Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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
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

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

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


Message 58 of 347 (490269)
12-03-2008 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by johnfolton
12-03-2008 10:47 AM


Trying to explain Noah's flood scientifically is like trying to scientifically explain the evidence for Santa Clause and his toy factory at the North Pole.
They do not exist, never have. People have been hunting for Noah's ark for hundreds of years with no success.
Creationist attempt to explain the diversification of animal life in the 6000 years since the supposed deluge would require the super evolution of life that is genetically and biologically impossible.
What hypocrisy. How can creationists say on one hand "It is scientifically impossible for evolution to occur in the millions of years scientists have proposed"? Or as Ken Ham eloquently puts it, "The idea of millions of years of evolution is just the evolutionists' story about the past".
Then, they turn around and say that only a handful of animals on the ark genetically diversified in less than 6000 years to produce hundreds of thousands of species that exist today.
You cannot have it both ways. They not only believe in evolution, they believe in a super sped up version of biological evolution. Creationists are so determined to keep their beliefs intact that they are willing to forgo common sense and logic to do so as well as contradicting their own claims against evolution in the process.

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 57 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 10:47 AM johnfolton has not replied

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


Message 61 of 347 (490283)
12-03-2008 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by johnfolton
12-03-2008 10:47 AM


Amen likely too floating mats of vegetation in the southern hemisphere given biblically it was summer thru much of the flood in the southern hemisphere.
If you are saying that the lands of the Bible are located in the Southern Hemisphere (I think that is what you are saying), than you are dead wrong. All the lands of the Bible i.e. Palestine, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. are all located in the northern hemisphere not the southern. How do you know when the flood occured i.e. summer, spring, winter?

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 57 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 10:47 AM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 4:28 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

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


Message 76 of 347 (490319)
12-03-2008 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by johnfolton
12-03-2008 4:28 PM


The second month of the Jewish calendar as described in Genesis 7 is Iyar which equated to April and May which is spring not summer in the northern hemisphere.

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 69 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 4:28 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 10:07 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

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


Message 90 of 347 (490384)
12-04-2008 5:33 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by johnfolton
12-03-2008 10:07 PM


October 17th in the second month from the creation of the world. Tishrei has been determined to be the first month since the creation of the world which puts Marcheshvan as the second month on the Hebrew calender.
In that case, you are still wrong numnuts, as October is fall not summer. You were wrong about the Biblical lands being in the southern hemisphere and you are wrong in describing what season the flood supposedly happened in.
What a fruitless discussion. Talking to you is worse than trying to discuss politics with my 4 year old daughter.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

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 84 by johnfolton, posted 12-03-2008 10:07 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by johnfolton, posted 12-04-2008 1:03 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 92 of 347 (490388)
12-04-2008 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Peg
12-04-2008 5:40 AM


Re: Kind
hi NN,
my understanding is that the biblical “kinds” seem to constitute divisions of life-forms wherein each division allows for cross-fertility. If so, then the boundary between “kinds” is to be drawn at the point where fertilization ceases to occur. ie a cow and horse cannot breed hence they are different 'kinds'
i dont know who or how the meaning of an animal 'kind' has been changed, can you give me an example?
Than this "kind" you are talking about is what most biologists would define as a species. A species is defined as organisms than can interbreed and produce offspring that themselves can interbreed. If this is true than the # of animals on the ark to repopulate the whole Earth and produce the diversity of today would not be in the thousands but rather the hundreds of thousands.

