Noah's Ark

[Sunshine Jesse]

It's because Noah's Ark was made out of the same material that clown cars are made out of.

[Forest Fire]

It's because Noah's Ark was made out of the same material that clown cars are made out of.

best answer yet

[MiracleGhost47]

 

 

there you go. every problem dealt with.

 

on a more serious note, I have no clue how Noah would have dealt with this; nor do I believe that it really happened, but suspension of disbelief and all that. 

Remember, this happened a long time ago. There’s no telling how different the ecosystem and geography was back then. For all we know, countless kangaroos and other animals could have lived in the middle east by default. The separation of the ecosystems was likely a slow process that occurred within generations of time, eventually being sped up by the influence of trading, poaching, pollution, weather shifts, etc. This is just a speculation, though.

 

I did some research. It appears the normal ph for sea water is in a range of 7.5 to 8.4. The ph of rain water is normally at 5.0 to 5.5. It’s difficult to say how different the ph of either rain and sea was back then, but much aquatic life share the ability to sense atmospheric changes and major weather pattern shifts. It’s likely that they would be able to prepare for a flood like that, assuming the rain had a less drastic ph difference back then.

 

The arc was three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide, and thirty cubits high. It’s not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the story, but I imagine Noah had several different floors, keeping the tallest animals outside at the top floor to save space. The ark was 45 feet tall, assuming the measurement for the cubit is 1.5 feet (30 x 1.5 = 45). If the floors were each 5 feet tall (which is possibly cramped, but still manageable), that means Noah’s ark would have space equal to 45/5 (9 ft) multiplied by the area of length (450 ft) and the width (75 ft).  Using the mathematical formula for solving the area, one floor would be equal to 33,750 square ft. If the ark had 9 5-foot tall floors as I speculate, then the vessel’s total square feet would be equal to 9 x 33,750 (303,750). That’s over 6 times the area of a standard American football field, which would explain how Noah was able to store so many animals. Of course, this measurement goes with the assumption that the ark was shaped like a rectangular prism. It was made to survive a flood, not for navigation, so it is possible that it was indeed shaped like that.  

 

I'm not an expert on the topic, so feel free to correct me I said something wrong.

[vla1ne]

Remember, this happened a long time ago. There’s no telling how different the ecosystem and geography was back then. For all we know, countless kangaroos and other animals could have lived in the middle east by default. The separation of the ecosystems was likely a slow process that occurred within generations of time, eventually being sped up by the influence of trading, poaching, pollution, weather shifts, etc. This is just a speculation, though.

 

I did some research. It appears the normal ph for sea water is in a range of 7.5 to 8.4. The ph of rain water is normally at 5.0 to 5.5. It’s difficult to say how different the ph of either rain and sea was back then, but much aquatic life share the ability to sense atmospheric changes and major weather pattern shifts. It’s likely that they would be able to prepare for a flood like that, assuming the rain had a less drastic ph difference back then.

 

The arc was three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide, and thirty cubits high. It’s not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the story, but I imagine Noah had several different floors, keeping the tallest animals outside at the top floor to save space. The ark was 45 feet tall, assuming the measurement for the cubit is 1.5 feet (30 x 1.5 = 45). If the floors were each 5 feet tall (which is possibly cramped, but still manageable), that means Noah’s ark would have space equal to 45/5 (9 ft) multiplied by the area of length (450 ft) and the width (75 ft).  Using the mathematical formula for solving the area, one floor would be equal to 33,750 square ft. If the ark had 9 5-foot tall floors as I speculate, then the vessel’s total square feet would be equal to 9 x 33,750 (303,750). That’s over 6 times the area of a standard American football field, which would explain how Noah was able to store so many animals. Of course, this measurement goes with the assumption that the ark was shaped like a rectangular prism. It was made to survive a flood, not for navigation, so it is possible that it was indeed shaped like that.  

