Creation

I think I could explain a lot of this stuff to a child if his questions were honest and not an attempt not to avoid the point. In ICANT's case, more effort has been spent unteaching wrong stuff than in teaching things.

That's an attractive idea of course since it gives us a much bigger ark, but you don't say exactly where in the Bible you get the 24-inch cubit. And I have to ask if this is your own personal observation or there is anyone else who shares it?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Hi caffeine I was just going along with a man with more knowledge than me.Einstein, having a final discussion with de Broglie on the platform of the Gare du Nord in Paris, whence they had traveled from Brussels to attend the Fresnel centenary celebrations, said "that all physical theories, their mathematical expressions apart ought to lend themselves to so simple a description 'that even a child could understand them.' " Page 418 of Einstein: His Life and Times (1972) by Ronald W. Clark.God Bless,

Hi NoNukes I like to think of myself as having an open mind. But there are some things where my mind is closed on some things. But those things can be changed if there is evidence to refute what I base my belief on.In Message 794 I asked you four questions which you did not answer and accused me of playing a game.The questions were as follows.1. Is the claim made that the space is what is expanding in the universe with objects not flying through space?This question is simply asking you to confirm expansion or to explain it if what I said was wrong.2. Is the claim made that when expansion and inflation began it was at the speed of light?If that is correct a simple yes would answer the question. If no you could explain exactly what was taking place and at what speed.3. Is the claim made that no knowledge of the early universe can be seen until 380,000 years after the BB?I read that so the claim has been made. If you disagree you could tell us when empirical data was available. You could even explain what it was.4. Is it a fact the first atom was formed 380,000 years after the BB?If that is correct a simple yes would be fine. If no you could explain when the first atom was formed. If you desired you could explain exactly how that atom was formed and what it was composed of.I am sure there are lurkers out there that would like to know.NoNukes I am 78 years old and I am trying to write a book. I would like to have scientific facts that are correct for any information I put in the book.This is not a game to me and if you have the answers to those question I would appreciate it if you are others could answer them. Trying to find factual information is very hard. And trying to get anything other than insults out of you is like trying to pull chickens teeth.Everybody likes to talk about empirical evidence but nobody wants to present any.God Bless,

They have been answered. Both space is expanding and objects fly through space. The reason galaxies (objects that are very far away) seem to be moving away from us is because the rate of expansion exceeds any speed they might be travelling through space.Closer objects can more easily be moving towards us as the expansion of space between us and them is much lower. It depends on the model. Using inflationary theories the expansion was greater than the speed of light. This epoch was between 10⁻³⁶ seconds and 10^-32 seconds. We cannot observe light from before this time. But we can use empirical observations to understand what was happening before this time. These empirical observations draw conclusions with a very high level of certainty back to about 1 second after the big bang. The certainty drops off but we have confidence about some things going back from there. The first nuclei were created within the first few minutes but the universe had not cooled enough for electrons to join in creating atoms until about that time. What are you looking for?

The balloon analogy can certainly be understood by a 5th grader.What questions have you asked me that I haven't answered?

Hi Faith You don't find the sizes in the Bible only in history.
The cubit is said to be the measurement between the tip of the elbow and the tip of the middle finger.I have found mentions of the cubit being anywhere from 15" to 45" and anywhere in between. There are charts giving different lengths for a man relative to his height. It they were correct I would be over 7 feet tall as from the tip of my elbow to the tip of my middle finger is 22.5". Noah lived to be 950 years old so he must have been a pretty healthy fellow. We don't know his size but I would think he was much bigger in stature than I am. At present I am only 5'7.5" tall, and measure a cubit as 22.5". An old Babylonian cubit of that era was 25". And a common cubit was 24". I have also read where a Noach cubit was 25". But I just took the common 24" Babylonian cubit. If the ark is too long it would make it hard to build the bottom where the timbers could hold the weight. But with 300' trees it would be no problem to lap them and have sufficient support. Especially since you would have cross support from side to side.The ark was to be something that could hold cargo while the water rose and fell. It was not designed to go anywhere just up with the water and down when the water receded. It had no rudder, no keel, no motor, no sail nor any oars. Now the kind of flood you talk about it would not survive everything that would be thrown at it. Most of the sites where I have talked with die hard YEC's the water would have boiled and everything would have perished. And there would have been no tree to put forth a twig for the dove to carry back to the ark. But there were a lot of things God did not tell Noah to do that He would have to have taken care of, thus involving what some would call a miracle. I personally don't believe in miracles. The only miracle I believe in is God being able to save such a sinner as I am.God Bless,

I don't want to change your mind. That is not possible. You believe that the Bible says something different than what the Big Bang theory says, and I am perfectly happy with you continuing to hold that belief. All I would want is that you understand what people are saying and why they say it. I would appreciate it if your criticisms and arguments made even the least bit of sense.If you'd like me to provide a list of your arguments that reveal poor faith, just ask.

