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.
Ahhh NB; you make truly valid points, but to whom? I get the same illogical arguments, time and again. There's no point, I'd say. We're getting pure speculation on our pet poster's part as to the sources of water, relying not on any definitive statements from his bible, but on scientific studies that couch their tentative conclusions in "maybe's", "perhaps's", "could be's", "needs much more study", "in a perfect world, this might provide approximately..." etc.
This is then happily over-exaggerated to be the exact, known and established source of massive quantities of easily accessed waters, boiling out of vast underground hidden pools which no-one can or ever will find. and then disappearing on command in a miraculous time frame!
We hear now, regularly, "Science is now proving out all the bible's stories..." Really? I wonder if Tom has e-mailed that study author as I suggested as to this being a good source of global flood water.
His likely answer?
"click". "Hello? Hello?"
Our man completely ignores what happens when you pull such water out of the soil, even though there's plenty of observed case studies of the resulting subsidence catastrophies. Given simple volumetric math, the resulting depression or crater would almost exactly equal the volume of water removed from under it. Spock again: "It's Only Logical, Captain!"
This has been proven in the Everglades and out on the over-pumped Great Plains. But on we go; his MAGIC crust remains somehow intact all over the earth, and the water floats MAGICALLY on top of it until "told" to recede back into the boiling depths. Wow! That IS Godly!
And all the while, he ignores your particulars, and mine and others, on all the other un-viable points critical to his desperate story. The required numbers of species to be kept on board, the unsolvable dino problem, the now-known age of the earth, the lack of any corroboration with any other well-documented cultures (the Egyptians apparently didn't notice they were under water when they built the pyramids... Nor the Chinese or Japanese or Koreans or Inuit or... or...), the completely missing flood-caused sedimentary layer and massive layer of flood-killed organisms, the total lack of any credible studies up on Ararat, or even of credible peer-reviewed write-ups on the studies he claims to be valid....
I wonder if C34 is familiar with the story of Don Quixote?
This is then happily over-exaggerated to be the exact, known and established source of massive quantities of easily accessed waters, boiling out of vast underground hidden pools which no-one can or ever will find. and then disappearing on command in a miraculous time frame!
Vast underground pools? How about vast underground oceans? The talk about the collapsing crust of the planet releasing massive amounts of water kind of reminds me of the "Hollow Earth" notion. Aliens live there too. I dunno. I think if the crust of the Earth collapsed, it'd be a hot time in the old town tonight. With all the magma oozing through, any water would turn to boiling hot steam. If the lava don't getcha, the blistering steam would certainly boil you down to the bones mighty fast.
"Why do you try to confuse something so simple, that an eight year old child could understand."
Are you an 8-year-old child?
"The word (OTHER) appears in the "New living Translation". Also in the young's Literal Translation it states that after two and a half months the heads of the mountians appeared."
Why is that a more accurate translation? Why not some of the newer contemporary translations?
The Bible, Technical Slang Version (http://www.rdrop.com/~cary/html/tsv.html#Genesis - broken link) Ebonics-Translator.com-Ebonics Bible--www.ebonics-translator.com
"The length of a cubit was a recent invention, which had no connection to Noah's time. The actual length of a cubit varies from 18 inches to 25 inches. Take your pick."
A recent invention, you say? I agree there are several different versions of the cubit, but since the account of Noah is attributed to have been written by Moses, Moses would have certainly been familiar with at least two, the Royal Cubit and the Hebrew Cubit, and possibly the Babylonian Cubit. I'd say it's been around for a long time, but I guess it depends on what YOU mean by "a modern invention". It's unlikely Moses would have preferred the Royal (Egyptian) Cubit, even though he grew up in Egypt. If he had used the Hebrew Cubit scale, the dimensions would be smaller, not in figures, but in the actual size of the Ark.
