FT Magazine on AIG’s Ark project

| 83 Comments

Via NCSE’s Facebook page. A snippet:

The ark will sit next to a man-made lake whose waters will erupt sporadically in fiery explosions to simulate the breaking open of the fountains of the deep. But the ark will not set sail. Marsh could build a seaworthy vessel with the same techniques, he said, but non-biblical fire regulations require concrete stairwells and exits that mean his version would sink.

I want to see that wooden ark covered inside and out with pitch riding out those “fiery explosions.” Pitch burns really well.

83 Comments

Pitch burns really well

But the miracles take care of everything, speeding up radioactivity enormously while simultaneously poofing away all of the heat. Oh, and the miraculous production of evolutionary patterns in designed organisms (and no, designed evolution answers nothing, it just raises questions, like WTF?) is a special poof that ID shares with YEC, too.

Fireproof pitch is a minor miracle by comparison with stuff like that.

Glen Davidson

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse. The ark was a floating box and not a boat. Like the ark of the covenant. That was the point about keeping a promise alive of eventual justice. By cross examination its wonderfully well documented that mankind collectively believed there had been a great flood that destroyed everything. The further you go back to written sources about ancient peoples origin stories the common thread is that originally there was this great flood. Just as it found be if it had been true. it would dominate a peoples memory. It there was no such stories then deniers would have a good point about why no story of such a great event! The Chinese , America’s iNdians, Greeks, and Mesopotamia , and so on all record this common story. In fact it could only be this way and is sooooo pregnant that it was a historical event.

Therefore all creatures fossilized below the k-t line, this YEC’ers boundary, were killed and covered within the first days/weeks of the great flood. every dinosaur ever found in fossil form was alive when Noah entered the ark. Fossils are telling a great story of a sudden great covering and a strange type of planet before the flood. Its a great point to YEC to stress how all the planet is covered by sedimentary rock(75%) and this as evidence of the great flood and the origin of it. thus the fossils laid at once and there they are documenting a strange earth by present standards. finally the bible , Gods witness in good standing, says this is what happened. I insist and assure that the Ark did sail the ocean blue. This is why so many people believe this is true especially in North America. Its persuasive. Its very interesting.

Robert Byers said:

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse.

Fine!

terenzioiltroll said:

Robert Byers said:

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse.

Fine!

Double or nothing Byers doesn’t get this.

Dave Thomas said:

terenzioiltroll said:

Robert Byers said:

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse.

Fine!

Double or nothing Byers doesn’t get this.

He has been told several times, so he really has no excuse. Unless of coarse its on porpoise.

Robert Byers said:

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse.

The Noah’s didn’t use flames for lighting, cooking and heating?

Or rather, didn’t use open flames twice after the first episode with methane collecting in pockets below decks?

I supposed they used electric lighting, powered via Baghdad batteries.

Or maybe electric eels hooked up to glowworms.

Hmmmm.…

So while reading the article I was to learn that building the pseudo-ark will cost $73 million dollars.

Now, why might that be?

Well, much of that probably goes to buying materials (lumber, steel, cement, etc) and labor (dozens of carpenters and builders operating heavy machinery) all to prove building the Ark was possible.

Somehow, I don’t remember Genesis saying to Noah “get thee to the lumber yard with your Bobcat, and hire thee a couple dozen laborers who are good with a miter saw and a welder or two while you’re at it”.

My modest proposal, at the entrance to the Ark there should be a list of the names of all the labor they used, plus the power tools, plus pictures of the cranes, and a tally of the weight of dressed trees that came in a dimensional lumber. And maybe a picture of the construction cranes. Just to demonstrate how Noah might do it.

If the water that covered the highest mountains came from outer space, the rate of energy deposition over a 40-day period would have been about 400 megatons of TNT per second per square meter of the Earth’s surface (including the surface of the ark).

If you don’t like that scenario and would like to believe the water came up from the lithosphere, then there was all that superheated water that had been in contact with temperatures on the order of the softening temperature of olivine, or roughly 1000 degrees Celsius.

If you don’t like either of the above scenarios and would like to believe the lithosphere simply slid around and scrunched up the continents and dug the ocean basins, then you will be dealing with energies even larger. It’s not easy to push around that much olivine and reconfigure the entire surface of the Earth in just 40 days.

The pitch would have vaporized pretty quickly; as would everything else.

Mike Elzinga said:

If the water that covered the highest mountains came from outer space, the rate of energy deposition over a 40-day period would have been about 400 megatons of TNT per second per square meter of the Earth’s surface (including the surface of the ark).

If you don’t like that scenario and would like to believe the water came up from the lithosphere, then there was all that superheated water that had been in contact with temperatures on the order of the softening temperature of olivine, or roughly 1000 degrees Celsius.

If you don’t like either of the above scenarios and would like to believe the lithosphere simply slid around and scrunched up the continents and dug the ocean basins, then you will be dealing with energies even larger. It’s not easy to push around that much olivine and reconfigure the entire surface of the Earth in just 40 days.