The length of a cubit I've usually heard of is 18 inches. I don't know how that was arrived at, it just seems to be commonly accepted. It sounds like there is really no authoritative measurement, it's all a guess in the end, but if there is some reasonable support for the 24 inches I'd think it would be preferred.I do know it's supposed to be based on the forearm measurement from elbow to tip of middle finger and somehow the 18 inches got accepted. It would be on a man's arm of course; my own is 17* and I'd expect the average man's measurement today to be some inches longer. I don't see any reason to think Noah was particularly large though; healthy yes but I'm not sure what that has to do with size. Yes, that makes sense; no need for a curved hull. Don't know why not. It rose, it floated, it went down with the water. Any violence would most likely have been at the edges of the land, or where water rushed down inclines. If the ark was on a level enough and high enough place, and away from the shores I don't see why it would have been affected by that. I don't want to get into a discussion about the Flood with you; I know you disagree with YEC views of it. I think it through for myself though my version is at least somewhat similar to YEC descriptions.I would assume that God said a lot more to Noah than is recorded in the Bible. I certainly do believe in miracles: God did them, His prophets Elijah and Elisha did them, Jesus did them, His disciples did them; but I don't see any reason to think miracles had anything to do with the Flood as it is described in the Bible.Anyway thanks for that information. I think you've got an ark that would hold everything it was supposed to hold. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

1 acre = 43,560 square feet.
15 acres = 653,400 square feet.
Deck area of the ark = 300 cubits x 50 cubits x 3 decks = 45,000 square cubits.
653,400 square feet / 45,000 square cubits --> 14.52 square feet = 1 square cubit - i.e. 1 cubit = 3.81 feetChecking my math:
300 cubits long x 3.81 feet per cubit = 1143 feet long (compare aircraft carrier USS Enterprise CVN-65 = 1123 feet long)
50 cubits wide x 3.81 feet per cubit = 190.5 feet wide
1143 feet x 190.5 feet = 217741.5 square feet per deck x 3 decks = 653224.5 square feet total deck space
653224.5 square feet / 43560 square feet per acre = 14.99 acresSo... are you looking at a fourteen-foot-tall Noah?

Hi ringoTo have a lower second and third story would means you were standing on the main deck. But to have a second story you would need a first story. To have a first story the ark would need a bottom as it has a top.If you used 12' for the bottom you could build the bottom 4 feet thick and have 8 feet for storage space.You could use 12' for the first story and have a 2' thick floor in it and still have 10' for storage.You could use 12' for the second story and have a 2' thick floor in it and still have 10' for storage.You could use 12' for the third story and have a 2' thick floor in it and still have 10' for storage.That would leave you 12' for the main deck. You could use 2' thick floor and still have 10' for storage and roof. If the roof was 1' thick you would still have 9' for storage.There is 46' of space available for storage on the bottom, first, second, third story and main deck.Rooms are to be built in this area. A 2' high room would be sufficient for many of the critters. Some even less but just by adding rooms 2' high on one deck you could add the equivalent of 4 decks divide up any of the remaining areas into 6 more decks for medium sized and even smaller critters.This gives you a bottom, a first story, a second story, a 3rd story
and a main deck. 600' long x 100' wide = 60,000 sq ft per floor space.The equivalent of 15 decks would equal 900,000 sq feet. That would equal 20.66 acres. More is available.This ark is only 600' by 100' by 60'.A ark the size of what you propose divided into the 5 divisions plus building the 2' high rooms on 1 deck would equal 15 decks.
1143' long by 190.5' wide and 114.3' high would equal 217,741.5 sq feet per deck x 15 decks would equal 3,266,122.5 sq feet which equals 74.97 acres.You missed something somewhere. No I was just using the old Babylonian an old Egyptian cubit.I am only 5' 7.5" and my forearm is 22.5".I am going to locate my old drawing one day but that will take a lot of searching to find the hard drive it is on. It is very detailed.God Bless,

Hi Faith That is a modern cubit. There is one shorter 17.5"God Bless,

Hi NoNukes, I did not say it was easy to change my mind. But it is possible.But you need hard facts that are verifiable. Lay the list on me.

That seems....huge.If your upper arms are in proportion they'd be about 28" Your total arm length would be about 50". You're 67 inches tall, I imagine your arms are only 55 inches or so off the ground. Your fingers must be scraping along the floor!I assume you mean your forearm length plus your hand? Even so, that's pretty big.So anyway, back to the topic. Since we've dealt with science and the Bible, are we going to 'move on to how God might have accomplished that event.'?

Hi Mod, It is just the way I am built. And yes that is the measurement from the tip of the elbow and the tip of the middle finger that is the way a cubit was measured and that is what I was talking about.Normal for my height is 18".My wing span from tip of middle finger to the tip of other middle finger is 6'2". Normal for my height would be 70".God Bless,