Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Ark volume calculation
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 16 of 347 (490070)
12-02-2008 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by earlejones
12-01-2008 5:25 PM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
earljones writes:
I can't find any data on how kangaroos got from Mount Ararat all the way to Australia!
the same way the Papua New Guinea people immigrated to australia - walked
the findings of oceanographers indicate that at one time land ridges connected what are now isolated land areas. For example, oceanographic studies indicate that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may have crossed that ocean above the surface. Possibly there were also other ridges, and animals could have migrated by means of these before such ridges sank below the surface of the ocean. Other oceanographic studies have turned up evidence that once there existed a huge South Pacific continent that took in Australia and many of the South Sea isles. If such was the case, then, of course, the animals had no difficulty in migrating to these lands

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by earlejones, posted 12-01-2008 5:25 PM earlejones has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Larni, posted 12-02-2008 6:19 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 17 of 347 (490075)
12-02-2008 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by kuresu
12-01-2008 8:32 AM


kuresu writes:
two of those behemoths probably would have sunk the ark. Which is why I think creationists tend to remove dinosaurs from the ark list.
as you knowe, Dinosaur bones are found in lower earth layers than are human bones, leading many to conclude that they belong to an earlier time period

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by kuresu, posted 12-01-2008 8:32 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 6:22 AM Peg has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 18 of 347 (490076)
12-02-2008 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Peg
12-02-2008 5:00 AM


Re: great topic
Internally strengthened by adding two floors, the three decks thus provided gave a total of about 8,900 sq m (96,000 sq ft) of space.
Do you know how small this space is? That's the total sq. ft. of the Denver REI store. I can tell you right now it would be impossible to house and feed all the living world's species on the ark for one year.
That is, unless you completely ignore reality and let god magically do everything.
Good thing this is a mythical story that didn't actually happen, huh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 5:00 AM Peg has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 19 of 347 (490077)
12-02-2008 6:19 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Peg
12-02-2008 5:04 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
For example, oceanographic studies indicate that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may have crossed that ocean above the surface.
Please provide some evidence of this claim (remember this has hold true for the Noaichian time frame as I'm sure you are not talking about Pangaea).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 5:04 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 3:50 AM Larni has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 20 of 347 (490078)
12-02-2008 6:22 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Peg
12-02-2008 6:09 AM


Then why have YECs tried to include dinosaurs in their ark models?
I agree, dinosaurs lived a long time ago. They died out 65 million years ago. Humans (homo sapiens) did not appear until about 250,000 years ago.
The flood model simply does not make sense with what we know about the geological and biological history of the earth. Among various other fields that it badly collides with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 6:09 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 6:45 AM kuresu has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 21 of 347 (490081)
12-02-2008 6:45 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by kuresu
12-02-2008 6:22 AM


i have no idea why anyone would try to include dinosaurs in the story of noah
there is no reason to do so, the bible does not mention dinosaurs because they were not existing when it was written
kuresu writes:
The flood model simply does not make sense with what we know about the geological and biological history of the earth.
im sure there is still a lot about the earths early history that we may never come to understand...everything we conclude about the earth as it is today is only based on our current knowledge. It will probably change in few decades and then it will change again a few decades after that. So for now, nothing is impossible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 6:22 AM kuresu has not replied

killinghurts
Member (Idle past 4993 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 22 of 347 (490083)
12-02-2008 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Peg
12-02-2008 5:00 AM


Re: great topic
So far I've learned the approximate size of the arc is:
1,518,000 cu.ft.
Bible Study - You Have Questions. The Bible Has Answers!
1,396,000 cu.ft.
Noah's Ark Search - Mount Ararat
1,518,000 cubic feet
1,400,000 cu ft
If we take an average (mean) we have 1,458,000 cu ft.
I have not had an answer, though, as to how many animals were on the ark.
Can someone please give me a formula to calculate how many animals were on the ark, and the apporximate size of "each kind" or species, or whatever you want to call it.
Thanks!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 5:00 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 7:37 AM killinghurts has not replied
 Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-02-2008 12:09 PM killinghurts has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 23 of 347 (490085)
12-02-2008 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by killinghurts
12-02-2008 7:16 AM


