Wyatt's Museum and the shape of Noah's Ark

I'm not a marine engineer or anything, only basing my reasonings on the trout, which only faces into the current, so the anchor stones could only be off the bow, if Noah was building an ark off marine design(an ark), knowing these anchor stones would sink into the slower currents below the waves blown by the wind, so the arks bow would continually need to face into the currents, like a trout barely wiggling a fin to maintain position, the anchor stones maintained the position of the ark in the rising waters above, till the waters flowed off the earth, but even here, the currents would of been slower deeper below the ark, allowing the bow to continue to face into the current like the trout, not getting carried away by the current, etc...P.S. Think what your all saying is that parachute anchors act as a sea brake, cause the waves are not actually moving, but is slowing he boat being blown by the wind (but no reason to believe the ark was a high rider, being blown by the wind), if so then the little wave currents on the ark would only keep the ark pointed into the current, no great stresses on the anchor stone ropes, until they snagged breaking from their ropes when the ark grounded in the mountains of Ararat, etc...

jar, You have every right to believe what ever makes sense to you, I don't agree, so were just agreeing to disagree. If the japanese buoy would of sunk, but they don't, "quite interesting", Noah had iron and bronze available for strengthening the keel, stress area, and if they were able to increase the air pressure within the ark, it solves all other problems, etc...P.S. It wasn't like the hull was being pounded by the waves (wasn't a tri-hull pounding vessel), if it was a low rider, wouldn't be excessive stresses on the hull. You do realize the chinese built vessels that floated believed longer than the ark, etc...NOVA Online | Sultan's Lost Treasure | Ancient Chinese Explorers

Bonobojones, Throw out all your manuals on ship building, the ark wasn't built off your designs but off fluid dynamics of an ark, if the sea anchors were off the bow side, they wouldn't act as a pendulum, but as a brake, there had to be some current on the surface, it would take much, to keep the bow into the wind surface current, with a sea anchor of stones densities that would sink below the currents, etc...P.S. Ron Wyatt said ancient mediterranean sea vessels used rock sea anchors, but a whole lot smaller than the ones used on the ark, etc...

Bonobojones, What have I been talking about, how come a trout with little effort maintains position in a fast moving stream of water calmly feeding, how come a dolphin can jump out of the water's, how is it possible for a coho salmon to swim up extreme rapids, are they defying gravity?, I mean the tail is less wide, think it would be like swimming into an incredible forces, or is it that because of fluid dynamics that a vaccum or something develops on the wider side of the fish, and the waters flow around the tail helping propel the coho forward, etc...P.S. I mean we all know water in motion is a current, but the coho is not only swimming into the current, he is swimming up hill through incredible rapids, you never see the tail going first, like you all go about your sea anchors, turn tail and through out the sea anchors, the coho goes onward and upward, never turning tail and running with the flow, etc...

Raz, I don't see the stones as being straight down, because it will be acting as a sea brake too. The ark being massive and not a tri-hull would be cutting through the waves, the wave energies parting around the ark bow, etc...P.S. I see the sea anchors being that rudder that keeps the ark pointed into the current, though if the boat was built like most boats today, it would of been a high floater, don't think thats how the ark was designed, it was built to be an ark (part fish, its own ventilation system, natural water and waste disposal system, adjustable water ballast, etc...), not a normal boat(had no rudder, wasn't something tossed to and fro by the wind and waves), etc... If you would just think about it, a boat capable of surviving a world flood, would it be a low rider, or a high rider, common sense seems to rule in favor of water ballasts so it would ride lower in the water, so it wouldn't be blown across the surface of the waters by the winds, (fishermen understand this principle, why they throw weights near the hook on a windy day to slow bobber drift), the anchor stones would of been the only way to insure that the ark never was going to be pounded in the sides by the waves, sea anchors act as a self aligning rudder, without power and without the sea anchors, the ark would of been at the mercy of the waves, because it will pound a boat without mercy from the sides (creating leaks, until the ark sunk), unless its arked shape is continually cutting into the waves, etc...Without the anchor stones the ark would of sunk because the waves would of pounded the hull, instead of smoothly flowing around the sides, etc...

Raz, Just to think about how sailors of old would of been tossed by the wind, sounds more like it would have been more liken to an awesome roller coaster ride, the ark however, wasn't built for speed, (like you said a wave doesn't move), no reason for the ark to be put through roller coaster stresses on its wooden hull, if its the wind that moves a boat, a low rider wouldn't be driven by the wind across the surface, not designed like those ancient sailboats of old, with their need for a sea anchor off their tail in wind storms, to slow the speed their boats were driven by the winds.The ark would of been a (low rider (water ballast), hull(moon)pool(forced air ventilation) & act as a (waste disposal hull pool), sea anchors (to act as the rudder)& (act as a sea brake), a natual water delivery system (RAM Pumps), and wastewater removal system a part of the design (bilge waste flowing to the lowered moonpool), ballast (simple water filled compartments that could be filled by wave powered RAM pumps, and be drained to the moon pool to be able to adjust ride), etc...P.S. I think you hit the nail on the head, that the waves don't move, its the wind that moves the boats over the wave surfaces, the purpose of the sea anchor to act as a sea brake the boat by your immovable wave, and I like how with anchors off the bow, the ark would of cut through the waves, instead of bobbing up and down (as with anchors off the tail), no reason there were large waves, in that your tusami, would of already dispersed its energies far before the fresh waters started rising upwards up above the continental land masses, etc...

Jon, He said no such thing. Waves move, the water doesn't (much).Whatever, Meaning the same thing?Jon, Its purpose is to keep a boat pointing into the seasWhatever, If they put the anchor off the tail, how does it keep the boat pointing into the current?Jon, Also known as "broaching" ... pretty close to the worst thing that can happen to a boat.Whatever, If the ark had a big hull hole in the bottom like the japanese buoy's have built into their design, that also had a big hole in the bottom which interestingly don't fill with water and sink(in fact they are making electricity off this principle of forced air compressions), why would you feel the ark would sink if it too had a roof, and a vent system similar to the japanese electric generating buoy's, etc... Maybe broaching is a good thing if you have a roof venting system that's designed to not allow water in, so not to overpower the hull pool, as its diving the pressure could be designed to be closing intake air vents, the air pressure blowing out the blow hole vents preventing water from coming into the ark, and when the ark's coming out of the water its drawing in air (a simple wave based ventilation system), not that the ark was ever broaching cause it had a roof, and even if it was a low rider, it was actually quite tall, so it wouldn't need to be a broacher to maintain its position in the waves, if 45 feet were below the water line, and 10 feet above the water line, it would still qualify as a low rider, with the anchor stones keeping its bow into the current, and normal rolling waves, broaching was not a problem, the anchor stones was not heavy enough to qualify as ballast to make the ark broach into the waves, its primary purpose was to be the rudder, and to act as a sea brake, etc...

Noticed you all never addressed the japanese buoy that has a hole in the bottom, and doesn't fill up with water, floats fine, guess time to claim victory, you all are designing your boats to float on the surface, not in the waters, etc...P.S. Guess I'll just spin my wheels (makes more sense than the water shortage in californian cities, where they pour water in the desert to grow oranges, makes more sense the solution in california to rising electric costs is to not build electric power plants in California), the democrats solution to rising gas prices is to not drill for oil/gas in Alaska, or off shore florida), guess I'll just spin my wheels, that the ark floated, had a forced air ventilation, big hole in the bottom, and floated quite well, cause it was designed to float in the waters and not on the waters, the mighty trout, the coho salmon, the dolphin all bearing testimony how they defy gravity, because they are in the waters, and not on the waters, etc...

Raz, You pictures explain why I seemed to go faster on my friends seado's riding the wave crest, compared to riding in the valleys, etc...P.S. I can kinda hear you, about your parachute anchors, though think if you would anchor below these wave energies, the ark would be the hammer, and the wave would flow around the ark, that it wouldn't matter if it rose up and down, thats my reasoning of the arked design, why a tri-hull would be battered by your wave energies, but a v hull would not, etc...This message has been edited by whatever, 05-04-2004 09:56 PM

Raz, I didn't find much either, heres at least a floating can, open below, air column inside, can not find the site about the japanese reversed turbine, though it appears from this article that floating is being considered due to damage that arises in permanent moored sites by larger waves, with an opening chamber from below, agree it would be interesting to see more of the design, but if a floating can, with an air column can float, it makes the ark theory of the hull pool a more viable (believable) theory, etc...http://www.incubator.dp.ua/Projects/Wave/Column" by Mr. Masuda.Navy officer in Japan Masuda offered floating can, opened below. Air column inside this can, being swung by waves, are directed into air turbine generator through valves. The "Column" by Mr. Masuda is only wave device, which is produced in small series and is used for energy supply of navigation buoys. Such buoy-generator have power about 30 W and auto lead battery as an accumulator. Service life of such device is about 3 years and is limited by corrosion and service life of lead battery. But idea to supply cities with "big energy" bore huge Masuda's "Column" - "Kimay" project in 1979. "Kimay" device looked like a big ship - 280 meters length and 30 meters wide, it cost 80 million yens, was made of concrete and had electrical power 1800 kW. After "Kimay" project Japanese government had to make decision to finance full-scale project of construction of 1500 MW power plant. But money wasn't gotten.Last time professor Wells with Californian Wevegen Company developed air turbine, which doesn't need valves. This turbine works in bi-directed air current and is named "reversive turbine".