U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-29-2012, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,061,524 times
Reputation: 3717

Advertisements

I's been argued to death about the hydrological impossibilites of creating such masses of water necessary to cover the earth in order to murder off all those plant and animal species that Noah did not make room for on his relatively tiny Ark. (As in, it would not be possible to duplicate the necessary storage and facilites even on the massive USS Enterprise, a modern super-carrier that can only house 5000 people max, and has to replenish itself more frequently than once every 18 months, and that little boat's not held together by pitch! (Honestly: the intransigence and lack of logic her is staggering...) Oh, and btw, the USS Enterprise is also nuclear powered, heated and with a fresh water generator plant. And with more than one window. and steerable. and so on...)(

Redirect Notice

As always, wild last-minute ideas flood (sorry...) the debate, with such things as God pre-flattening the earth to allow it to be more easily but transitionally, temporarily inundated, or that there existed (but not any more..) huge cavernous earth-bound containers of easily available water that GOD just hastened to the surface, ignoring that subsequent subsidence would then create a hole equal to that which was just evacuated. Glub glub; back to square one, eh, junior hydrologists in training!

Meaning, for the less scientifically literate, there would be NO NET SEA LEVEL GAIN! (<Sigh; double sigh...>)

But anyhow, some recent evidence about why a single species of mammoth that lived about 12,000 - 20,000 years go died out. It inexorably points to the problems with lesser "herds" of any animal, even one as hardy and homeothermic (Able to manage wide temperature variations in it's "environmental niche") as a giant wool-covered elephant precursor species. Seems the researchers found some interesting evidence about species fragility even in such a viable and hardy monster:

Ancient DNA Traces Woolly Mammoth's Disappearance

But then we have the Noah's Arkists confirming that a mere two of each "kind" ("kind" means their oddball and incorrect definition of species in order to escape being cornered as they have been, but they obviously need it that way. soo...) would easily set forth and repopulate in their correct niche.

Apparently they accomplish this by simply migrating back, wildly assuming they also made a globe-trotting earlier migration, covering many tens of thousands of miles pre-flood, on arrangement after what, getting an i-Pod e-mail to "come on down to the Ark Meeting, but make it snappy: the weather's lookin' ominous, by God!"

This is but one of many thousands of reasons it would have been environmentally impossible post-flood, given the total global devastation, and the huge piles of dead and rotting vegetation and animals.

It does not even begin to address the biological diversity requirements such an endeavor would have required, as well as the ship-board living and waste management requirements, all of which come together to put this vast intransigent silliness completely to bed.

In short, everything initially alive and on-board would have died very early by being constantly sea-sick, with no fresh water, no good food (I mean, who wants to eat freeze-dried chow for 8 months anyhow? And this totally ignores that the thousands of carnivore species, times the absolutely necessary numbers of each "kind) to ensure regeneration, don't go for freeze-dried stuff (that's such an inane idea, I just have to keep repeating it!) and dinosaurs wouldn't like it anyhow! They need "fresh" lamby, which would have happened rather early (within the first few hours...). Then ol' Noah and his family would be next on the menu!

"Down, T-rex; down! Didn't your owners teach you no manners at all?"

The constant and relentless storm effects and ongoing deluge would have reduced this barge to, as sans noted, matchsticks after the first, oh, 1000 or so hours of massive side-impact wave action pounding on this pitch secured vessel, and all the sea life would also be killed off, with no subsequent ability to reproduce and re-populate the oceans' species. Or even "kinds". ( Ha ha..).
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-29-2012, 02:09 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,425,536 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
I's been argued to death about the hydrological impossibilites of creating such masses of water necessary to cover the earth in order to murder off all those plant and animal species that Noah did not make room for on his relatively tiny Ark.
Sorry you couldn't handle the facts I presented. Of course there is enough water to cover the earth especially when the mountains of TODAY were not as high as in Noah's day.


Quote:
(As in, it would not be possible to duplicate the necessary storage and facilites even on the massive USS Enterprise, a modern super-carrier that can only house 5000 people max, and has to replenish itself more frequently than once every 18 months, and that little boat's not held together by pitch! (Honestly: the intransigence and lack of logic her is staggering...) Oh, and btw, the USS Enterprise is also nuclear powered, heated and with a fresh water generator plant. And with more than one window. and steerable. and so on...)(
Just because you say it is not possible does not prove it was not possible for Noah.


