Re-enactments of the Noah's Ark voyage?

Because they're made of water. When have you ever seen water be "gently pressed back"? Pour yourself a glass of water and try to "press" it around.Water flows, because it's a fluid. When you press some of it away more flows in to take it's place. You can't "press" fluids except in a totally closed container, which the oceans are not.Your steam jet is going to circulate the oceans, not "press them back." That's going to kill all coral, and most everything else - and certainly isn't going to result in stratification. Well, you're free to disagree. Nonetheless, you can't push on water, so you're wrong. It's hard to imagine how you got the ridiculous idea that you could push on water.

quote:

---

Randy, You forget Noah had Iron and Brass to strenthen the ark, bolts, nails, ribs, hinges, valves, and to compartmentalize the ark, the ark was sealed inside and out, this would of strengthed the boat,

​

The bible says that in Noah's day they could make things out of iron and brass!!!

​

kjv Gen 4:22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain [was] Naamah.

---

Sorry but you can’t use one myth to validate another. At the time Genesis was written the Hebrews had iron but the flood myth is set in the Bronze Age as Crashfrog has already pointed out. Of course sealing the ark inside and out would have quickly caused buildup of toxic animals wastes so on the one hand you must claim it was sealed and on the other hand claim that it was well ventilated even during 40 days and nights of intense global rain.

quote:

---

the waves pulsating action, would of increased the air pressure within the ark, causing the moon pool level to press down, accelerating the ventilation,

---

So increased pressure from the moon pool causes more ventilation through the window on top??? This is just plain silly. Try building a wooden boat with a hole in the bottom and a window on top and see how long it stays above the water line.

quote:

---

roof over the windows, the length of the ark, only air would be drawn back into the ark, through the vent slats under the roof in the windows, the moon pool would be like a giant bellows, keeping the atmosphere fresh, and driving the moon pool lower so the wastes would be diluted continually,

---

The waste would be diluted by all the water of the flood as the boat would quickly sink. This is just absurd. If the moon pool is somehow sealed off from rest of the ark to keeping it from filling the boat the water and sinking it there can be no contribution to the ventilation. You can’t pressurize a three-story wooden boat with a big window on top anyway. In fact you can't pressurize a wooded boat at all no matter how much "pitch" you use to seal it. Do you think Noah had air locks and compressors to pump fresh air into the lower decks?

quote:

---

Stokes law would be a non factor, because of the iron in the basalt sediments, and the iron, calcium, and aluminum ions in the oceans waters, the waves would mix the sediment and then they would settle quickly through the upper warmer salty stratification layers, but agree that stokes law might slow its decent as the waters cooled, and interestingly stokes law might actually support liquefication, explaining how the fossils floated within the dispersed sediments, the massive salt deposits buried by sediments came into being when God created the water canopy that covered the earth (pre-flood), if it never rained preflood, the waters evaporated leaving incredible amounts of salt behind, likes expressed beneath the sediments of the Mediterranean Sea, but the flood explains the sediments that covered these salt deposits, and the Salt domes, etc...the coral reefs were simply covered as the sediments settled slowly by Stokes law & liquefication, gently burying your coral reefs beneath the sediments. The steam erupting out of the fountains of the deep would of rolled back the atmosphere much like Mt. St. Helens, so the steam would of mushroomed out above the atmosphere so the atmosphere being rolled back (displaced) wouldn't of over heated, with the rains raining down as the steam cools it would slip under the accelerating steam rising upwards 100's possibly 1000's of miles above the atmosphere, causing these fine sediments in the upper atmosphere to continually to rain upon the entire earth, during the flood adding additional 1000's of feet of sediments over the entire earth, I'm not sure how much sediments existed before the flood, to how many feet would of been deposited by the flood, but agree the massive salt deposits were formed pre-flood, etc...