The pitch would have vaporized pretty quickly; as would everything else.

Well Dr Smartypants, but see it wasn’t water! It was blood! All from Väinämöinen’s toe!

Checkmate!

Robert Byers said:

The ark didn’t come in touch with fire of coarse. The ark was a floating box and not a boat. Like the ark of the covenant. That was the point about keeping a promise alive of eventual justice. By cross examination its wonderfully well documented that mankind collectively believed there had been a great flood that destroyed everything. The further you go back to written sources about ancient peoples origin stories the common thread is that originally there was this great flood. Just as it found be if it had been true. it would dominate a peoples memory. It there was no such stories then deniers would have a good point about why no story of such a great event! The Chinese , America’s iNdians, Greeks, and Mesopotamia , and so on all record this common story. In fact it could only be this way and is sooooo pregnant that it was a historical event.

Therefore all creatures fossilized below the k-t line, this YEC’ers boundary, were killed and covered within the first days/weeks of the great flood. every dinosaur ever found in fossil form was alive when Noah entered the ark. Fossils are telling a great story of a sudden great covering and a strange type of planet before the flood. Its a great point to YEC to stress how all the planet is covered by sedimentary rock(75%) and this as evidence of the great flood and the origin of it. thus the fossils laid at once and there they are documenting a strange earth by present standards. finally the bible , Gods witness in good standing, says this is what happened. I insist and assure that the Ark did sail the ocean blue. This is why so many people believe this is true especially in North America. Its persuasive. Its very interesting.

but those stories are not biologicals, they is just being ink on papers so no one can be drawing biological conclusions from thems im sure of coarse that they are fine

the fossils is likenwisely not biologicals so they can in no wise being used to telling storieses upon the floodingly its not on porpoise that they are not to being that

i insist and assure that the ark was not biological eithers and so cannot be floating anywheres nohows im not caring at alls about how many peoples is believing in the magical arks or the alien abductions which is neither biologicals eithers

its persuasive of just the opposites of the magical ark to anyone with two brains to rub together and so not interesting in the leastest

phhht said:

Well Dr Smartypants, but see it wasn’t water! It was blood! All from Väinämöinen’s toe!

Checkmate!

So; stubbed his toe on the ark, did he?

It isn’t just the Ark that is bought for the $73 million. It’s the whole shebang. And they’re hiring Amish carpenters, who are among the few now able to erect large timber structures without steel fastenings, using notching, joining and pegging.

My grandfather would have had a field day. He was trained as a joiner when joinery meant “you don’t use nails or screws”, and he always used to express deep contempt for what is now called “carpentry”. No doubt the Amish will do a good job. Provided, of course, that the structure is bedded in concrete, thoroughly braced externally, and never has to contend with the shifting stresses of working in a seaway, or with warping and differential shrinkage and expansion rates that are inseparable from being partly immersed.

Floating boxes, now. I wonder if Byers has ever wondered why ships are not “floating boxes”?

Nah. That would require intellectual curiosity.

“That would require intellectual curiosity.”

So you are saying that Byers loses twice. I have to agree.

Breaking Science News From AIG Laboratories !

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Inquiring minds want to know !

Get your own copy hot off the presses from Answers Research Journal !

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Is there a distinct layer of dead bodies at about the right place in the geological column, and a complete absence of dead bodies in any layer older than that? ;)

Rikki_Tikki_Taalik said:

Breaking Science News From AIG Laboratories !

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Inquiring minds want to know !

Get your own copy hot off the presses from Answers Research Journal !

Wow; that thar reeserch jernel is sho nuf syntifik. Dint hafta go outsyd the bahbl one bit.

stevaroni said:

Hmmmm.…

So while reading the article I was to learn that building the pseudo-ark will cost $73 million dollars.

Now, why might that be?

Well, much of that probably goes to buying materials (lumber, steel, cement, etc) and labor (dozens of carpenters and builders operating heavy machinery) all to prove building the Ark was possible.

Somehow, I don’t remember Genesis saying to Noah “get thee to the lumber yard with your Bobcat, and hire thee a couple dozen laborers who are good with a miter saw and a welder or two while you’re at it”.

My modest proposal, at the entrance to the Ark there should be a list of the names of all the labor they used, plus the power tools, plus pictures of the cranes, and a tally of the weight of dressed trees that came in a dimensional lumber. And maybe a picture of the construction cranes. Just to demonstrate how Noah might do it.

I am prety sure that $73 million dollars is much more than Palestine’s gross national product 4000 years ago.

Robert Byers said:

The ark was a floating box and not a boat. Like the ark of the covenant.