 

I'm not an expert on the topic, so feel free to correct me I said something wrong.

well, starting off, the flood story, as told in the bible, was supposed to have occurred 6000 years ago, give or take a few centuries.

 

kangaroos are indigenous to australia, same as how pandas are indigenous to china, there is no evidence of them ever being anywhere else, and evolution on the scale required to change bone structure enough to make it impossible to trace (within mammals) would be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years. we can track humans throughout the planet, from their earliest appearance to their navigation to north america, but we see no signs of kangaroos (both animals with very unique bone structures and diets) ever being near the stated location of noah (middle eastern locale). no bones, no nothing. from all known records kangaroos originated in australia, evolved from other animals that lived millions of years ago, and pandas have been relegated to china for longer than 6k years.

 

 

did you factor sediment shifts, salinity, water pressure, humidity, and the rest of the factors into that? the rain is stated to have risen above even mount everest. now,even ignoring the fact that there isn't enough water on earth to actually cover mount everest by the degree claimed in the bible (it states even the tallest mountains were at least 1 mile below the ocean) when you take that volume of water, you have to also add in the increased pressure at the bottom, from miles of water torrenting down. the PH of the water would waver and fluctuate drastically with that volume of water in turmoil, be it freshwater or saltwater. now, what happens when you put a freshwater fish into saltwater is that they balloon and die. and when you do the opposite, the fish is essentially swiftly sucked dry of salt by the surrounding water, also dying.(i might be wrong, it could be that salt fish balloon while freshwater fish are sucked dry, but the point stands.) now, no matter which way the ocean goes, it will essentially kill either all freshwater, or all saltwater fish right off the bat. and beyond that is sediment pollution. there exist fish who can only live in pure water, said fish don't take well to sediment, and sediment, s exactly what they would have to deal with were the earth to flood above the mountains. the layers of dirt kicked up underwater from such a storm would then proceed to kill of all fish who needed purer water. and past that, is water pressure. now, of course, the fish remaining could swim upwards or downwards, but then you have to remember that the food and shelter that many fish need to live inside/upon is only found at higher/lower sea levels, meaning that clown fish, and fish like them,, would have been picked off by any predators that happened to live in their same strata, and on that note, we get to humidity, now, you know how much water would have to be in the air for there to be a mile's worth of it above the mountains in 40 days? humans, and any non marine animals, would literally drown on the air around them. that is how much rain would be falling.

 

the arc would have had to withstand mile high, if not higher waves. there is no ship in existence that could take that kind of beating, much less a wooden ship. in addition, no sturdy wooden ship known to man has been created that was even 3/4s long as a football field.and could survive a normal storm. much less one that dwarfs mountains. and that's going by modern standards, where there's enough tech to supplement the natural weaknesses of wooden ships.

 

[MiracleGhost47]

Those are some interesting considerations you have here, m8. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to answer for all of them, but I'll try my best for the ones I can. For the ones I can't, I'll consider learning more about in the future. :)

well, starting off, the flood story, as told in the bible, was supposed to have occurred 6000 years ago, give or take a few centuries.

 

kangaroos are indigenous to australia, same as how pandas are indigenous to china, there is no evidence of them ever being anywhere else, and evolution on the scale required to change bone structure enough to make it impossible to trace (within mammals) would be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years. we can track humans throughout the planet, from their earliest appearance to their navigation to north america, but we see no signs of kangaroos (both animals with very unique bone structures and diets) ever being near the stated location of noah (middle eastern locale). no bones, no nothing. from all known records kangaroos originated in australia, evolved from other animals that lived millions of years ago, and pandas have been relegated to china for longer than 6k years.