---

There is so much wrong with the physics and logic of this that I hardly know where to begin. JonF correctly characterizes it as gibberish. First, salt shields charges and doesn’t neutralize them. However, for this to happen the salt water and fresh water must mix. So much for your fish preserving stratification. Fine sediments such as those that form shale must still settle out very slowly.Second, there is no possible way that the fossil record was created by a worldwide flood but that is a subject for other threads.Third the salt layers sit on top of other layers that are alleged to be flood deposits and so they weren’t just buried. You can see this from Glenn Morton’s page on the geologic column for instance.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/The vapor canopy idea was abandoned long ago. Any significant amount of water vapor in the atmosphere requires temperatures and pressure hostile to air breathing life.Steam pressures tend to equalize very rapidly so the steam would in fact spread out through the atmosphere radiating heat in all directions including back toward the earth cooking the earth to death.

quote:

---

Given heat rises, the heat could of primarily dispersed in the upper atmosphere, not toasting the ark, with the steam gently pressing the oceans back, no giant waves to worry about either, just a lot of rain, in fact it wasn't until after the flood that God allowed the winds to blow

---

So we have huge steam jets shooting through the atmosphere but no winds blowing!? How do you displace the atmosphere as you claim above without creating wind? You are contradiciting yourself. We have steam gently pressing the ocean back!? How does steam gently push the ocean back?? You get more and more absurd with each post. Heat rises because hot air rises. This means it was hot to begin with. The steam will spread out in the atmosphere until the pressure equalizes and even as it reaches the upper atmosphere it will radiate heat back to earth through black body radiation at least until the surface of the earth reaches the temperature of the steam. The pressure of the atmosphere is hydrostatic and putting a significant amount of steam in the air will lead to higher and higher pressures. Enough steam to fall as 1000 meters of global rain with lead to an pressure of about 100 atmospheres and a temperature of several hundred degrees which would be a little hard on Noah don’t you think?

quote:

---

crashfrog, The steam would of pressed upward, displacing the ocean and the atmosphere, why would not the oceans not be pressed back, gently, because the steam would be pressing upward, heat rises, etc...I'm sure your going to disagree, so I'm going to agree to disagree, this is my last post, its just too addicting, etc...

---

I am not surprised you would want to give up since all your claims have been shown to be nonsense.
Randy

Randy, I've stopped posting, however, wind commonly presses waters back (Demark flooded because of this very problem), it maybe some sediments were formed pre-flood, but the waves themselves would of caused the moon pools levels to fluctuate turning the moon pool into a massive air pump, etc...P.S. Perhaps I'll come back when I have more time, next December- January, and we can discuss how steam rising up above the atmosphere, 100's or 1000's of miles into the upper atmosphere wouldn't of overheated the earth or increased air pressure significantly(but would of only accelerated the rain because of the ash forming raindrops as the heat dissipated into outer space), if your really interested in this stuff, I probably won't come back on next December, so I'll just suggest you check out Walt Browns site, if for no other reason than to see a brilliant scientists, bring out some of the problems within the theory of evolution, tecktonic plate theory, etc...
Center for Scientific Creation – In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

quote:

---

Randy, I've stopped posting, however, wind commonly presses waters back (Demark flooded because of this very problem),

---

But didn’t you say that God didn’t allow the wind to blow until after the flood?

quote:

---

, but the waves themselves would of caused the moon pools levels to fluctuate turning the moon pool into a massive air pump, etc...

---

Only if the ark was open to the moon pool which would fill the ark with water to the level that the ark rode in the ocean.

quote:

---

P.S. Perhaps I'll come back when I have more time, next December- January, and we can discuss how steam rising up above the atmosphere, 100's or 1000's of miles into the upper atmosphere wouldn't of overheated the earth or increased air pressure significantly(but would of only accelerated the rain because of the ash forming raindrops as the heat dissipated into outer space

---

The steam is going to expand in the air radiating heat in all directions as it rises and will continue to radiate heat back toward the earth even from hundreds or thousands of miles in the air. Also you are forgetting the conservation of energy. Water a thousand miles in space has a potential energy of E= mgh where g is the gravitation constant, m is the mass in kg and h is the height in meters or 9.8 x 1,609,000 J/kg. Thus the 5 x 10^20 Kg of water needed to produce a km of global rain will have a potential energy of about 8 x 10^27 J at 1000 miles above the earth. When this water falls back to earth the potential energy will be converted into kinetic energy and eventually to heat cooking the earth to death thousands of times over again. You are stuck in a hopeless dilema here. The higher up the water the more potential energy it has to convert to heat as it falls back to earth and the lower it is the greater the fraction of its heat energy that is radiated back to earth and only a small fraction of its total heat energy is enough to heat the atmosphere beyond the point that any air breathing life could survive. The only question is whether the ark will sink before or after the air temperature reaches the point that no life could survive.