Quote:
As always, wild last-minute ideas flood (sorry...) the debate, with such things as God pre-flattening the earth to allow it to be more easily but transitionally, temporarily inundated, or that there existed (but not any more..) huge cavernous earth-bound containers of easily available water that GOD just hastened to the surface, ignoring that subsequent subsidence would then create a hole equal to that which was just evacuated. Glub glub; back to square one, eh, junior hydrologists in training!
God didn't have to "pre-flatten the earth." It just didn't have as high of mountains on it back then. Who says there wasn't a lot of water underground in Noah's day?



Quote:
But anyhow, some recent evidence about why a single species of mammoth that lived about 12,000 - 20,000 years go died out. It inexorably points to the problems with lesser "herds" of any animal, even one as hardy and homeothermic (Able to manage wide temperature variations in it's "environmental niche") as a giant wool-covered elephant precursor species. Seems the researchers found some interesting evidence about species fragility even in such a viable and hardy monster:
You ever hear of "hunted to extinction"? And a lot of wooly mamoths are covered by ice in the northern hemisphere. Russia still takes ivory from them today. The ice age that occurred just after the world-wide flood and caused by the world-wide flood, killed off the majority of mamoths.

Quote:
But then we have the Noah's Arkists confirming that a mere two of each "kind" ("kind" means their oddball and incorrect definition of species in order to escape being cornered as they have been, but they obviously need it that way. soo...) would easily set forth and repopulate in their correct niche.
Not true. Try to learn the truth before making up your own myth. It was 2 pair of one type of animal and 7 pairs of another type.

Quote:
Apparently they accomplish this by simply migrating back, wildly assuming they also made a globe-trotting earlier migration, covering many tens of thousands of miles pre-flood, on arrangement after what, getting an i-Pod e-mail to "come on down to the Ark Meeting, but make it snappy: the weather's lookin' ominous, by God!"
Didn't have to do any globe-trotting. As Pangea broke apart to where the continents are today, the continents would only have to travel about 8 foot a day and then slow to their current points. The animals all over pangea got stranded on the specific areas where they settled i.e., the part we call Australia that broke away, Africa, USA etc.

Quote:
This is but one of many thousands of reasons it would have been environmentally impossible post-flood, given the total global devastation, and the huge piles of dead and rotting vegetation and animals.
Thousands of reasons? Kind of like just "2 of each kind"? LOL!

Quote:
It does not even begin to address the biological diversity requirements such an endeavor would have required, as well as the ship-board living and waste management requirements, all of which come together to put this vast intransigent silliness completely to bed.
And yet it still worked.


Quote:
In short, everything initially alive and on-board would have died very early by being constantly sea-sick, with no fresh water, no good food (I mean, who wants to eat freeze-dried chow for 8 months anyhow? And this totally ignores that the thousands of carnivore species, times the absolutely necessary numbers of each "kind) to ensure regeneration, don't go for freeze-dried stuff (that's such an inane idea, I just have to keep repeating it!) and dinosaurs wouldn't like it anyhow! They need "fresh" lamby, which would have happened rather early (within the first few hours...). Then ol' Noah and his family would be next on the menu!
Obviously they didn't die and obviously they collected plenty of rain water as they went. Who wants to eat freezed dried chow? I know! I know! Kuala bears would! You ever hear of hybernation or slowed down systems? Today they make freeze dried dog food. The dogs love it. They also make freeze dried emergency foods that lasts years for humans today. I just go back pack with lots of freeze dried foods. Just add water, heat and eat.

Quote:
"Down, T-rex; down! Didn't your owners teach you no manners at all?"
T-rex was drowned in the flood.

Quote:
The constant and relentless storm effects and ongoing deluge would have reduced this barge to, as sans noted, matchsticks after the first, oh, 1000 or so hours of massive side-impact wave action pounding on this pitch secured vessel, and all the sea life would also be killed off, with no subsequent ability to reproduce and re-populate the oceans' species. Or even "kinds". ( Ha ha..).
Obviously it didn't reduce the ark to match sticks. Just because you say it did does not prove it did. It is just your word and your word can't get the facts straight like just . . . "2 of each kind!"

All of sea life would not be killed off. They weren't killed off.

But your OP title is correct. There were no survivors of Noah's flood except those in the ark and most sea critters.

Last edited by Eusebius; 03-29-2012 at 02:37 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2012, 09:40 PM
 
Location: playing in the colorful Colorado dirt
4,486 posts, read 4,330,896 times
Reputation: 6929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Sorry you couldn't handle the facts I presented. Of course there is enough water to cover the earth especially when the mountains of TODAY were not as high as in Noah's day.