Hmm. Well, kinda. This tale had precursors and evolved over time. Noah’s tale was borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh seems now to have possibly been a descendant of the tale of Atram-Hasis …

Atram-Hasis, a Sumerian king who lived before the flood and who is the Noah figure in earlier versions of the ark story. His god speaks to him as follows …

“Wall, wall! Reed wall, reed wall! Atram-Hasis, pay heed to my advice, that you may live forever! Destroy your house, build a boat; despise possessions And save life! Draw out the boat that you will built with a circular design; Let its length and breadth be the same.”

The tablet goes on to command the use of plaited palm fibre, waterproofed with bitumen, before the construction of cabins for the people and wild animals. It ends with the dramatic command of Atram-Hasis to the unfortunate boat builder whom he leaves behind to meet his fate, about sealing up the door once everyone else is safely inside …

“When I shall have gone into the boat, Caulk the frame of the door!”

The tablet describes a simple circular reed raft called a coracle which is still used sometimes even today in the middle east. The tablet that documents this tale is dated to about 3700 years ago. More information here … Relic reveals Noah’s ark was circular

Robert Byers said: By cross examination its wonderfully well documented that mankind collectively believed there had been a great flood that destroyed everything. The further you go back to written sources about ancient peoples origin stories the common thread is that originally there was this great flood. Just as it found be if it had been true. it would dominate a peoples memory. It there was no such stories then deniers would have a good point about why no story of such a great event! The Chinese , America’s iNdians, Greeks, and Mesopotamia , and so on all record this common story. In fact it could only be this way and is sooooo pregnant that it was a historical event.

Yeah, there’s a problem with this mish-mash of tales that supposedly show some kind of shared experience. First, almost none of these tales involve “origin stories”. Two, it’s absolutely no shock that many peoples have stories of floods. Here’s an experiment for you Robert. Get out a map. Any map that shows a large region with many large cities. Now, look at all those large-to-middle sized cities and tell me what they have in common. Have you guessed yet? No cheating! Go and look!

Ok, ok, I’ll give you the answer anyway. They all reside on water. Rivers, lakes, the ocean. Why is that you say? Well, how about because they are a source of food, transportation, and uhhhh water! Now where do floods occur? On flood plains upon which water travels to natural pathways (rivers) and reservoirs (lakes and oceans)? Humans have always lived in locations such as these. It defies logic, dear Robert, to think that any civilization that was advanced and long lived enough to leave behind some history would not have some memory of some type of local flood. It’s easy to say, see!, there are so many flood stories.

I invite you to demonstrate that they have any connection in time or for that matter, that all these stories speak of a global flood. It’s another annoying false canard.

Robert Byers said: Therefore all creatures fossilized below the k-t line, this YEC’ers boundary, were killed and covered within the first days/weeks of the great flood. every dinosaur ever found in fossil form was alive when Noah entered the ark. Fossils are telling a great story of a sudden great covering and a strange type of planet before the flood. Its a great point to YEC to stress how all the planet is covered by sedimentary rock(75%) and this as evidence of the great flood and the origin of it. thus the fossils laid at once and there they are documenting a strange earth by present standards.

It’s already been explained to you ad nauseum why the above cannot be true, yet you refuse to even consider the evidence. Evidence that has changed the minds of actual Christian geologists. This has been known for hundreds of years. You do not care about the truth Robert. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say, you do not care if your beliefs are true which is demonstrated by an unwillingness to even honestly consider that you may be wrong. This tale you hug so tightly to has evolved over time. Just like all tales do. Just like all of life does. Reality disagrees with that tale.

Among other matters, it has been explained ad nauseum to Robert Byers that the “k-t line” is an obsolete term. Yet he still parrots the “k-t line” anyway. Not that this is a surprise.

Anyway, for anyone else that is interested…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretac[…]ene_boundary

Robert, please do both yourself and all of us a favor, click this link Black Sea.

Or google “flooding of the black sea”, and you will find huge amounts of information you did’t know existed. Then continue using Google to learn more about the Gilgamesh Flood Myth, and all the other things you know nothing about.

Yours - and therefore our problem, is that you are very ignorant and don’t make the slightest effort at educating yourself.

The fact is, you can use Google and Wikipedia to learn all about all the things you know nothing about, which in your case amounts to almost everything worth knowing.

I should mention for Roberts benefit that I don’t think anyone believes that the story of Noah was pure fabrication. Like any tale it grows from a simple to a more complex story, the characters change, and new elements are adopted or changed with the progression. Many of them may well have a real but less grandiose event, a real person or composite of persons, and often real historical locations behind them. It would also be no surprise that a large enough event would indeed be the origin of parallel stories, but certainly this cannot be stretched as far as Roberts sources would have one believe. Flood stories do abound but they cannot be connected so casually as they are in this case.

To pick a random character and fable, Robin Hood, as far as I know it’s thought that there may well have been a real person or a composite of characters behind the fable that got only better as it was told in taverns and inns. I don’t think anyone would be surprised to find that Noah’s tale has a real but local event like the one discussed in the Black Sea document Rolf just linked to. One can easily imagine what it would be like for a more primitive people, most of whom likely never ventured more than several or tens of miles from their place of birth. For them it would have seemed as if the whole world had flooded and from their frame of reference indeed it had.