Re: great topic
Look up the number of taxonomical families, as that tends to be where creationists define "kind".
Although sometimes it's genus, and occasionally species (men and all other primates are two separate kinds, for example). Look only within the animal kingdom, as I don't think god commanded noah to take plants on board. Also, do not include any sea organisms (like whales and jellyfish).
Then, assume that all organisms were young, but old enough to have been weened.
Keep in mind, if the ark had 96k sq.ft, as one creo just argued in this thread, you're talking about a space that is smaller than your average super wal-mart. Or, 1.6 american football fields of room.
Good luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by killinghurts, posted 12-02-2008 7:16 AM killinghurts has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by ICANT, posted 12-02-2008 10:43 PM kuresu has replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 24 of 347 (490105)
12-02-2008 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by killinghurts
12-02-2008 7:16 AM


Re: great topic
I have not had an answer, though, as to how many animals were on the ark.
Can someone please give me a formula to calculate how many animals were on the ark, and the apporximate size of "each kind" or species, or whatever you want to call it.
I am not a believer in the Biblical flood. Rather I see the Biblical flood as being derived from a host of older dilivuian myths i.e. Epic of Gilgamesh and others, that are present in ancient Mesopatamium literature. However, for the sake of exploring the science and logic of the Noah flood I have done a little bit of research as shown below:
The Bible does not define the word "kind". However the original Hebrew word miyn translates into english "kind", but literally it means "to portion out" or "to sort". According to Stephen Caesar, a staff member of the Associates for Biblical Research and graduate of Harvard with an M.A. in Anthropology and Archaeology:
Stephen Caesar writes:
Genesis 1:11 and 1:21 state that God created animals and plants “according to [their] kind.” “Kind” is miyn in Hebrew; the Latin Vulgate translates miyn as genus. Charles Linnaeus, the scientist who formulated the genus/species system of nomenclature for animals and plants, used the Bible as the source of his formula. When he saw the word genus in his Latin Bible”the Hebrew miyn”he chose that as the designation not for an individual species, but for the wider genus to which it belonged.
Let's say this is true, that the Biblical word "kind" scientifically translates to the biological classification of genus (I know that is a stretch but lets just go with that for now). This may actually make a little sense, since many animals of close species may not had many distincly visible differences distinguishable to the Early Bronze age people, however animals of different genus and family biological categories most certainly would have had certain distinguishable visible physical differences which they could interpret as "kinds" of animals. For example the family Felidae, can be broken down into the following genera (plural form of genus): Acinonyx (cheetah), Panthera (lion, tiger), Neofelis (clouded leopard) and Felis (domestic cats).
Therefore lets go with the kinds=genus hypothesis. How many genera categories of animals are there?
I would venture that Noah (if he existed) would have only carried only the genera of land and air animals. So discounting microrganisms, plants, fungi, insects, worms, small marine animals, fish, amphibians, reptiles (many are aquatic) etc this leaves us with birds and mammals (yes I know some mammals and birds are aquatic i.e. whales, dophins, etc but we will disregard this for the sake of simplicity i.e. was this a global or local flood). The class Mammalia (mammals) contains 1117 genera (4629 species) and Aves (birds) contain 2050 genera (9,648 species). This gives us a grand total of 3167 "types" of creeping, crawling, walking and flying terrestrial creatures.
This sort of matches up with the figures I found from the "Life history on Earth" model developed by the the Niehls Bohr Institute's Center for Models of Life which stated that out of about 36,000 genera of life that have existed, 31,363 are extinct and 4637 genera still exist.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by killinghurts, posted 12-02-2008 7:16 AM killinghurts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 12:58 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied
 Message 28 by killinghurts, posted 12-02-2008 6:52 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied
 Message 39 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 4:12 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 25 of 347 (490109)
12-02-2008 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate
12-02-2008 12:09 PM


