The Ark - materials, construction and seaworthness

Not so amusing when you realize that the size of the boat in question inevitably leads to engineering problems in its construction, stability, and watertight integrity that were comparable to those confronted by the shipbuilders of around 1800.After all you are talking about something bigger than any of the ships of the line in Nelson's fleet, that would have to contend with heavy weather. How Noah would be able to avoid engineeering problems that faced Nelson is far from clear. The most reasonable assumption is that he would need technologies Nelson had access to.Otherwise, that boat won't float. It isn't stable to begin with and capsizes at the first hint of heavy weather. Or its bilges fill rapidly and it sinks. Or it simply breaks up under the hull stress.In addition, as I alluded to, thre are archeological and geological objections to the scenario. Probably biological as well (what about the parasites, what about species that required unique foods, etc.).We are in a science forum. If you are convinced the flood story should be interpreted literally you need to provide scientific or engineering evidence, and answer objections that are raised.Alluding to "possible" technologies won't do at the patent office, and it won't do here.

So "simple" that the first evidence we have of use of an "Archimedes screw" in Mesopotamia is about 600 B.C., some 3000 years later, if you believe the YEC timeline. And you are arguing both sides - on the one hand you would have Noah and Sons to be technological geniuses before and during the Flood and on the other hand you would have them adopting a Luddite mentality after the Flood. And of course it is all so much speculation. The history of the world is that once a new technology is discovered and adopted, it is disseminated, improved upon, and disseminated some more. But in the case of Noah, he hits upon a pumping technology that is at least 3000 years ahead of his time and he and his progeny promptly abandon it, even though it would have been extremely useful for transporting water for people, livestock, and to irrigate crops. Yes, that is a reasonable proposition.

We weren't disucussing the ark itself. We were discussing a simple pump. And in invoking 21st century engineering concepts you sidestep the engineering method ("suck it and see") which is all that is required to make said pump.I wrote in response to Percy above that the operating pressure (excl losses) need not be anything more than 0.6 Bar or so. You are not going to tell me that this requires involved calcuations as to "burst strength" and "thermal analysis" are you?

The problem with that excuse is that if the technology is so simple, it should have been invented over and over and over again throughout history. You are not postulating a "simple" technology at all - you are postulating a technology that was dreamed up once and then lost for centuries.

---

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

That's exactly what you're being asked to do: show us that your design will work - either with a historical example or a prototype. So far, what you've given us is not an "engineering method" - it's science fiction.

---

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

Your "technology propagates" argument simply points to the technology that has propagated. Any technology that hasn't - for whatever reason, propagated, hasn't - and we will not have evidence for it - for it did not propagate. Your argument seems to use the idea: "that which happened is that which happened" It pushes to far to say that "that is the only thing that can happen"For example: the mind that conceived of the ark and the minds that generated solutions which built it might as easily be amongst those who perished. For all we know Noah & Sons might have had two left hands when it came to things engineering.

There are other ways to show. If Paisano (who strikes me as an engineer) were to say that there is nothing standing in the way of such a pump given intelligence and basic materials then you might be satisfied. You probably wouldn't be but I would consider my case rested

Excuse me? You haven't got a case to rest!I could just as well have spent the last twenty posts arguing that Noah had Warp Drive. It would be no more science fiction that what you have propoed.If it IS God we are talking about then I propose that He gave Noah anti-gravity technology which allowed the Ark to float above the flood. Noah also had a DNA replication machine that stored the DNA sequences of every known animal and then recreated them from scratch after the flood.Now prove me wrong!Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

On the matter of the ark itself.My uncle used to work as an aircrash investigator in the States (gruesome job). He once had a converstation with the CEO of Boeing who told him that he reckoned that it was no problem to make an aeroplane that would not fall out of the sky due to any failure or lack on the part of engineering. But that nobody could afford to fly in such a plane. Deaths were accepted because it made it possible for millions to fly in relative safety.The technology developed by Nelsons ship builder was part influenced by the fact that they were operating within financial constraints. Every solution they thought off was couched in this framework. There is no point in dreaming up unstoppable battleships that no one can afford to build.With Noah we have no idea as to his means. We cannot comment either way. If not so constrained then he has a bit of a jump on Nelsons boatbuilders.

I have "wood and intelligence". This is consistant with what we might suppose of his timesWhat do you need - then we can compareEdited by iano, : No reason given.

...because he is a character in a mythical story! His "means" are irrelevent to technology, archaeology and history because they provide no evidence.We don't know Santa's "means", do we? Can you tell me how Santa's sleigh is able to float?A lack of evidence doesn't demonstrate your case, it simply makes all your assumptions utterly baseless. The evidence we DO have totally discounts the entire myth.Like others have said to Faith, the honest position for you to take on this is just to argue that "Goddidit" and not attempt to bend science, history and archaeology to fit your faith.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, you still intend to argue that Noah had whatever technologies he needed, whether there is evidence for them 5000 years ago or not. This is a far cry from "some assumptions need to be made." Your approach doesn't involve making some basic non-controversial assumptions. It instead involves assuming whatever you need to support your argument.I again point out that if the discussion is not based upon evidence then it just comes down to opinion.--Percy

That Noah's family developed technologies for the ark that were abandoned after the flood is unsubstantiated speculation. I again encourage you to base your arguments upon evidence.--Percy

Iron use has been found as early as 4000 BC in Sumer, so why
did it take humans till victorian times to build steam engines? I mean, the Sumerians had "iron and intelligence" didn't they?Technology advances through the accumulation of knowledge, the raw materials alone don't demonstrate your case. Invention aside, one also needs a suitable social infrastructure to take on large, technically diffcult projects - manpower to build, to source materials and to feed workers, for example.

I hope someone with the right background expands this into an essay. The reason technology advances slowly and gradually is because new technologies are built upon existing technologies, and new ideas build upon existing ideas. Simple technologies may seem obvious from a modern perspective, but they are actually anything but.James Burke had a series of TV programs (Connections) where he clearly indicated via numerous examples the way in which new technological developments are dependent not only on what went before, but also upon a whole host of interplays that could never have been anticipated.If Noah and his sons needed pumps for the ark, then they took advantage of or improved modestly upon existing designs, the way of technological advances throughout history.--Percy