Just because you say it is not possible does not prove it was not possible for Noah.


God didn't have to "pre-flatten the earth." It just didn't have as high of mountains on it back then. Who says there wasn't a lot of water underground in Noah's day?



You ever hear of "hunted to extinction"? And a lot of wooly mamoths are covered by ice in the northern hemisphere. Russia still takes ivory from them today. The ice age that occurred just after the world-wide flood and caused by the world-wide flood, killed off the majority of mamoths.

Not true. Try to learn the truth before making up your own myth. It was 2 pair of one type of animal and 7 pairs of another type.

Didn't have to do any globe-trotting. As Pangea broke apart to where the continents are today, the continents would only have to travel about 8 foot a day and then slow to their current points. The animals all over pangea got stranded on the specific areas where they settled i.e., the part we call Australia that broke away, Africa, USA etc.

Thousands of reasons? Kind of like just "2 of each kind"? LOL!

And yet it still worked.


Obviously they didn't die and obviously they collected plenty of rain water as they went. Who wants to eat freezed dried chow? I know! I know! Kuala bears would! You ever hear of hybernation or slowed down systems? Today they make freeze dried dog food. The dogs love it. They also make freeze dried emergency foods that lasts years for humans today. I just go back pack with lots of freeze dried foods. Just add water, heat and eat.

T-rex was drowned in the flood.

Obviously it didn't reduce the ark to match sticks. Just because you say it did does not prove it did. It is just your word and your word can't get the facts straight like just . . . "2 of each kind!"

All of sea life would not be killed off. They weren't killed off.

But your OP title is correct. There were no survivors of Noah's flood except those in the ark and most sea critters.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2012, 10:46 PM
 
34,444 posts, read 8,865,664 times
Reputation: 4783
Quote:
Originally Posted by pamelaBeurman View Post
I have to agree. Eusebius' post is simply denial, speculation and bald restatement of claims shown to have no evidence to support them and plenty of evidence that doesn't. There is evidence that prehistoric creatures lived and died and were sometimes fossilized in the appropriate geological strata, not in one year -long flood - deposit. There is no valid evidence for the sort of underground reservoirs needed for this Flood - model and the rapid growth of mountains exists only in our posting pal's imagination.

Even the polystrates don't seem to help much as recent posts show.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2012, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 21,341,330 times
Reputation: 5054
rifleman: Don't you know yet that being rational doesn't work with Eusebius?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2012, 12:33 AM
 
1,745 posts, read 1,826,196 times
Reputation: 935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
...Just because you say it did does not prove it did..
Oh, the irony...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2012, 07:44 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,425,536 times
Reputation: 989
On the History Channel just the other day they were talking about the super ships made of wood thousands of years ago.

They said the Egyptians built 400+ foot long super ships to haul hundreds of tons of obelisks to their site. The only thing they used to keep the ship together was to lash each wood with natural fiber and put bees wax between the wood. When the wood would get wet it would swell and become water tight.

Noah built the ark

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2012, 08:01 AM
 
1,745 posts, read 1,826,196 times
Reputation: 935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
On the History Channel just the other day they were talking about the super ships made of wood thousands of years ago.
Ahh yes, the History Channel. Home of such academic material as MonsterQuest, Ice Road Truckers, Swamp People and Ancient Aliens

Quote:
They said the Egyptians built 400+ foot long super ships to haul hundreds of tons of obelisks to their site. The only thing they used to keep the ship together was to lash each wood with natural fiber and put bees wax between the wood. When the wood would get wet it would swell and become water tight.

Noah built the ark
Right, because if hundreds of skilled Egyptians could build a barge, then Noah could build a ridiculous multi-storied ark

And I think you mean Utnapishtim built the ark, BTW. Noah's was a cheap ripoff.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2012, 08:06 AM
 
34,444 posts, read 8,865,664 times
Reputation: 4783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
On the History Channel just the other day they were talking about the super ships made of wood thousands of years ago.

They said the Egyptians built 400+ foot long super ships to haul hundreds of tons of obelisks to their site. The only thing they used to keep the ship together was to lash each wood with natural fiber and put bees wax between the wood. When the wood would get wet it would swell and become water tight.