I know little of paleontology and evolution, so I best stay neutral with those statements for the time being.

the rain is stated to have risen above even mount everest. now,even ignoring the fact that there isn't enough water on earth to actually cover mount everest by the degree claimed in the bible (it states even the tallest mountains were at least 1 mile below the ocean) when you take that volume of water, you have to also add in the increased pressure at the bottom, from miles of water torrenting down. the PH of the water would waver and fluctuate drastically with that volume of water in turmoil, be it freshwater or saltwater. now, what happens when you put a freshwater fish into saltwater is that they balloon and die. and when you do the opposite, the fish is essentially swiftly sucked dry of salt by the surrounding water, also dying.(i might be wrong, it could be that salt fish balloon while freshwater fish are sucked dry, but the point stands.) now, no matter which way the ocean goes, it will essentially kill either all freshwater, or all saltwater fish right off the bat. 

Mountains are formed by the vertical shifts of tectonic plates, and even Mt. Everest grows taller with time. It's estimated that every year, Everest increases by 0.16 inch. The present height of Everest is 29,035 feet. If we were to go back in time 6,000 years, it would have been approximately 28,955 feet (6,000 x 0.16 = 960 inches. Converted to feet, we get 960/12 = 80. 29,035 subtracted by 80 gives us 28,995). I suspected the amount might be more substantial, but I crunched in the numbers, and it turns out I was wrong. Regardless, it's a neat fact that I figured I might as well share. Anyway, I'll get back to the more important variables now.

 

After taking a revision of the story, it appears the flood may not have been as high as we thought. Genesis 7 verse 19 states, "And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth, and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered." (KJV). In this case, the term "heaven" possibly refers to the sky. I know this because verse 23 makes a reference to "the fowl of the heaven". As mentioned before, only the mountains under heaven were reportedly submerged. I'm not sure how high the sky is supposed to be, but if I had to guess, I would presume around low-level cloud height (6,500 ft). Whatever the case, we at least know that the flood couldn't have been powerful enough to obliterate all freshwater and/or saltwater species.

and beyond that is sediment pollution. there exist fish who can only live in pure water, said fish don't take well to sediment, and sediment, s exactly what they would have to deal with were the earth to flood above the mountains. the layers of dirt kicked up underwater from such a storm would then proceed to kill of all fish who needed purer water.

The hypothetical purity of the rain during that era could have compensated for all the pollution of the sediment. Remember, fish have an acute sense of their environment and the way it changes. They would have known where to go to find the optimum circumstances. For example, sediment from the land won't reach the middle of a large lake easily. 

 and past that, is water pressure. now, of course, the fish remaining could swim upwards or downwards, but then you have to remember that the food and shelter that many fish need to live inside/upon is only found at higher/lower sea levels, meaning that clown fish, and fish like them,, would have been picked off by any predators that happened to live in their same strata, 

Well, it really depends on how much the flood effected their metabolism. For example, I know certain shellfish in the cold water of Winter can go a year without eating. Additionally, while they are certainly at higher risk without shelter, there is still the possibility that predators would not be enough to drive them to extinction within the flood's duration. 

and on that note, we get to humidity, now, you know how much water would have to be in the air for there to be a mile's worth of it above the mountains in 40 days? humans, and any non marine animals, would literally drown on the air around them. that is how much rain would be falling.

Where does the Bible make the claim that the water rose a mile above the mountains? I read through chapters 6-8, and I did not find that information. I did, however, find a passage in Genesis 7:20 that claims the water rose 15 cubits above the mountains (not necessarily Everest, but mountains nonetheless). 

the arc would have had to withstand mile high, if not higher waves. there is no ship in existence that could take that kind of beating, much less a wooden ship. in addition, no sturdy wooden ship known to man has been created that was even 3/4s long as a football field.and could survive a normal storm. much less one that dwarfs mountains. and that's going by modern standards, where there's enough tech to supplement the natural weaknesses of wooden ships.

With the information I stated before, I think we can agree that the waves were less severe. Regardless, the flood was still massive, and I'm sure the waves were as well. The question is, were those waves guaranteed to be in the proximity of the ark? Additionally, even though the ark was made with wood, there remains the possibility that sturdier materials were used in the primary framework of the blueprints.