Please note also that stress increases with size. The longer a craft is, the more critical the design and construction of it has to be. Assuming the Ark was 300 cubits long x 50 cubits wide x 30 cubits high, judging from the photos of the models you've posted, the length looks much longer to match the comparative size of its related width. If such a craft in reality had such a length, the only solution would be to beef up the interior to prevent warping and breaking into pieces, and to withstand wave action beating against it. Remember, we're talking about a craft capable of holding pairs of all the animals in the world; clean animals were permitted in groups of 7 pairs. Which cubit? Like you said, take your pick. It doesn't really matter as much as the overall proportions.
"Once again I'm trying to rewrite the Bible?
According to Genesis 8:4 The ark of Noah land on the mountains of Ararat on the 17 day of the (SEVENTH MONTH)
And according to Genesis 8:5 the water continued to go down and on the (TENTH MONTH OF THE FIRST DAY OF THAT MONTH) the tops of the mountains could be seen.
I don't have to rewrite the Bible, yet I believe you have to read it. The ark landed on the (SEVENTH MONTH). Yet the tops of the mountains were not viewed until the (TENTH MONTH)."
Yes, you were once again "rewriting" the Bible. The Bible says the Ark landed on the MOUNTAINS of Ararat. Do you think it literally landed on several mountains at the same time? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the terms. I'm disagreeing with your use of juggling the context around like a jigsaw puzzle in order to appease your own view.
You've also failed to recognize that a ship, especially a large one, can be grounded even if that surface is underwater. You've also failed to acknowledge that the Ark was covered the entire time. It was only when it was time to disembark, that Noah was told to uncover the Ark. He then would have been able to see other mountains. Assuming he peeked out before uncovering the Ark, he still could have seen other mountains as the water level lowered, and yet not see whether what the Ark was stuck on was also above water level.
Greater Ararat is not like a walk in the park. It's high, steep and dangerous to scramble around on. Noah didn't have any trails or local guides to show him the way off it. How all the animals managed to get down the slippery slopes is a mystery. Let's assume the ice and snow had melted off. It would still be steep and slippery. And assuming Noah had dinosaurs on board, how would they have managed to climb down the mountain? And what about food for all the animals? Even if the salinity level of the water had not changed, nearly every plant would have died from being underwater.
Okay, coconuts could have floated around with little problem. But you still have to take into account the massive layer of mud (even if it was dry enough to walk on) that would have covered the flat surfaces of the ground below. The mud would have buried everything: plants, animals, and people. It would take an extraordinary amount of time for even tiny shoots of plants to reappear, but most would have become extinct from the flood. That means not enough vegetation for the herbivores. And since it would take a very long time to build up a viable population of animals (reproduction and sexual maturity takes time), the carnivores would've starved to death.
There is another possibility. The flood was not global but was a catastrophic regional flood. Tales of such a flood could have easily circulated far and wide by survivors and been modified by different cultures for generations, giving a plausible explanation for the account of the Biblical version of the flood. I don't know if you've ever been in a dangerous flood, but it can certainly seem like the end of the world to those who are in it. Black Sea deluge theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A possible source of the Noah's Flood story
Every account presented to us by those who have seen the Ark up close, tell us, they got to the Ark by walking up the mountain.
The flood was not a regional flood. Because the Bible tells us in Genesis 7:19 that the flood waters rose greatly on the earth, (AND ALL THE HIGH MOUNTAINS) under the (ENTIRE HEAVENS) were covered by the flood waters. Now, if you want to write your own flood story thats fine, yet if we are going to talk about the Biblical flood, it should be obvious. It was not a regional flood, but global.
And the Contemporaty Translations will tell you the samething. The Ark land on the Mountains of Ararat on the 7th month, yet only in the 10 month were the tops of the mountains seen. It should be obvious that the Ark would of had to of landed on the tallest mountain on the mountains of Ararat. When I was a kid, my parents took me to see the (Rocky Mountains). Did I see all the (Rocky Mountains), of course not, yet (Rocky Mountains) was the correct wording. When God said the Ark landed on the Mountains of Ararat, that was also correct. It did not mean the Ark landed on every mountain.