Seriously Robert, at least make an honest attempt to read the Wiki link on the Gilgamesh flood that Rolf has provided.

Rolf, I haven’t had the time to read through the Cahill document but I find it very interesting and definitely will. Thank you for that and for posting the more appropriate link to the Gilgamesh flood mythology available on Wikipedia as well.

While I’m at it, thank you Tenncrain for the link on Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary. I’d seen it commented on in the past when the K-T has been mentioned but never pursued the info on it. I’ll be reading that and perhaps more when I get the free time.

The problem is that in order to believe in a young earth and a world wide flood, you pretty much HAVE TO REMAIN IGNORANT of all of the evidence. Once you let a little flicker of doubt penetrate the total darkness you begin to see things all around you that you never noticed before. Robert can’t even be bothered to learn basic grammar, even after being corrected on the exact same mistake dozens of times. There is no way that he is ever going to try to examine any evidence and no way that it is ever going to convince him of anything even if he does screw up the courage to confront reality. I am sure that the only reason he is allowed to post here is to serve as an example of the degeneracy of the creationist mindset. (Of coarse I meant a loud).

Reality has left Robert behind. Fortunately, reality doesn’t care what he thinks.

Yeah, I know you’re right DS and that I’m on a fool’s errand. As aggravated as we become with him I can’t help but feel a little sorry for him. Mostly because in a number of categories he’s the polar opposite of straight up ankle-biters like FL or Ray. Ray is really flourishing over at Talk Rational lately. With Robert, I don’t feel like the few times I bother to engage him is a total loss as I usually learn something new from others. It also sharpens my arguments I may have elsewhere with those that actually can be reached. Perhaps there’s some value in potentially affecting the onlookers. Perhaps I’m full of it and fooling myself. *shrug*

Have I ever mentioned that when I think about the Chixulub impact I get this Buscemi-esque delight imagining being able to view the event unfold from a safe distance? Albeit without all the thermonuclear weapon humping.

Nearly everybody is willing to give up on a strict reading of the Bible on some subjects when it conflicts with modern understanding. One example is the Genesis story of Joseph in Egypt and the world-wide famine. I doubt that anyone today would insist that when the Bible says that people came from all the realms of the world to get grain from Egypt, one must believe that Australia and Alaska were being fed from Egypt’s storage.

Rikki_Tikki_Taalik said: …a more primitive people, most of whom likely never ventured more than several or tens of miles from their place of birth.

Up until a very few generations ago, almost nobody “ventured more than several or tens of miles from their place of birth.” The world, like the minds of creationists, was a very small place.

Henry J said:

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Is there a distinct layer of dead bodies at about the right place in the geological column, and a complete absence of dead bodies in any layer older than that? ;)

Current creation science has determined that at one time that was probably the case. However the post flood hydro-sorti-misation hydro-sorti-mated them. It’s a jumble out there.

Rikki_Tikki_Taalik said:

Yeah, I know you’re right DS and that I’m on a fool’s errand. As aggravated as we become with him I can’t help but feel a little sorry for him. Mostly because in a number of categories he’s the polar opposite of straight up ankle-biters like FL or Ray. Ray is really flourishing over at Talk Rational lately. With Robert, I don’t feel like the few times I bother to engage him is a total loss as I usually learn something new from others. It also sharpens my arguments I may have elsewhere with those that actually can be reached. Perhaps there’s some value in potentially affecting the onlookers. Perhaps I’m full of it and fooling myself. *shrug*

Have I ever mentioned that when I think about the Chixulub impact I get this Buscemi-esque delight imagining being able to view the event unfold from a safe distance? Albeit without all the thermonuclear weapon humping.

I did not mean to imply that you should not respond. I am sure that many here appreciate your responses, including myself. Although I think it might be better to respond on the bathroom wall most of the time, even if the administrators cannot be bothered to banish him there.

Rikki_Tikki_Taalik said:

Henry J said:

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Is there a distinct layer of dead bodies at about the right place in the geological column, and a complete absence of dead bodies in any layer older than that? ;)

Current creation science has determined that at one time that was probably the case. However the post flood hydro-sorti-misation hydro-sorti-mated them. It’s a jumble out there.

No, the structure of the fossil record has complex specified information, and thus had to be deliberately designed that way.

Hydro-sortimisation cannot violate the creationist laws of thermodynamics.

Henry J said:

Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Is there a distinct layer of dead bodies at about the right place in the geological column, and a complete absence of dead bodies in any layer older than that? ;)

Well, it would be pretty simple to figure out what the geological column should look like on a Noachian world.

First, it would be empty of all life forms for most of its depth. God created it de novo, so there’s no reason it parts of it would be made of thousands of feet of diatom skeletons.

Second, there should be a layer of about 2000 years of “normal” life (assuming things died). This should include dinosaurs intermingled with mammals.

