of boats of 3-4 thousand years earlier. These were either dugout canoes, like this

or essentially rafts, typically built of reeds sealed with tar, with houses built on top of them, like this

or this

.

 

Despite these primitive materials and techniques, these boats could be very large and bear great weights – there’s evidence of the large stone blocks used to construct ancient Egyptian pyramids having been transported on such raft/boats, of lengths over 100 m. Note that the original writers of Genesis, having been Egyptian slave laborers, would have been familiar with such vessels, and would likely have imagined Noah’s Ark looking like a particularly impressive one of them.

 

People of this period had a limited understanding of what makes a boat float, and appear to have relied on the principle that bundles of a natural material observed to float well, such as reeds, would itself float well. Sealing this material with tar, as the Genesis 6 account describes, would have represented a state-of-the-art boat-making practice.

[tmaromine]

Quite interesting. So even if there were the Ark, it had a small chance of survivnig wholely...

 

I don't know why I was stuck on a football field being about 300 yards, but I guess it's mostly 120 yards. So, a 120 yard 'ark' could've been built.

[CerebralEcstasy]

What I found most interesting in presentation of flood stories from many traditions is not that items 2 and 5 (“Destruction by a flood” and “Few of mankind survive”) were common to the 14 selected traditions – these traits are common to verified modern catastrophic floods (assuming “mankind” to refer to a local population) – but that all but the “South America – Quechua” stories include item 6 (“Saved in a vessel”).

 

In my experience, a vessel resting on soon-to-be-flooded ground is not a good place to be in a flood. Massive floods usually involve strong currents and large amounts of floating debris. Photos of the aftermaths of modern floods typically include spectacular examples of the fate of boats swept up in them, which usually involves some sort of being dashed to bits and washed into a debris pile. Though I’ve known some people who have survived floods clinging to small boats, their experiences were more along the line of surviving a boat wreck than a comfortable, planned boat ride.

 

If these stories are reasonable accurate retelling of actual events, you’d expect the survivors to be those who fled to high ground, not those who boarded a huge boat in the flood’s path. As none of the flood stories I’ve read describe Noah or his equivalent having cleared the surrounding country of debris, built barriers to lessen floodwater speed, etc., I wonder how realistic their narative could be. In short, using ancient ship building materials and techniques, is it even possible to build a large vessel that could survive a flood like the Missoula flood or the Black Sea deluge?

 

Sounds like a great MythBusters episode idea, except for the possible show-canceled-due-to-angry-religionists consequences.

 

 

If we're assuming they are an accurate retelling of events, then we'd also have to assume the reason as to why there was a flood in the first place.

 

Noah was a man of faith, he built the ark because God TOLD him to. Having this faith, he'd also have the necessary building materials, or find them because he didn't doubt for one minute that God was going to flood the world like he said.

 

In all honesty, I don't even know if the bible states Noah's occupation. To my knowledge he wasn't a ship builder, but he was given strict instructions on how to build the boat.

 

If we're still assuming that God is giving him the instructions...not only would the thing float....it could have flew if he wanted it to *laughs*

[tmaromine]

If we're still assuming that God is giving him the instructions...not only would the thing float....it could have flew if he wanted it to *laughs*

 

 

Yes, we must presume all possibilities.

[Turtle]

Yes, we must presume all possibilities. :D

 

Even the ridiculous ones. :eek: :hyper:

 

If we're assuming they are an accurate retelling of events, then we'd also have to assume the reason as to why there was a flood in the first place.

 

Noah was a man of faith, he built the ark because God TOLD him to. Having this faith, he'd also have the necessary building materials, or find them because he didn't doubt for one minute that God was going to flood the world like he said.

 

In all honesty, I don't even know if the bible states Noah's occupation. To my knowledge he wasn't a ship builder, but he was given strict instructions on how to build the boat.

 

If we're still assuming that God is giving him the instructions...not only would the thing float....it could have flew if he wanted it to *laughs*

 

Bible trivia from the hip it is then! :hihi: I recall Noah was a bit of an alchoholic according to holy scripture. Then wasn't there some hanky-panky wit da laaadies? I seem to also recall it took the faithful ol' sot 100 years to complete the craft and outfit it.

 

Thats +3 for me I think, but I don't recall Noah's occupation so -1. But wait! Wood will support roughly 10% more than its weight when floating in water, depending on species. Given 100 years and god giving him the finger to point the way, maybe gopher wood is cork from the cork oaks of Portugal? This led Noah to invent the first wine cork. ;) :D

[tmaromine]

100 years to make ? I guess Noah had to have been 600...

 

Still, let no radiation penetrate Earth, and us, and that still would not give us a 500-800 year boost in age, aye ? I mean, I don't think we're walking through some nuclear reaction in the air...

 

It still makes no sence to me, why God would kill the planet (save a few chosen and all two of all animals) and not just get rid of Adam and Eve when it was at the beginning. I mean, killing two because they're "sinful" – and were the first to sin – makes more sence then waiting for a population, no ?... I guess that is fit for another forum, but unless God likes screwing with our mental states, we're either going to go crazy at what he likes to do, or there just be no being to screw with our heads....