Noah was told to uncover the Ark, he would (then be able to see) the mountains? Before Noah was told to uncover the Ark, the Bible tells us he used a window. Genesis 8:6. "After forty days Noah opened the window he had made in the ark and sent out a raven," Noah would of been able to see the tops of the mountains from his window. To suggest otherwise, would require you to ignore the obvious.
And when it comes to the actual length of a cubit, we can only make assumptions as to how many inches long it might of been.
Vast underground pools? How about vast underground oceans? The talk about the collapsing crust of the planet releasing massive amounts of water kind of reminds me of the "Hollow Earth" notion. Aliens live there too. I dunno. I think if the crust of the Earth collapsed, it'd be a hot time in the old town tonight. With all the magma oozing through, any water would turn to boiling hot steam. If the lava don't getcha, the blistering steam would certainly boil you down to the bones mighty fast.
Again, the water we see today ended up in it's present location after the flood. The water before the flood, was not where we find it today. And based on all of the ancient archeological finds around the globe, we know something happend to the earths crust long ago, which sank many technologically advanced civilizations below the seas. Only the Biblical flood account, would explain this global catastrophe. Consider the link below.
Ahhh NB; you make truly valid points, but to whom? I get the same illogical arguments, time and again. There's no point, I'd say. We're getting pure speculation on our pet poster's part as to the sources of water, relying not on any definitive statements from his bible, but on scientific studies that couch their tentative conclusions in "maybe's", "perhaps's", "could be's", "needs much more study", "in a perfect world, this might provide approximately..." etc.
This is then happily over-exaggerated to be the exact, known and established source of massive quantities of easily accessed waters, boiling out of vast underground hidden pools which no-one can or ever will find. and then disappearing on command in a miraculous time frame!
We hear now, regularly, "Science is now proving out all the bible's stories..." Really? I wonder if Tom has e-mailed that study author as I suggested as to this being a good source of global flood water.
His likely answer?
"click". "Hello? Hello?"
Our man completely ignores what happens when you pull such water out of the soil, even though there's plenty of observed case studies of the resulting subsidence catastrophies. Given simple volumetric math, the resulting depression or crater would almost exactly equal the volume of water removed from under it. Spock again: "It's Only Logical, Captain!"
This has been proven in the Everglades and out on the over-pumped Great Plains. But on we go; his MAGIC crust remains somehow intact all over the earth, and the water floats MAGICALLY on top of it until "told" to recede back into the boiling depths. Wow! That IS Godly!
And all the while, he ignores your particulars, and mine and others, on all the other un-viable points critical to his desperate story. The required numbers of species to be kept on board, the unsolvable dino problem, the now-known age of the earth, the lack of any corroboration with any other well-documented cultures (the Egyptians apparently didn't notice they were under water when they built the pyramids... Nor the Chinese or Japanese or Koreans or Inuit or... or...), the completely missing flood-caused sedimentary layer and massive layer of flood-killed organisms, the total lack of any credible studies up on Ararat, or even of credible peer-reviewed write-ups on the studies he claims to be valid....
I wonder if C34 is familiar with the story of Don Quixote?
The orginal arguement was. The earth does not have enought water to account for a global flood. Yet numerous scientist are now suggesting it has more than enought water for such a flood. And the flood of Noah occured before the pyramids. So why would you believe the Egyptians failed to notice it? And your now known age of the earth belief, is based on assumptions, than can never be proven.
Noah was told to uncover the Ark, he would (then be able to see) the mountains? Before Noah was told to uncover the Ark, the Bible tells us he used a window. Genesis 8:6. "After forty days Noah opened the window he had made in the ark and sent out a raven," Noah would of been able to see the tops of the mountains from his window. To suggest otherwise, would require you to ignore the obvious.