quote:

---

I'll just suggest you check out Walt Browns site, if for no other reason than to see a brilliant scientists, bring out some of the problems within the theory of evolution, tecktonic plate theory, etc...
Center for Scientific Creation – In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

---

Do you think I haven’t seen Walt Brown’s total nonsense before? His hydroplate model is one the silliest things I seen even from YECs and that is really saying something. I suggest you can get better science from Walt Disney cartoons than from Walt Brown's web page. A talking mouse makes more sense than hydroplates. I don’t have time to discuss Brown’s nonsense right now but for starters the hydroplate model cooks the earth to death for just the reasons I have described.Randy

Whatever. We are talking about a huge wooden ship here. Not a modern steel vessel! A moon pool would not be a drag issue, but a strength issue. There is absolutely NO evidence that ancient shipwrights would attempt to use one, let alone have the concept of one. Livestock was caried aboard Bronze Age vessels, but they seemed to use the tried and true method of waste disposal..shovels.
Water ballast is a relatively new concept. It requires specially designed tanks and a complex trim mechanisms. Ballasting would have been accomplished in the same manner as done for thousands of years, according to all archaeological evidence. Ballast stones.
Just building a 450' vesel out of wood, moon pool or no, could not have been possible. For argument's sake, if one was built, the hogging and flexing of such a boat would have had the whole 8 person crew running around trying to recaulk seams that would have been constantly opening to the sea.
If you are interested, I will post what the scantlings for such a vessel would be.

---

Reunite Gondwana!

What are scantlings?

---

Common sense isn't

scantling (sk?nt'l?ng, -l?n)
n.
1. A very small amount; a modicum.
2. A small timber used in construction.
3. The dimensions of a building material, especially the width and thickness of a timber.
4. Nautical. The dimensions of the structural parts of a vessel. Often used in the pluralObviously #4 is the appropriate one.http://EvC Forum: About that Boat - Noah's Ark -->EvC Forum: About that Boat - Noah's Ark[This message has been edited by JonF, 02-02-2004]

Ah, that would be interesting. Thank you for looking it up.

---

Common sense isn't

You're welcome, but no big deal. It's just alt-click and the free GuruNet pops it up. http://www.gurunet.com/Note my edit to add a relevant URL.

A while ago, I created some Ark scantlings while working on a design project for a 190' schooner.I was curious as to the lumber requirements. Using dimentions from some creationist sites, I calculated an estimated displacement of ~25,000 tons. That gave me the scantlings number I plugged into the calculator and this is what I got. If anyone has a better figure, let me know.LOA: 450' BEAM:45' Estimated DRAFT: 25'
Scantlings Numeral 91.9 (cube root disp. In cu. Feet)Planking Thickness 13.79 (inches)
Frames, 22.98 (inches)
Frames, Spacing 37.85 (inches) Plank to Frame Fastening Diameter 3.45 (inches)
Length of Screws 27.57 (inches)
Trunnel Fastenings Diameter 5.17 (inches)
Keel Portion of Backbone Molding 64.33 (inches)
Keel Minimum Siding Widest Point 128.66 (inches)
Stem, Sternpost, Horn Timber S & M 55.14(inches minimum)
Bilge Stringer Thickness 13.79 (inches)
Bilge Stringer Width 192.99 (inches)
Minimum Stringer Wiedth at Ends 96.5 (inches)
Clamp Sided & Shelf Molded 36.76 (inches)
Clamp Molded & Shelf Sided 59.74 (inches)
Combined Clamp/Shelf Sided & Molded 43.19(inches)
Secondary Clamp Siding and Molding 30.33(inches)
Floor Timber Spacing 37.85 (inches) Floor Timber Minimum Siding 22.98 (inches)
Floor Timber Min. Ext. Along Plank 114.88(inches)
Floor Timber Minimum Molding 45.95 (inches)
Partner Knees Siding 40.21 (inches)
Partner Knee Min. Arm Length 201.03 (inches)
Regular House Knees as FloorsSome large timbers needed!! No laminating due to lack of waterproof glue, so ya gotta find some huge trees. All the wood has to season to 12% moisture and be kept from rot during the 120 years of construction. The pitch would have kept the ship worms away from the wood, at least until constant thumping against all the flotsom and jetsom, that would have been floating around, exposed bare wood.[This message has been edited by Bonobojones, 02-03-2004]