Third, every mountain basin that existed 4000 years ago should have a hundred-foot deep pile of mixed bones and vegetation. In the Noachain world every living thing on earth died in a couple of weeks. As the waters receded all that organic detritus should get swept into catch basins, because that’ show floods work.

Donkeys, dinosaurs and Douglas firs should all be found in great heaping piles in the ancestral deep valleys of the world, and any carbon dating you do on them should agree within a few weeks.

So… Beyers, is this what we see?

stevaroni said:

Donkeys, dinosaurs and Douglas firs should all be found in great heaping piles in the ancestral deep valleys of the world, and any carbon dating you do on them should agree within a few weeks.

So… Byers, is this what we see?

No, but, then again, Robert Byers the Idiot For Jesus is not allowed to explain why this is not so.

stevaroni said:

Dave Luckett said:

The Ark was supposed to be 440 or so feet long. That means that its keel could not be supplied by any tree on earth. Hence, it would have to be joined. But no timber join can conceivably stand the flexing and twisting stresses of working in a seaway.

Actually (and I use that term loosely), almost any keel the Noah’s would have used would have to be joined.

As I was reminded quite recently while working with a friend install decorative timbers in his house, wood is heavy.

Lebanese cedar weighs about 30-35 lbs per cubic foot.

That means that a large beam, say 10 x 10” would weigh about 22 lbs/ft. This sets a low upper limit to how long a beam could be since it had to be cut, dressed, transported, and erected by 4 men, Since there were 4 men, one of which was pushing 90.

Now, reasonable people might ague whether that limit is 12 or 15 or maybe 20 feet, but it’s probably not 100.

I have no doubt that creationists will construct elaborate explanations about how the Noah’s could have used cranes and such (The AIG Ark will reportedly feature a conveyor belt to remove manure), but this in turn only raises the issue that Noah & Sons would have to both invent yet another technology (there would have been no large cranes in a world with no large buildings) but would have then had to build the cranes which themselves are large machines requiring the cutting, dressing and transportation of enormous timbers, the cultivation of enough hemp to weave ropes, the actual weaving of said rope, etc.

How long does it take for a bronze-age shepherd to carve a 1-foot pulley sheave out of a block of cedar with the tools of the era?

Oh - that’s right - they would first have to make the tools of the era.

How long does it take for a bronze-age shepherd (apparently the rare shepherd cross-skilled in boat-building) to learn the craft of bronze-age tool making?

As I was reading this, I kept thinking, “No, wait. That’s not right. The Romans certainly had (for example) cranes that could easily lift such things. They did it all the time.” Then the double-take kicked in. Oh right. That was the Rome of Jesus’ time. Noah was a couple thousand years earlier, well before any recorded use of cranes. Duh.

Actually, if you look here, you’ll find a creationist model builder showing the wheeled cranes that Noah presumably used for the construction of the Ark.

Dave Luckett said:

lkeithlu said:

I would love to see a marine architect’s analysis of how a wooden boat of this size would have to be constructed to survive the obvious wind and wave action that would occur on a planet that had no exposed landmass.

There is no such analysis. No vessel made in the manner and of the materials described in Genesis could conceivably float for more than a day or so.

No seaworthy fully wooden vessel the size of the Ark was ever made. The only ships ever constructed that approached that size were fastened, strapped, and reinforced with steel fittings. There certainly was an economic need for larger ships from the mid-seventeenth century on, at least, and in ships like the Vasa we see shipbuilders crowding the limits of the possible - but simply strength of materials and keel length requirements defeated them, once that size was reached.

In the later nineteenth century, some planked hulls were built that approached 300 foot in length. Any of them beyond 100 foot were either heavily braced, ribbed and reinforced with iron or steel, or else were unseaworthy, or both - and this was with steam pumps constantly working.

The Ark was supposed to be 440 or so feet long. That means that its keel could not be supplied by any tree on earth. Hence, it would have to be joined. But no timber join can conceivably stand the flexing and twisting stresses of working in a seaway. Even just an ordinary ocean swell would soon tear it apart. And that’s in an ordinary swell, not in the catastrophic flows of water envisaged in a world-wide flood and a deluge/upswelling that gouges out whole new ocean basins.

To get past this, Byers and his crowd can only evoke another class of miracles. God set the impossible aside and preserved the Ark. Just as God miraculously prevented its passengers and cargo from being steam-cooked by the energy released by this deluge, upswelling, and gouging of rock. This required God to set aside wholesale the laws of physics that he had ordained.

Well, why not? Miracles, even uncovenanted miracles, are like peanuts. You can’t stop with just one.

I hate to be pedantic (well, actually, I don’t hate it at all :-), but are you sure about the single-piece-of-wood keel thing? This site and this suggest (or at least strongly imply) that keels of wooden vessels could have been built up from more than a single piece of timber. Did you have some other references?

I don’t doubt that the resulting vessel would have serious problems on the open ocean for a year, but I wouldn’t argue that the keel could not be built.