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 91 by Peg, posted 12-04-2008 5:40 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Peg, posted 12-04-2008 6:08 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 96 of 347 (490412)
12-04-2008 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Peg
12-04-2008 5:29 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Peg writes:
and back to the point of how the Papua New Guinea people walked to australia... that happened in the last 4-5 thousand years
so it in itself proves that sea levels must have been lower then they once were.
The closest distance between Papua New Guinea and Australia is across the Torres Strait which is about 93 miles(150 km) wide.
The depth across the majority of the strait is from 0-30 feet (as seen here) and the stait is scattered with reefs and over 274 large and small islands some of which are still inhabited.
I doubt that people walked ALL the way across from Australia and Papua New Guinea but most certainly they could have migrated across in stages with boats without the whole sea level of the entire Pacific Ocean Basin having to be lowered.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

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 88 by Peg, posted 12-04-2008 5:29 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-04-2008 11:27 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 97 of 347 (490419)
12-04-2008 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by DevilsAdvocate
12-04-2008 10:17 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
Additionally, archeological, linguistic and mitrochondrial DNA evidence support the fact that a little over 1000 years ago ancient Polynesians circumnavigated over 2000 miles of the Pacific ocean in double-hulled canoes to settle in the Hawaiian islands. This cross-ocean journey has been retraced numerous times. For example one journey was by the Hokule`a, an outrigger canoe that sailed from Hawaii to Tahiti without the use of modern instruments. Some have even voyaged all the way to New Zealand as you can read here: Voyaging Canoes Set Sail

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 96 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-04-2008 10:17 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 280 of 347 (497228)
02-02-2009 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by prophet
02-02-2009 4:43 PM


Re: standards?
Your attempt to throw whatever and all catastrophic events at the Ark only shows your desire to sink it. Sinking the Ark would mean the amount of food needed would be reduced to what is necessarily to sustain them while it sinks. Since this topic was considering displacement required for food and animals to LAST the duration... I decided the way to continue was to understand that the Ark did not sink and so, now we know why you exist.
Being a Sailor myself with 16 years in the Navy and over 9 years of sea time on a ship, I can ASSURE you that an unpowered boat with no source of propulsion fares a lot worse than a powered vessel even in the fairest seas.
Sailors would get more sea sick if we lost power and propulsion or had to make bare steerageway (less than 5 knots) than when we are steaming ahead at 10+ knots due to the undulating nature of the waves. Even in the most placid seas and clear weather, the undulating, rocking back and forth like a cork in a bathtub can wreak havock onboard an ocean going vessel.

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 277 by prophet, posted 02-02-2009 4:43 PM prophet has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by prophet, posted 02-02-2009 5:46 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 286 of 347 (497244)
02-02-2009 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by kuresu
02-02-2009 6:07 PM


Re: standards?
Just another variable to add to the Deluge hypothsis. If seas are bad enough, the undulation of the waves is strong enough to bruise bodies, break bones and smash people (and in this case animals) into decks (floor), bulkheads (walls) and overheads (ceiling) especially in an unpowered vessel. Especially in the span of 6 months.
In storms people are instructed to not lock there knees, to stand on the balls of there toes and to hold on to fixed structures of the ship to keep from getting hurt. In the strongest of storms, movement about the ship is secured (not allowed) and unless you are standing watch you are strapped into your rack (bed). When I would crawl into my rack I would put boondockers (my boots) underneath my mattress to help wedge me against the wall of my rack and would attach the strapps across the opening of the rack to keep me from falling out.
Can you please for the love of God, tell me how you are going to tell thousands of animals to follow these procedures?
Also, a boat rocks back and forth and pitches up and down if propelled, and if not propelled there is no specific pattern to the rocking and rolling so can you please tell me how these animals could keep there footing when humans barely can? Or did they lie down the entire 6 months they were onboard?
Oh, I forgot, it was a miracle, thus throwing all logic and reason out the window
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

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 283 by kuresu, posted 02-02-2009 6:07 PM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by prophet, posted 02-05-2009 3:10 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

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


Message 301 of 347 (497667)
02-05-2009 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 299 by deerbreh
02-05-2009 11:00 AM


Re: Miracle or Bust
Also I would add that there is zero evidence that Noah's society was technologically advanced. And plenty of evidence it wasn't. Just read the specs for the ark. The ark would have been steel, not wood, for starters.
Great project for 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 299 by deerbreh, posted 02-05-2009 11:00 AM deerbreh has not replied