Does this give any clue about the forces on the main keel and other supports? What material strengths are needed?I don't know what all those different parts are so I can't tell what this would look like inside. How much is taken up with structure compared to actual storage volumen?

---

Common sense isn't

If your going by the bible, man lived longer immediately after the flood, and the bible says there were giants in those days kjv genesis 6:4 http://greatserpentmound.org/articles/giants3.html fossil records concur a tribe lived in the Americas, where all their fossils were documented to be around 8 feet tall, there is no reason Noah couldn't of been much taller, all life grew bigger pre-flood, however the ark Ron Wyatt found was around 540 feet long, so I'd go by the Sacred cubit which is 21.888 inches per cubit, etc...If preflood fossils were all bigger, Noah was a mighty big man, as were his sons, as were the trees, based off the sacred cubit, I'd design the ark to be 547.2 feet long 91.2 feet wide, and 54.72 feet tall, 21.888 inches for the sacred cubit which is 21.888 inches This is the same as the Egyptian measurements for a cubit, the point being made is Noah was not a small man, or were his sons, etc....the large birds wouldn't of been able to fly if the atmospheric pressure wasn't greater pre-flood. http://www.s8int.com/boneyard1.htmlFor design shape, it needs to be an ark, heres a picture from Ron Wyatts website, etc... You don't hear much how the fossils were much larger in the Pleistocene extinction, only thousands of years past, so there would of been no need for laminated woods, the trees grew large too, etc... I would design the ark with a water ballast so only the upper story was above water, with the moonpool designed to pressurize the ark, I'd like my ark to have running water, so I'd design a simple Ram pump, with a large water storage tank in the upper level, but given the size the trees grew pre-flood, you probably wouldn't need a moon pool, I just took a peak and wouldn't want you to undersize the ark, you have iron, brass, no need for laminate woods, you have pitch, if the ark rode lower within the waves with sea anchors, it would of rode out the storm just fine, like a trout with little energy stationary facing into a fast moving stream of water(vortex energies)(fluid dynamics), the very reason the trout isn't pressed backward, with the ark being designed much like the trout, the waters would of flowed around the ark, so I'd design the ark to ride a bit lower in the water, water ballast, etc... ForbiddenP.S. Randy has a problem understanding how air ventilation works, the cooler outside air would be drawn in through air vents, settling, the warmer air would rise, being expelled by the moon pool, the hot waters expelling as supersonic steam from the fountains of the deep, would be much like the storms where the hot humid air rises and straight line winds return as it cools, Page not found - Channel3000.com these straight line winds "would of" continually been pressing down on the oceans, it would be happening a much greater scale, the cold air returning would balance the hot air escaping, as the heat radiates above the erupting waters dissipating into space, etc...I guess all the scientists are good for is mocking people like Ron Wyatt, though his ark site was exposed to the ravages of erosion since the earthquake opened it up, so all you have is the pictures taken before the decomposed impression was destroyed, to go by for your design, and it concures with the sacred cubit, and I found that interesting, I'd suggest you check out the pictures Ron took of the sea anchors, to help you size up your sea anchors, the design, the roof design, in spite of all the mockers, and remember a trout can just stay in one spot facing into a fast moving stream of water without being pressed back, hes not even swimming just a little wiggle, the ark is basically to be designed to be an ark shape, so waters would flow around, just like the trout, facing into the stream, and not being pressed back, the water energies themselves stablizing the ark, because of the sea anchors continually reorintating the ark to be facing into the wave, like the trout facing into the stream, etc...I don't have time to waste posting, so I'm kind of fading away, but you wanted me to respond, don't have much else to say, liked your specks, etc...[This message has been edited by whatever, 02-04-2004]