 

I know I asked many questions ; I hope some sound answers will keep coming. (My current interest is in the idea that, land-level of Earth would be cold/freezing if after 80 days, 8km high waters receded in minutes and reshowed land ?... At least, it deffinately would have destroyed some animals' ecosystems and stuff ; you know, I guess Noah didn't have to take fish onboard... )

 

Yes... All 'possibilities' must be taken into consideration. . .so that the ludicrous ones can be quickly refuted.

[ughaibu]

The story of Noah is ridiculous, it's only this year that I've realised that there are people who believe it, a fact that is difficult to accept because it's quite depressing.

God created the universe in a week, why bother with the Ark? Save Noah and family, kill all people and animals then create the animals again, would've been the sensible procedure.

How did the sloths get to Noah? How about the koalas?

I'm pretty sure the viability of a ship the size of the Ark has been refuted, but I'm not looking for any references as this really is a subject that exceeds my tolerance for silliness.

[Boerseun]

You can stay right about anywhere in the world, and chances are that sometime in your life, you'll experience a huge storm, resulting in a flood. Even in the deserts, flash floods are not unknown. And you will tell your kids about it. And they will tell their kids. Every single spot on Earth is dependent on the will of the atmosphere; which is utterly unpredictable, more so for a guy 5,000 years ago than the early morning weatherman.

 

These stories will grow, and as your community spreads out and you meet up with your neighbours, they've got similar stories to tell. Eventually you believe it must have been a world-wide flood, because everybody tells the same stories about their ancestors experiencing this big flood. No mystery, though. There is not enough water on Earth to achieve what Genesis will have you believe, neither frozen nor liquid.

[CerebralEcstasy]

The story of Noah is ridiculous, it's only this year that I've realised that there are people who believe it, a fact that is difficult to accept because it's quite depressing.

God created the universe in a week, why bother with the Ark? Save Noah and family, kill all people and animals then create the animals again, would've been the sensible procedure.

How did the sloths get to Noah? How about the koalas?

I'm pretty sure the viability of a ship the size of the Ark has been refuted, but I'm not looking for any references as this really is a subject that exceeds my tolerance for silliness.

 

It seems a lot of things exceed your tolerance for silliness, so why bother to comment? One would think that if something was inconsequential to person, they wouldn't even bother to dignify it with a response.

[ughaibu]

Certainly my tolerance has reduced with (recent) exposure to silliness. I'm a member of a society that includes people who believe this nonsense, the fact that it's silly does not imply that it's inconsequential.

[maikeru]

Wouldn't the Ark sink beneath the waves if it did have to bear the weight of all "breathing" or "creeping" things on earth if there are millions and millions of species? Or would it explode from the sheer volume of creepy, crawly, breathing things?

 

Genesis 7:14 They and every beast after its kind, and all the

 

KJV Bible

 

Genesis 7:14: "They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort."

7:15: "And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life."

 

Either way, one must meditate upon these sacred mysteries.

[CraigD]

If these stories are reasonable accurate retelling of actual events, you’d expect the survivors to be those who fled to high ground, not those who boarded a huge boat in the flood’s path. As none of the flood stories I’ve read describe Noah or his equivalent having cleared the surrounding country of debris, built barriers to lessen floodwater speed, etc., I wonder how realistic their narative could be.

If we're assuming they are an accurate retelling of events, then we'd also have to assume the reason as to why there was a flood in the first place.

I believe this is logically incorrect.

 

Consider the following hypothetical scenario:

• A house is struck by lightening and destroyed
  
• An account of this event, and the explanation that the lightning strike was due to the house’s resident having angered a particular god, is recorded in a document
  

It does not follow that, if this account is accurate in the factual details of the lightning strike, that the offered explanation is correct.

 

It is possible to accept that the various flood stories found throughout human culture come from accounts of actual floods, without accepting that these floods were the result of supernatural influences.

[CerebralEcstasy]

I believe this is logically incorrect.

 

Consider the following hypothetical scenario:

• A house is struck by lightening and destroyed
  
• An account of this event, and the explanation that the lightning strike was due to the house’s resident having angered a particular god, is recorded in a document

It does not follow that, if this account is accurate in the factual details of the lightning strike, that the offered explanation is correct.

 

It is possible to accept that the various flood stories found throughout human culture come from accounts of actual floods, without accepting that these floods were the result of supernatural influences.

 

Fair enough, I see your point.

 

What I wonder though is why all of these peoples considered it an act of God. Several different parts of the world, several different belief systems.....however all of them think God was supremely ticked off.

 

Where does such a notion arise from? Could it have came from Noah?

[Buffy]

What I wonder though is why all of these peoples considered it an act of God. Several different parts of the world, several different belief systems.....however all of them think God was supremely ticked off.

From prehistoric through almost modern times, religion and government were completely intertwined (heck look at the Bush administration! You have to be a graduate of Pat Robertson's university in order to get a job at the Justice Department! :hihi: ). Political power developed *directly* from the leader's ability to "speak for God" both to explain things that happen and warn people to follow his rules or they would pay the consequences. God is a concept that is at the core of political power! All good and evil that has no obvious explanation has to be the "work of God" and the leader is the only one who can influence God or get the word on how to stay on God's right side.

 

Thus its actually hard to come up with any *other* explanation that could have been formulated by these prehistoric social groups!

 

You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you, :doh:

Buffy