Scott F said:

I hate to be pedantic (well, actually, I don’t hate it at all :-), but are you sure about the single-piece-of-wood keel thing? This site and this suggest (or at least strongly imply) that keels of wooden vessels could have been built up from more than a single piece of timber. Did you have some other references?

I don’t doubt that the resulting vessel would have serious problems on the open ocean for a year, but I wouldn’t argue that the keel could not be built.

Upon such doubts are the hopes of all creationists built.

What? A doubt? Well then, creationism therefore must be true, and of course evolution is necessarily therefore false.

Not to say your doubt is unfounded, just pointing out how desperate the creationists are. It’s how they fleece their sheep. Shame on them.

stevaroni said: That means that a large beam, say 10 x 10” would weigh about 22 lbs/ft. This sets a low upper limit to how long a beam could be since it had to be cut, dressed, transported, and erected by 4 men, Since there were 4 men, one of which was pushing 90.

I don’t believe that Genesis rules out the possibility that Noah hired people to help with the construction.

Or that gopher trees grew so that they were ready-made (intelligently designed) for ship building.

Or that the pre-flood environment not only gave men long lives but also great strength.

Or that there was a miracle.

Were there tube worms on the ark? What did Noah put them in?

If the Mid Atlantic Ridge was caused by the Flood, where did the tube worms live before the Flood?

If all that water came up from the lithosphere, didn’t it have to go right by the tube worms?

What about all those bacteria living around the vents and inside tube worms? Did they take a ride on the ark? What did they breathe? Where did they live before the Flood?

TomS said:

I don’t believe that Genesis rules out the possibility that Noah hired people to help with the construction.

Yes, and that’s one of the most evil parts of the myth.

I don’t know how many paintings and dioramas I’ve seen over the years that show a small army at work constructing the Ark. They’re cutting beams, hammering boards, running cranes and lofting scaffolding all over the place.

Yet the Good Book is firm - the Ark sailed with a crew of 8, all of clan Noah.

That means that Noah shut up the Ark and sailed away leaving his build crew - men, women and children that his family had worked beside for decades - to all drown.

And it’s even worse than that.

If Noah commanded the resources to employ a small army he was a man of great wealth.

And Noah wasn’t just some rich guy hiring day labor. In the world of 4000BC there was no such thing as a distinction between wealth and political power because wealth was largely political capitol in the day.

If Noah was rich enough to have hundreds working for him he was some sort of political figure. At the very least the equivalent of a minor ruler of an area that could produce tens of thousands of board feet of lumber and the staff necessary to harvest it, and the agricultural wherewithal to feed all those people - again, no mean feat in an era of small-scale subsistence farming.

Noah was, effectively a regional prince, and he used his people to build him a giant boat.

And then he sailed away in it and left them all to drown.

He carefully took half a million different kinds of beetles, but he left all the babies.

Because that was the right thing to do because, apparently, the babies were too evil to be worth saving.

stevaroni said:

TomS said:

I don’t believe that Genesis rules out the possibility that Noah hired people to help with the construction.

Yes, and that’s one of the most evil parts of the myth.

I don’t know how many paintings and dioramas I’ve seen over the years that show a small army at work constructing the Ark. They’re cutting beams, hammering boards, running cranes and lofting scaffolding all over the place.

Yet the Good Book is firm - the Ark sailed with a crew of 8, all of clan Noah.

That means that Noah shut up the Ark and sailed away leaving his build crew - men, women and children that his family had worked beside for decades - to all drown.

And it’s even worse than that.

If Noah commanded the resources to employ a small army he was a man of great wealth.

And Noah wasn’t just some rich guy hiring day labor. In the world of 4000BC there was no such thing as a distinction between wealth and political power because wealth was largely political capitol in the day.

If Noah was rich enough to have hundreds working for him he was some sort of political figure. At the very least the equivalent of a minor ruler of an area that could produce tens of thousands of board feet of lumber and the staff necessary to harvest it, and the agricultural wherewithal to feed all those people - again, no mean feat in an era of small-scale subsistence farming.

Noah was, effectively a regional prince, and he used his people to build him a giant boat.

And then he sailed away in it and left them all to drown.

He carefully took half a million different kinds of beetles, but he left all the babies.

Because that was the right thing to do because, apparently, the babies were too evil to be worth saving.

You see, there are good and bad genocides.

Good genocide can be turned into amusement.

Glen Davidson

Scott F

Your references say:

The heaviest and strongest timber in the ship was the keel. It formed he basis of the vessel and was it’s backbone. The keel was put together with massive timbers in order to provide the greatest possible strength.

(all sic)

I think the expression “the keel was put together with massive timbers” should be construed to mean “the keel was joined to massive timbers (forming the sternpost and stempost)”. These are essentially angled uprights, not part of the keel.

Your second source shows this keel jointing to these timbers, reinforced with knees and massive iron bolts. These joints are weight-bearing, but the moment of flexion and torsion on them from pitching and rolling is far smaller than that at the midships of the keel.