Noah built the ark
Even if that is true - and I doubt that the Egyptians would do more than make a long pontoon or raft for the admittedly labour- saving job of transporting stone from quarry to site and they would be easier to load the blocks onto - I see no point in constructing elaborate barges such as were used by the Pharaohs or for sea - trading. And of course the Nile is a placid and undemanding river- between the quarry and the building site whether at Mimpi or No - Amun.

Hatshepsut's barge ca. 1500 BCE Used to transport obelisks. Modern estimates range from 63–95 m by 27–32 m (Wiki - underlining of length, mine, throughout) That's at ten or so feet over 300 feet top estimate. It's big, but 110 feet short of an Ark. I'll repeat that approaching 400 feet is the limits of what is structurally sound in a wooden ship - and the detailed account of Ark construction mentions no metal bracing.

"One experiment was to transport a small obelisk on a barge in the Nile River. The barge was built based on ancient Egyptian designs. It had to be very wide to handle the obelisk, with a 2 to 1 ratio length to width, and it was at least twice as long as the obelisk. The obelisk was about 10 feet long and no more than 5 tons. A barge big enough to transport the largest Egyptian obelisks with this ratio would have had to be close to 200 feet long and 100 feet wide. The workers used ropes that were wrapped around a guide that enabled them to pull away from the river while they were towing it onto the barge. The barge was successfully launched into the Nile."

Further, I have some doubts about that length - rather conveniently near the size needed for the ark. I recall that Caligula's wooden sea - going boat used to transport the largest obelisk to Rome didn't approach that size. I'll look it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk

Caligula's Giant Ship ca. AD 37 Modern estimates are approx 104m (341 feet) 20.3 m(66 ft)
Traces of this Roman barge were found during the construction of Rome's Leonardo da Vinci International Airport in Fiumicino, Italy. Some speculate that this ship, or a similar ship, was used to transport the obelisk in St. Peter's Square from Egypt on the orders of Roman emperor Caligula.[wiki]

There are only two recorded texts describing the ships that transported the obelisks from Egypt across the Mediterranean to Rome. The first recorded text is from Pliny the Elder (AD 23 – 79), who described the great ships that transported the Vatican obelisk in 40 AD under the emperor Caligula. The second description comes from Ammianus Marcellinus (AD 330 – 393), who describes the ships that transported the Lateran Obelisk in 357 AD.

The evidence that is known suggests that ships were built similar to the Egyptian ships depicted in Pharaoh Unas’ tomb in Saqqara. The depictions show two ships that carry the obelisk underwater between them.

Three Roman ships were built to transport one obelisk. The two aft ships were of rectangular shape, they were 37 meters in length and 5 meters in width. The two ships were held together by longitudinal beams, while the obelisk was tied to these longitudinal beams and held stationary underwater. The third ship, a larger trireme, was in the front and was tied to the two larger ships carrying the obelisk. The third ship’s purpose was to help steer the two aft ships and have rowers and sail power the ship across the Mediterranean."


They really don't approach the size of the ark and nothing like the design. Now, I don't know whether it was you or the makers of that programme but the 400 feet figure seems unjustified and rather tossed in to make it look as though a 400 foot sea- going Ark loaded with animals and birds for a tenmonth sea- voyage is feasible. It is not.

And while we're at it.
Treasure ship 15th c. 127×52 m (416×170 ft) Historical records from the document "History of the Ming dynasty" claim that the largest Chinese Treasure Ships were more than 400 feet (120 m) long. However, the size of treasure ships is still disputed and some scholars argue that they were probably closer to 200–250 feet in length, while others argue that they were actually 309–408 feet in length and 160–166 feet in width.

71.1 m (233.3 ft) 14.1 m Zheng He Treasure ship replica 2008 (planned)- under construction This ship will exceed "the Göteborg, the world's largest wooden ship, by 10 m. in length" (sic), according to China Daily.[7]

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-30-2012 at 08:44 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2012, 10:45 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,425,536 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Treasure ship 15th c. 127×52 m (416×170 ft) Historical records from the document "History of the Ming dynasty" claim that the largest Chinese Treasure Ships were more than 400 feet (120 m) long. However, the size of treasure ships is still disputed and some scholars argue that they were probably closer to 200–250 feet in length, while others argue that they were actually 309–408 feet in length and 160–166 feet in width.
Well, Noah's Ark beat them all being no less than 450 feet long. At least we know from the historical document that it was that long with no one saying "Well, I think it was about 450 feet long but, since no one in our day (Moses' day) ever built one that long it was probably more like 4 feet long."
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top