The Flood - Animals and their minimum food requirement

Who would know better than Answers In Genesis?

quote:

---

The Ark measured 300x50x30 cubits (Genesis 6:15), which is about 140x23x13.5 metres or 459x75x44 feet, so its volume was 43,500 m3 (cubic metres) or 1.54 million cubic feet.

---

---

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

How much, er... horsepower do you suppose it would take to pump a big leaky tub like that? How many shifts of horses and other "kinds" of draught animals would it take to power the pumps twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week? How much extra food and water do you suppose all that hard labour would require? How much human labour do you think would be required to supervise the animals, change the teams, repair the harnesses and other equipment, etc.?

---

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

450' x 75' x 45'. There are no pieces of wood that big. Therefore there were joints. Therefore there were leaks. It only rained for 40 days. They needed to store what they needed for the remaining 330 days. (And wooden storage tanks also leak. How much of a safety margin do you suppose they'd need?) Pumping was necessary to prevent sinking. Hibernation has nothing to do with it. Pumping was necessary to prevent sinking. Waste disposal has nothing to do with it. And the bears might have eaten porridge, sat in chairs and slept in beds.... Don't know much about boats, do ya? My uncle's 40' troller required constant repair - and it was in better shape than most. You're lookin' at an ark more than a thousand times the size, with a crew of eight.My guess is it never would have lifted off the ground. (When are we going to see that creationist prototype?)

---

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

Don't know much about wood either, do ya? All wooden boats leak because of the joints and the joints "work" in a seaway, getting looser and looser... until the joints fail and the boat falls apart. Sure, the pieces would float. Little good that would do the living cargo. (Though it would explain the multiplicity of "found" arks.) This is a science forum. You can take that to the fairy tale forum.-------------But we are getting away from the topic of food/water requirements. Kindly restrict your nonsense to that subject.

---

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

quote:

---

Gen 6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.

---

The pitch within and without would prevent the wood from absorbing moisture.Why do you suppose it is that every wooden boat ever built leaks at the joints - whether or not they are "pitched"? Your "self-sealing" is just another fairy tale.Now, how about the topic?

---

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

Please cite your source so we can look. It's a given that the ark was a physical impossibliity. Otherwise, creationists would have built a working prototype by now.The premise of this topic is to calculate whether or not Noah could stuff all the necessary victuals into the ark before the flood started. So far, it appears that most of the animals would not have survived the loading process.

---

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

I figure you could make a good start for $150 million or so. That's only a fraction of the haul from the Great Creationist Video Racket. Not according to Answers In Genesis:

quote:

---

Total safety index, defined as the weighted average of three relative safety performances, showed that the Ark had a superior level of safety in high winds and waves compared with the other hull forms studied. The voyage limit of the Ark, estimated on the basis of modern passenger ships, criteria, revealed that it could have navigated through waves higher than 30 metres.

---

They seem to know enough about ark design to proclaim it "safe". Didn't you get the memo? 1/5 scale is a joke. That's only 90 feet long. Thousands of wooden ships that big have been built. Unless he's going to stock it with 1/5 scale animals and 1/5 scale food, it's utterly irrelevant.Either build a full-size prototype or stop pretending there is any science behind your fantasies.Edited by Ringo, : Removed superfluous quotation mark.

---

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

Ironically, that's exactly where I'm coming from.As a teenager, I tried to do the calculations - how much flood water, how many animals, how much food, etc. (and this was before Henry Morris commercialized creationism). The problem I had was that every answer produced ten new questions - which you can see happening in this very thread.I gave up on a literal interpretation of Genesis because it can't be done.

---

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

Not without distorting the Bible beyond all recognition, he couldn't. It clearly says one ark, not a fleet.You might as well have him resupply the ark by parachute drops.

---

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

No. The implication is not that the olive branch "survived" the flood.The ark was at rest for several months before Noah sent out the raven and the dove. If the olive branch had "survived", the dove could have brought it back any time. Genesis 8:9 says specifically that she found no veggie mats to rest her feet.The implication of the olive branch is that the vegetation had regenerated - i.e. there was food for the animals.

---

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

Of course. I was only correcting johnfolton's Biblical error.

---

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

Nonsense. The Bible says quite clearly that there were no floating mats:

quote:

---

Gen 8:9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth:

---

There was nothing floating on the water for the dove to rest on. Also nonsense. The oceans covered the whole earth. It was all salt water, so nothing would grow.

---

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

Impossible. The salt was there. It didn't magically appear after the flood.
Water dissolves salt, ergo salt water.But that's off topic. We're supposed to be talking about the food supply on the ark, not the non-existent veggie mats or the impossibility of growing food after the flood.Edited by Ringo, : Formatting.

---

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