That source does show a scarf joint near the end of the keel, where the stresses were less. I still believe that this is an error for a large ship of all-wooden construction.

It’s true that small vessels can be built with a keel that is scarf-jointed. Even so, these joints must be minimised, and must be heavily reinforced with long bolts or gangtrusses. But with a very long or heavy wooden ship, this is not the case - and the Ark was said to be longer and heavier than any all-wooden ship ever built. No such join, unless heavily reinforced with flexible steel plates and multiple bolts, can stand the flexion and torsion on a long hull caused by working on the open sea. Lacking such reinforcement - and 4000 BCE is well before the iron age, or even the chalcolithic - any joint would fail. All-wooden ships were pegged and sewn together, which made for flexibility. The maximum reinforcements that Noah might have been able to manage - and which are not mentioned in Genesis - were copper or maybe bronze bolts.

The keel length of a seaworthy all-wooden ship was therefore in practice almost limited to the maximum length of a timber that could be provided by a tree of the required species. Minor extensions near the ends might be viable, but all joins whatever detracted from the ship’s seaworthiness.

The longer the ship, the more stress on all its timbers as it worked. The longer the seams in the hull planking, the more they opened. That is, the more it leaked. Wooden-planked ships approaching the Ark’s dimensions could only be kept afloat by steam pumps. No wooden-framed ship ever did reach those dimensions, not even those that used steel bolts, braces and cross-braces. Wikipedia says that the British warships HMS Orlando and HMS Mersey, which were 300 ft long, and were so reinforced, were pushing the limits of wooden ship construction and “had structural problems”, which is a polite way of saying that they tended to come apart in a seaway and leaked like birdcages. The Ark was supposed to be over 400 ft long.

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmg[…]X_Zhn8#57cad said: You see, there are good and bad genocides.

Good genocide can be turned into amusement.

Glen Davidson

First a comment on a harsh statement: I presume that you are referring to an ark amusement park.

And then, I believe I have heard it said that it is permitted to participate in what seems to be, in human terms, an evil if one is following a command of God. I wonder whether that extends to permitting a falsehood about the mechanisms of the Solar System or the history of variations in life on Earth?

Dave Luckett said:

Scott F

Your references say:

The heaviest and strongest timber in the ship was the keel. It formed he basis of the vessel and was it’s backbone. The keel was put together with massive timbers in order to provide the greatest possible strength.

(all sic)

I think the expression “the keel was put together with massive timbers” should be construed to mean “the keel was joined to massive timbers (forming the sternpost and stempost)”. These are essentially angled uprights, not part of the keel.

We have been around this loop before on other threads, with many relevant links, but there does not seem to be an easy way to find them. Keel timbers are always joined because even if you could find a piece long enough, it would not be thick enough at one end! I’m writing from memory, but I could find unimpeachable sources if you need them.

The keel on Nelson’s HMS Victory’s is about 2ft square, becoming slightly narrower, but not shallower, at the ends. It is over 150’ long and as Elm trees don’t grow that big, it is made of seven pieces with very precisely cut vertical scarfs held together with copper(iron fixings corrode) bolts. But that’s just the start. On top of that is another 6 or 8 inches of oak to locate the frames, and then another couple of foot of keelson (this time scarfed horizontally) once the frames are fitted. Massive copper bolts up to a couple of inches in diameter hold the whole complex sandwich together. At he ends of the ship where the frames are curved, these bolts can be be over 10 feet long, and that is a hell of a hole to drill when all you have is a hand auger. Then for good measure there is more internal bracing fitted in critical areas once at least 4-inch oak planking has been fitted to both sides of the frames. And all that to build a ship a fraction of the size of the Ark.

I am sure I have recommended it before, but “Building the wooden fighting ship” by Dodds and Moore is an excellent reference for anybody interested in the problems of buiding and operating large wooden ships.

Well, well. I stand corrected. I see that I made another error, and attributed Noah’s flood to about 4000 BCE, when it was, on balance, about 2400 BCE. That’s still bronze age, of course.

But apart from the keel, the other difficulties remain. And I’d really like to see the shipwright who could build a vessel like the Victory, let alone the Ark, in the bronze age, without any prior developed technology or tradition of such ships. I doubt that a cylinder of copper ten feet long and two inches in diameter could even be cast, back then.

Dave Luckett said:

I doubt that a cylinder of copper ten feet long and two inches in diameter could even be cast, back then.

I suspect that the fabrication of such a cylinder would have been within the capability of a good Bronze-Age metal worker.

TomS said:

Glen Davidson said: You see, there are good and bad genocides.

Good genocide can be turned into amusement.

Glen Davidson

First a comment on a harsh statement: I presume that you are referring to an ark amusement park.

And then, I believe I have heard it said that it is permitted to participate in what seems to be, in human terms, an evil if one is following a command of God. I wonder whether that extends to permitting a falsehood about the mechanisms of the Solar System or the history of variations in life on Earth?