Which we are not. We are discussing the scientific evidence. There is no scientific evidence for longer lives or larger men at any time in the past; there is plenty of evidence for shorter lives and slightly smaller people in the past. Prove it. The link you gave doesn't talk about that, just makes unsupported assertions about what is required to creata a fossil graveyard. Ah, so you would reduce the cargo space by 80% or so? How many cubic feet for the animals? How many animals? How many cubic feet for food?And "using water ballast" is a lot more complex than pouring water into the boat. But you claim that the moon pool would pump air in and out. How could it if the ark is sealed so it can be pressurized?And the idea of sealing such a structure with Bronze Age technology ... laughable. There were no such pumps in the Bronze Age .. and you just reduced the cargo space even more. We do. Nobody in the Bronze Age did. Yes .. but remember that nails were not used in boat construction in the Bronze Age. Riding out a storm on a world-wide ocean is nothing like a trout in a stream.Oh, but you forgot ... you claim there was no storm to ride out! The Flood was stiller than the smoothest millpond, so the salt and fresh water didn't mix! That's because there's nothing to hear about. The fossils of the Pleistocene are of animals no larger than we see today or before the Pleistocene. No, you have a problem understanding how floating (or, in this case, sinking) works. That's all Ron Wyatt was good for. He was a fraud. He found a rock. BOGUS "NOAH'S ARK FROM TURKEY EXPOSED AS A COMMON GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE, Wyatt Archeologiscal Research Fraud Documentation.

JonF, Whats wrong with vents with a roof covering like is evidenced in the picture Ron Wyatt took of the ark, a picture at times says what words can not say, on a sailboat water ballast might be complicated, but were not talking about a sailboat, were talking about a fluid dynamic designed barge, to ride low in the water, just needs to face continually into the waves, like the trout, scientific need to face into a fast moving stream of water, fluid dynamics is what prevents the trout from being pressed downstream by the waters, so fast moving streams of water only stabilizing the floating trouts position, so its not pressed downstream, this is why it faces into the stream of fast moving waters, etc... but it does appear the straight line winds would of been experienced on each side of the erupting waters, the east wind would of been shutdown by the contiual rains, so Noah waves probably were not that excessive, in respect to the size of the ark, and if you take the bible literally, it wasn't until after the erupting waters ceased that God caused a wind to blow over the earth, etc...P.S. If you take the bible literally, Noah was a giant of a man, iron, bronze technology existed, and if you take science seriously, the ark is like a trout facing into a fast moving stream of water, with the waters flowing around allowing the trout not to be pressed down stream, etc...If you can not see the trout is in essence defying gravity, by not being pressed downstream, if you still don't understand this significance, perhaps you could take a college course in mechanical engineering, and then explain to all of us how this is not relevant to fluid dynamics, etc...I thank you all though for explaining how Noah would not of needed all that many immature creatures, Noah just preserved the different kinds, you all have shown how quickly creatures diversify via speciation, explained by 4350 years of natural selection, genetic drifting, mutations, ressessive genes, even chromosome mistakes within kind, occuring since the flood, etc...JonF, Need a job, so say a prayer I find one, otherwise I'll be back(incentive for you to pray), with that said, I have to start looking for a job, and not posting, so I'm stuck with agreeing to disagree in advance to whatever, take care, bye, people that are more righteous you can pray too, etc...[This message has been edited by whatever, 02-04-2004]

Sinking. On any boat water ballast is complicated. Irrelevant to a boat in a strorm. We don't. Not at all. If your claim is true, boats would never founder. THey do. Your claim is wrong. I have a Masters of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which included several courses in fluid mechanics in which I did quite well. Perhaps you should learn some fluid mechanics beyond the "water flows downhill" level before trying to make claims about it.The trout is not defying gravity, in essence or not, and the trout is not sitting in the full force of the current expending no effort. Either the trout is expending effort or the trout is sitting in a small area of still water. However, it's all irrelevant to the issues of a boat attempting to remain on the surface of the water; the air-water interface makes a big difference. Nobody mentioned the ridiculous and ad-hoc "immature creatures" argument; it fails for many reasons,How many millions of kinds are there? How much space did they take up? What volume is allocated for food?