Look at your own quote. It says he OPENED the window. Does it say he looked out the window? Any other passages you'd like to change? The "window" was probably one of the "vents" on top you've referred to. The windows probably didn't have glass panes for a scenic view, but were probably make of wood which would have to be pulled or pushed to open and close, like the door. If the Ark was covered, which is what the account states, then how is he going to look out? Since Noah was chosen by God in the first place, do you think he's going to ignore God and do what he wants? Or do you think he'd probably wait until he gets the all clear message? To suggest otherwise would require you to ignore the obvious.
I'm not saying he didn't see the tops of mountains, but he could have done that AFTER he uncovered the window(s). It's not clear what covering the Ark means. It may just mean keeping the windows closed. Even so, depending on how the Ark settled, he might well have only been able to view other mountains and not necessarily see the one he was on, especially if the Ark settled nose up or nose down. I admit, I'm just guessing. But then that's all you've been doing. Exactly why you think you're so absolutely right and everyone else is completely wrong is a mystery. But you know what they say when a person thinks like that.
Another thing you're not taking into consideration is that the account is a narrative written in the third person. So who's doing the narrative? Probably not Noah because it's written in the third person. God? Moses? Someone else?
Isn't it interesting that major money was invested in locating and videoing a known entity, the lost Titanic. Hundreds of millions of dollars spent to go find it with sidescan sonar and magnetometers and such, and then to drop a submersible down there to find it.
Imagine the consequences to world history of a find of a large old boat with dimensions roughly that of the imaginary Ark, up on a mountaintop, oddly unaffected by 2500 years of the sun, ice, water, seismic activity, volcanic eruptions, glaciation, freeze-thaw-freeze-thaw-etc. etc. cycles, people clambering all over it and stealing pieces, etc. etc.
It's unimaginable that someone who realistically thought there was any good evidence up there wouldn't have, by now, simply flown a helo of credible geologists, Arkologists, etc. up there, one warm, calm summer's day, but with, finally, at least one functioning video and still camera, and verified or debunked it. Especially since we're told you can walk into a protected cave and all.... and it's right there. It could be done in an afternoon, for the cost of a helo flight (I'd say about $20k US would cover it all nicely.) I'd even pay to have Tom taken along, with a closeup video of his face when they found some old driftwood and nothingelse.
Humbug. Nonsense. Literal tripe. Or, in the words of the immortal Commander Spock: "Illogical, Captain. Quite illogical!"
Well, just wanted to add one more impossibility to the growing list of them as regards this silliness. It's clearly an...
EPIC FAIL. As many of us have said now. (We need newmeat to gnaw on here. Anyone? Anyone?)
The team that found the structure in the cave, did not find driftwood. They found a large structure. And how much would it cost to confirm the figurines of El Toro mountain? Of course after waiting some 60 years, it might cost a little more do to inflation. Now the fact that your scientist did nothing to confirm that huge find, is really what silliness is all about. At least those who went to Mt. Ararat, are making an honest attempt. Your people do nothing but sit on the sidelines. And even when you show them something that could really be tested, all we see from your side is no shows.
And the flood of Noah occured before the pyramids. So why would you believe the Egyptians failed to notice it?
The Egyptians and Chinese were recording life before the Pyramids were being built so I don't see what that has to do with it but anyway, according to your Bible chronology, your flood was around 2300BCE. The Egyptians were building pyramids in the 3rd Dynasty which was c2700BCE....so you're wrong anyway.
Isn't it interesting that major money was invested in locating and videoing a known entity, the lost Titanic. Hundreds of millions of dollars spent to go find it with sidescan sonar and magnetometers and such, and then to drop a submersible down there to find it.
Imagine the consequences to world history of a find of a large old boat with dimensions roughly that of the imaginary Ark, up on a mountaintop, oddly unaffected by 2500 years of the sun, ice, water, seismic activity, volcanic eruptions, glaciation, freeze-thaw-freeze-thaw-etc. etc. cycles, people clambering all over it and stealing pieces, etc. etc.