Re: great topic
So in other words, a little over 6300 animals (ignoring the 7 pairs of clean beasts).
If we use peq's figure of 96,000 sq.ft, that gives us 15.23 sq.ft. per animal. That's not quite a 4x4 foot enclosure. Per animal.
And food for a year has to be stored as well, right?
Yeah, I honestly don't see how creationists could accept that. Far fewer kinds would have been brought onto the ark.
That, or the ark was much, much bigger than as described in the bible. Bit since the word of god is infallible, that's not an acceptable path.
Perhaps we should just find all the mammalia and aves genera that are native to the middle east?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-02-2008 12:09 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-02-2008 3:29 PM kuresu has not replied
 Message 29 by obvious Child, posted 12-02-2008 9:09 PM kuresu has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 26 of 347 (490128)
12-02-2008 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by kuresu
12-02-2008 12:58 PM


Re: great topic
Also realize that 8 people would have to take of those 6300+ animals.
I agree that it would make more sense if this was a local not a global flood and Noah/Gilgamesh only took those animals from the local area. You then could probably get it down to 200-400 animals, possibly.
Who knows, this is mere speculation, though I think we should submit this idea to Mythbusters.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 12:58 PM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by bluescat48, posted 12-02-2008 4:15 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 27 of 347 (490136)
12-02-2008 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by DevilsAdvocate
12-02-2008 3:29 PM


Re: great topic
Also realize that 8 people would have to take of those 6300+ animals.
I agree that it would make more sense if this was a local not a global flood and Noah/Gilgamesh only took those animals from the local area. You then could probably get it down to 200-400 animals, possibly.
That makes a lot more sense then a global flood and 6300+ animals. The 8 people would probably be dead from exhaustion the first day.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-02-2008 3:29 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

killinghurts
Member (Idle past 4993 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 28 of 347 (490148)
12-02-2008 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate
12-02-2008 12:09 PM


Re: great topic
quote:
This sort of matches up with the figures I found from the "Life history on Earth" model developed by the the Niehls Bohr Institute's Center for Models of Life which stated that out of about 36,000 genera of life that have existed, 31,363 are extinct and 4637 genera still exist.
Thanks DevilsAdvocate - I think one fundamental principle (and I'd like to be corrected by a creationist if I'm wrong) that you're missing is that *every* one of those extinct species (since the flood) would need to have a spot on the Ark, not just the one's that exist today. Remember living organisms, according to creationism, do not have a common ancestor, so they must have existed on the Ark and died later.
So it would be 4637 + all kinds that have become extinct since.
Is that a reasonable assumption?
Edited by killinghurts, : Spelling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-02-2008 12:09 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

obvious Child
Member (Idle past 4115 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 29 of 347 (490171)
12-02-2008 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by kuresu
12-02-2008 12:58 PM


Re: great topic
What about aquatic animals?
After all, many of them can't survive salinity and heat changes.
And what about animals with very specific diets, like Koalas and Pandas?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by kuresu, posted 12-02-2008 12:58 PM kuresu has not replied

killinghurts
Member (Idle past 4993 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 30 of 347 (490176)
12-02-2008 9:42 PM


So does 6300+ animals sound right, or is it more like 4637?
Remember it must include all animals that have become extinct, since the flood.
Once we have the number of animals we can then determine how much food, and therefore the volume of food required to keep that many animals alive for an entire year.
I'd prefer to have an answer from somewhere in the bible, if possible!
Thanks!

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by ICANT, posted 12-02-2008 10:58 PM killinghurts has replied
 Message 34 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 12-03-2008 12:29 AM killinghurts has not replied
 Message 40 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 4:21 AM killinghurts 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