If you commit a sin or any other evil with the excuse that you’re committing it in God’s/Jesus’ name, then you’re actually doing good, even though Jesus specifically stated that such a thing is actually a really bad/evil sin.

Dave Luckett said:

But apart from the keel, the other difficulties remain. And I’d really like to see the shipwright who could build a vessel like the Victory, let alone the Ark, in the bronze age, without any prior developed technology or tradition of such ships. I doubt that a cylinder of copper ten feet long and two inches in diameter could even be cast, back then.

Many difficulties indeed remain. I hope my response did not imply that the size of available timber was the problem. Approximately, the strength of a structure increases as the square of its increase in size, but the forces it is subject to increase as the cube. It is not the straight bits that are the limiting factor with a material like wood. All the curves for the frames need to be cut from wood with natural curvature similar to the part being manufactured. This is especially true of the “knees” which feed loads from the frames to the deck beams. European forests were carefully managed to produce this premium “Compass” timber by selective felling and even training of growing trees, a process with a lead time of a century or more. Maybe this is why it took so long to build the ark; Noah had to become an expert in forestry, then wait for his trees to grow!

Dave Lovell said:Massive copper bolts up to a couple of inches in diameter hold the whole complex sandwich together. At he ends of the ship where the frames are curved, these bolts can be be over 10 feet long

It sounds kind of like a wooden version of pre-tensioned concrete.

SWT said:

I suspect that the fabrication of such a cylinder would have been within the capability of a good Bronze-Age metal worker.

So.. the 4 men of clan Noah are skilled as…

Shipwrights

Tool-makers

Lumberjacks/sawyers

And now bonzewrights

And, apparently, since they created solutions like cranes, conveyor belts and (according to Beyres, I think) wave-powered forced air ventilation without ever having seen them, had the imagination and foresight of Leonardo DaVinci.

Actually, they pretty much invented marine engineering, since no knowledge base like that would have existed at the time. Isambard Brunell would have been proud.

Oh, and they lived long enough to construct a vessel the size of a Liberty Ship by hand.

Yeah, sure, now that we put it that way, it seems perfectly reasonable.

stevaroni said:

SWT said:

I suspect that the fabrication of such a cylinder would have been within the capability of a good Bronze-Age metal worker.

So.. the 4 men of clan Noah are skilled as…

Shipwrights

Tool-makers

Lumberjacks/sawyers

And now bonzewrights

And, apparently, since they created solutions like cranes, conveyor belts and (according to Beyres, I think) wave-powered forced air ventilation without ever having seen them, had the imagination and foresight of Leonardo DaVinci.

Actually, they pretty much invented marine engineering, since no knowledge base like that would have existed at the time. Isambard Brunell would have been proud.

Oh, and they lived long enough to construct a vessel the size of a Liberty Ship by hand.

Yeah, sure, now that we put it that way, it seems perfectly reasonable.

Don’t get me wrong, I am arguing neither for a literal interpretation of the Flood narrative nor for the feasibility of building such a vessel ca. 2000 BCE. I’m just saying that I think a competent metal worker of the time would probably have been able to make such a bolt. But he’d be a specialist and quite possibly not affordable by some guy and his kids who were building a huge boat-like object in their back yard.

SWT said:

Don’t get me wrong, I am arguing neither for a literal interpretation of the Flood narrative nor for the feasibility of building such a vessel ca. 2000 BCE.

Sorry if it sounded like I was trying to yank your chain SW.

It’s tough doing smart-ass over the internet. The problem is that HTML really needs codes for snark on/off.

stevaroni said:

SWT said:

Don’t get me wrong, I am arguing neither for a literal interpretation of the Flood narrative nor for the feasibility of building such a vessel ca. 2000 BCE.

Sorry if it sounded like I was trying to yank your chain SW.

It’s tough doing smart-ass over the internet. The problem is that HTML really needs codes for snark on/off.

We’re cool. When I read your comment, it occurred to me that my comment could be read in a way I didn’t intend so I clarified. I totally agree with the need for HTML for snark.

stevaroni said:

It’s tough doing smart-ass over the internet. The problem is that HTML really needs codes for snark on/off.

<snark> and </snark> usually work for me.

“<” — coded by joining an ampersand with lt and a semicolon — is joined with snark or /snark and followed by “>” — an ampersand, gt, and a semicolon — all without any spaces.

And that’s just about the only HTML code I know.

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmg[…]X_Zhn8#57cad said:

You see, there are good and bad genocides.

Good genocide can be turned into amusement an amusement park.

Glen Davidson

I beg pardon for the presumptuousness but I thought it read better this way.

And TomS beat me to the punch. grumble grumble

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Richard B. Hoppe published on April 5, 2013 2:16 PM.

Roger Ebert, Defender of Evolution was the previous entry in this blog.

Happy 9th Paul Nelson Day! is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter