Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,602 Year: 4,859/9,624 Month: 207/427 Week: 17/103 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does The Flood Add up?
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 136 of 298 (323706)
06-20-2006 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Crue Knight
06-20-2006 12:43 AM


quote:
The bible didnt give any reason to make us think that the reference to Peleg was mentioned because it explains why he was named so. He can be a very important calendar patriarch.
You are incorrect. Genesis 10:25
Two sons were born to Eber; the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided...
(emphasis mine)
The Bible IS explaining how Peleg got his name. It does not in anyway imply that Peleg was a "calendar patriarch" and - more importantly - it doesn't in any way imply that the division happened while he was the patriarch. (i.e. if they used the system at all there's nothing here to suggest that this is an example).
As I stated earlier the simplest explanatoin is that the "division" happened about the tiem of Peleg's birth which would explain why he was named after it.
quote:
He didnt change anything, at least nothing contradicts that explanation I just did on message 116
Apart from claiming that Genesis 10:25 says somethign that it doesn't say. Remember that Genesis 10:25 is the whole basis of his idea - but it doesn't support it. His while idea of "calendar patriarchs" is his invention. It isn't in the Bible.
quote:
And if you go to the link and read further, he explains some more about this and why he thinks there is such and such gap between Eber and Peleg and other calendar patriarchs.
I've checked the page an his "strong evidence" is based on misrepresenting Genesis 10:25. That's it. Nothing else. If there's more on some other page I'm not going to search the whole thing looking for it. If there is some more, and you want to discusss it provide a link to the correct page.e

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Crue Knight, posted 06-20-2006 12:43 AM Crue Knight has not replied

Gullwind
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 298 (324133)
06-20-2006 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by mjfloresta
06-15-2006 2:52 PM


Stability of the Ark
The problem with the Ark isn't the proportion of the dimensions. It's the structural strength of the material the vessel is made of.
Wood is simply not strong enough by weight to withstand the flexing and twisting (hogging, sagging, etc.)that a vessel in open water is exposed to. The more stress that is applied (which is proportional to the size of the vessel) the more material is needed to withstand the stress. The ark as described in the bible might survive if it was a single solid block of wood, but trying to put enough empty internal volume to carry all the cargo would weaken the structure to the point that it would break up in seas more that a foot or two high.
But it would be very stable until that happened!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by mjfloresta, posted 06-15-2006 2:52 PM mjfloresta has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by deerbreh, posted 06-22-2006 4:30 PM Gullwind has replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2975 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 138 of 298 (324956)
06-22-2006 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Gullwind
06-20-2006 9:55 PM


Re: Stability of the Ark
Nice post. But you will never get anywhere with creationists assembling relevant facts, you should know that. They have the ultimate comeback - God did it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Gullwind, posted 06-20-2006 9:55 PM Gullwind has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Gullwind, posted 06-22-2006 5:35 PM deerbreh has not replied

Gullwind
Inactive Member


Message 139 of 298 (324980)
06-22-2006 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by deerbreh
06-22-2006 4:30 PM


Re: Stability of the Ark
Oh, I know. I have some training in the maritime field, and the size and structure of the ark has always been something of interest to me.
One really has to wonder why God didn't just poof all the bad people away. Far less evidence to not find.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by deerbreh, posted 06-22-2006 4:30 PM deerbreh has not replied

PetVet2Be
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 298 (326195)
06-25-2006 9:37 PM


Just out of curiosity but how much research have you guys done on the ark? The Ark was about 1.5 (American) football fields in length and about three stories high. Plenty of room for the animal kinds. Fish and other sea animals were not counted as they could live in the waters. There were actually 7 of each type of bird. Even dinos were on the ark; most likely juveniles as these would fit a lot better! There was actually quite a bit of spare room. Like enough room to keep the neccesary plants alive for 40 days. Most plant eaters are quite happy with dried plants though. Same with the meat eaters only they got dried meat not plants.
As for Austrailian animals.... Austrailia is a very unique climate. the animals that migrated there did so because they thrived there best.
And the earths geography most certainly agrees with a global flood. The Local Flood theory is rediculous. I doubt the faith of the Christians that came up with that compromise. The Bible clearly states in Genesis 7:17-24 that the flood covered the entire earth.

Matt G.

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by nator, posted 06-25-2006 9:42 PM PetVet2Be has replied
 Message 142 by arachnophilia, posted 06-25-2006 9:46 PM PetVet2Be has not replied
 Message 143 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 9:52 PM PetVet2Be has not replied
 Message 147 by ringo, posted 06-26-2006 1:27 AM PetVet2Be has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2252 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 141 of 298 (326197)
06-25-2006 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by PetVet2Be
06-25-2006 9:37 PM


Hi there petvet,
I have some expertise in equine nutrition, so I was wondering if you have considered how one would feed horses on the ark.
Do you have any idea much hay and fresh water would need to be stored aboard the ark just to sustain one horse?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by PetVet2Be, posted 06-25-2006 9:37 PM PetVet2Be has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by MangyTiger, posted 06-26-2006 1:49 AM nator has not replied
 Message 150 by PetVet2Be, posted 06-26-2006 2:10 AM nator has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 142 of 298 (326199)
06-25-2006 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by PetVet2Be
06-25-2006 9:37 PM


There were actually 7 of each type of bird.
most types of birds are unclean, so there were 2.
The Bible clearly states in Genesis 7:17-24 that the flood covered the entire earth.
the implication is, yes, since it destroys everything "under heaven." but the verse you used is not a good one, as the word used in it, literally means "land." as in country, not planet. the hebrews of the time did not have our modern cosmological views, so our modern word for "world" is adapted which means something closer to "eternity" in biblical hebrew.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by PetVet2Be, posted 06-25-2006 9:37 PM PetVet2Be has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6419
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 143 of 298 (326200)
06-25-2006 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by PetVet2Be
06-25-2006 9:37 PM


The Ark was about 1.5 (American) football fields in length and about three stories high. Plenty of room for the animal kinds.
And only 8 zookeepers to take care of them all. As a vetinary trainee you should already see a problem there.
As for Austrailian animals.... Austrailia is a very unique climate. the animals that migrated there did so because they thrived there best.
Rabbits are known to do well in Australia. Why didn't they migrate there. The same question applies to sheep.
What did they feed the koalas and the echidnas on the ark?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by PetVet2Be, posted 06-25-2006 9:37 PM PetVet2Be has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by jar, posted 06-25-2006 9:56 PM nwr has replied

jar
Member
Posts: 34054
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 144 of 298 (326202)
06-25-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by nwr
06-25-2006 9:52 PM


Koala herdin
I always wondered who went ahead of the koalas planting eucalyptus trees for them, only to take them up after the koala herd went by.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 9:52 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 10:02 PM jar has not replied
 Message 146 by Mercury, posted 06-25-2006 10:08 PM jar has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6419
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 145 of 298 (326205)
06-25-2006 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by jar
06-25-2006 9:56 PM


Re: Koala herdin
I always wondered who went ahead of the koalas planting eucalyptus trees for them, only to take them up after the koala herd went by.
Yes, that would be another big problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by jar, posted 06-25-2006 9:56 PM jar has not replied

Mercury
Junior Member (Idle past 768 days)
Posts: 23
From: Socorro, NM, USA
Joined: 06-04-2006


Message 146 of 298 (326208)
06-25-2006 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by jar
06-25-2006 9:56 PM


Re: Koala herdin
Euclayptus ents? Wait..wrong myth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by jar, posted 06-25-2006 9:56 PM jar has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 494 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 147 of 298 (326275)
06-26-2006 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by PetVet2Be
06-25-2006 9:37 PM


Just a few more points that haven't been mentioned yet:
PetVet2Be writes:
The Ark was about 1.5 (American) football fields in length and about three stories high. Plenty of room for the animal kinds.
Depends on what wishy-washy definition of "kind" you use. What's yours?
Even dinos were on the ark; most likely juveniles as these would fit a lot better!
All of the animals on the ark would have had to be sexually mature, so that they could propagate their "kinds" after the flood. Care to give us the benefit of your research on how big those sexually mature dinos would be?
(And I always wondered: why would Noah go to all the trouble of taking dinos on the ark, only to have them all go extinct immediately after the flood?)
Like enough room to keep the neccesary plants alive for 40 days.
More like 370 days, if you read your Bible. (Another creationist trying to make the flood "add up" who can't do simple math?)
Austrailia is a very unique climate. the animals that migrated there did so because they thrived there best.
And was the climate along the way suitable for them too? Or did the climate migrate with them?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by PetVet2Be, posted 06-25-2006 9:37 PM PetVet2Be has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by MangyTiger, posted 06-26-2006 1:32 AM ringo has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6435 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 148 of 298 (326278)
06-26-2006 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by ringo
06-26-2006 1:27 AM


Or did the climate migrate with them?
ROTFLMAO

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by ringo, posted 06-26-2006 1:27 AM ringo has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6435 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 149 of 298 (326283)
06-26-2006 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by nator
06-25-2006 9:42 PM


What's the density of hay (or how big/heavy is a bale)?
Do you have any idea much hay and fresh water would need to be stored aboard the ark just to sustain one horse?
That set me thinking - what would be the volume of a year's supply of feed (presumably hay or something similar) for two horses? I don't how much horses eat per day or what the density of stored hay but maybe you can supply the figures.
What I was really wondering about was the elephants, who I was able to find out require a minimum of 300 pounds of feed a day each. So 600 pounds a day for around 365 days gives us the total weight of feed that had to be stored on the Ark for the two elephants. If we assume their feed will be of a similar density to horse feed we will be able to work out how much storage space was needed.
I suspect if you add up the storage requirements for the feed for the large herbivores (there's still rhinos and hippos etc. to consider) there will turn out to be no space left for the animals...

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by nator, posted 06-25-2006 9:42 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Randy, posted 06-26-2006 6:42 AM MangyTiger has not replied

PetVet2Be
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 298 (326289)
06-26-2006 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by nator
06-25-2006 9:42 PM


In response to schrafinator:
All the food they would need for water is rain water (they probably had enough). Actually they would need enough food for 2 horses. Yes this is a lot but, they had enough room to store a lot of food. Here are some figures to back up this claim.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/...answersbook/arksize13.asp
In response to nwr:
Actually 8 people is not that bad as many animals, such as the grazers, did not have to be fed every day. i.e. they were likely given enough food at a time to last 2 or more days. As for the Aussie animals, I think that God has a sense of humor and directed animals to different places, Austrailia being his "oddity" place.
In response to Ringo:
I mean kinds as in equines, canines, bears, etc.
And Dinos did not have to be sexually mature. Who said that they all got off the ark and immediately began reproducing. I believe they migrated a ways before mating. And Dinos did not go extinct immediately after the flood. In fact "dragons" fit the criteria for dinosaurs very well minus the firebreathing part. The fact that so many different cultures have such similiar depictions of these beasts lends much credibility to their existance. The Bible even depicts a creature the sounds like one of the sauropods. (Job 40:15-24)
And you are correct that the number is larger than 40, but its actually 150 (Genesis 7:24). Still a reasonable number.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by nator, posted 06-25-2006 9:42 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by arachnophilia, posted 06-26-2006 2:43 AM PetVet2Be has not replied
 Message 152 by ringo, posted 06-26-2006 2:51 AM PetVet2Be has not replied
 Message 155 by nator, posted 06-26-2006 8:03 AM PetVet2Be has not replied
 Message 163 by nwr, posted 06-26-2006 10:23 AM PetVet2Be has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024