It's unimaginable that someone who realistically thought there was any good evidence up there wouldn't have, by now, simply flown a helo of credible geologists, Arkologists, etc. up there, one warm, calm summer's day, but with, finally, at least one functioning video and still camera, and verified or debunked it. Especially since we're told you can walk into a protected cave and all.... and it's right there. It could be done in an afternoon, for the cost of a helo flight (I'd say about $20k US would cover it all nicely.) I'd even pay to have Tom taken along, with a closeup video of his face when they found some old driftwood and nothingelse.
Humbug. Nonsense. Literal tripe. Or, in the words of the immortal Commander Spock: "Illogical, Captain. Quite illogical!"
Well, just wanted to add one more impossibility to the growing list of them as regards this silliness. It's clearly an...
EPIC FAIL. As many of us have said now. (We need newmeat to gnaw on here. Anyone? Anyone?)
The team that found the structure in the cave, did not find driftwood. They found a large structure. And how much would it cost to confirm the figurines of El Toro mountain? Of course, after waiting some 60 years, it might cost a little more do to inflation. Now the fact that your scientist did nothing to confirm that huge find. Well, thats what silliness is all about. At least those who went to Mt. Ararat, are making an honest attempt. Your people do nothing but sit on the sidelines. And even when you show them something that could be tested, all we see from your side is a no show. It's pretty obvious to me, the only thing your side is intrested in, is keep your evolution myth alive, and ignoring anything that would challenge it's reality. Just like that find off of western Cuba in 2002. Where are those scientist who would consider the man-made structures found in 2300 feet of water? Oh that's right, it another one of those no shows.
Look at your own quote. It says he OPENED the window. Does it say he looked out the window? Any other passages you'd like to change? The "window" was probably one of the "vents" on top you've referred to. The windows probably didn't have glass panes for a scenic view, but were probably make of wood which would have to be pulled or pushed to open and close, like the door. If the Ark was covered, which is what the account states, then how is he going to look out? Since Noah was chosen by God in the first place, do you think he's going to ignore God and do what he wants? Or do you think he'd probably wait until he gets the all clear message? To suggest otherwise would require you to ignore the obvious.
I'm not saying he didn't see the tops of mountains, but he could have done that AFTER he uncovered the window(s). It's not clear what covering the Ark means. It may just mean keeping the windows closed. Even so, depending on how the Ark settled, he might well have only been able to view other mountains and not necessarily see the one he was on, especially if the Ark settled nose up or nose down. I admit, I'm just guessing. But then that's all you've been doing. Exactly why you think you're so absolutely right and everyone else is completely wrong is a mystery. But you know what they say when a person thinks like that.
Another thing you're not taking into consideration is that the account is a narrative written in the third person. So who's doing the narrative? Probably not Noah because it's written in the third person. God? Moses? Someone else?
No, it was not one of the vents, because the Bible states it was a window that Noah made, and it required him to (open it). And it also states that Noah reached out his hand when the dove returned, and took the dove and brought it back to himself in the ark. I did not have to change any passage, it would require Noah to look out the window to even see the dove. This is pretty much a common sense approach here.
And the Bible makes it very clear, the Ark had already landed by the 7th month, yet you could not see the tops of the mountains, because it took another two and a half months for the water to go down to make that possible.
Genesis 8:3,4,5 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. The waters (CONTINUED TO RECEDE UNTIL THE TENTH MONTH, AND ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TENTH MONTH THE TOPS OF THE MOUNTIANS BECAME VISIBLE.)
The last three verses point to what could be seen, do to the water level going down, and had nothing to do with what Noah could see by looking out his vent, or window. The Bible simply states that 2 and a half months after the Ark of Noah landed, the tops of the other mountains could be seen.
2 Tim. 3:16. All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God. And since this is Scripture, it matters little who was doing the writing here.
Also, when the Russion pilots saw the Ark, they did report that it appears as part of the roof was removed, which would help to confirm the Biblical account.
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 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.