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


Message 309 of 347 (497695)
02-05-2009 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 307 by prophet
02-05-2009 3:10 PM


Re: standards?
My neighbor is going on a cruise to the Bahamas this weekend.
And how long is that cruise? What at most 1 or 2 days to the Bahamas from Port Canaveral and then 1 to 2 days at sea on the way back. That is not even close to 12+ months that Noah, his family and the animals were on the Ark.
She has extreme difficutly with walking and balance. Along with her, will be others of her developed years and arthritic conditions. She went on the same cruise before and in about the same condition. Imagine an entire ship of old people being tossed about, extremely angry because of the inflicted pains... eating each other because the galley is un-obtainable and don't work... and yet the liner makes money?
Yes, because if there was a storm or any other problems they would not leave port or they would go around the storm. The Ark did not have this capability. It had no source of propulsion according to the Bible and could not divert around storms or cancel port calls. And 1 or 2 days of steaming in a large floating 3 star-hotel constructed of steel floating in the relative calm waters of the Caribbeans in calm weather does not compare to living on a floating zoo for over a year and subject to "the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." and "nd the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered." and " Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed, and the rain from the sky was restrained;"
That is to say; there are parts in your descriptions that err.
They are not in error. Are you calling me a liar?
I should tell her of the necessity for her to take boon dockers and strapping to keep her in the bed?
If she is on a ship for 7+ months exposed to all different conditions of weather, YES. There have been cruise liners and supermassive oil tankers larger than cruise liners that have scuttled and sunk due to adverse weather conditions as shown here:
Your claim is like nearly every other post ...an extremist's view.
And you don't count 12+ months aboard the largest wooden boat and floating zoo in history in the largest flood in the entire Earth's history extreme? Be realistic now.
How do you expect to arrive close to a correct conclusion when you apply whatever extreme principals needed to reflect the outcome you wish?
What outcome would that be? That this is the biggest fabricated story ever told?
Remember, just because the Ark is found feesible does not mean it was true.
It is far from feasible. You have yet to produce a convincing argument.
And just because science cannot prove the Ark feesible does not mean it was not done. Keep this in mind, to discourage prejudiced research. :0
LOL, your a joke. Keep wishful thinking.

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 307 by prophet, posted 02-05-2009 3:10 PM prophet has not replied

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


Message 314 of 347 (497725)
02-05-2009 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by prophet
02-05-2009 6:24 PM


Re: Miracle or Bust
The zoo provides more than adequate space for the express purpose of the visitors... us. So, this must also be reviewed.
You obviously have not been to the San Diego zoo. The ample amount of space there is more for the animals than it is for us. The San Diego Wild Park has even more room for the animals than the zoo.
Last time I went in the middle of the peak summer time season, the park almost looked empty due to the vast tracks of land the animals lived on compared to the amount of people taking trams around the park.
Many animals need there "personal" space alot more than civilized and pampered societal animals such as humans do. Wild animals like lions, elephants, zebra and the like are accostomed to roaming over large savannahs spanning thousands of square miles not living in small pins for months at a time on a floating zoo.
BTW, here is an assignment for you. Go talk to a real zoologist or biologist and ask him what would happen if you gathered a bunch of different "kinds" of animals i.e. lions, tigers, zebras, elephants, giraffes, monkeys, hippotamouses, rhinos, horses, buffalo, antelope, sheep, pigs, rodents, birds, reptiles, etc and put them in 10x10 ft adjacent inclosures in a warehouse for 1 year without letting them out or giving them room to move about. Then ask what would happen to these animals. I think you would be pleasently suprised the answer. I would venture close to 80-90% of these animals would perish before the year is out or a lot sooner. Now add bad weather and constantly moving vessel into the factor and this number would jump up close to 100%.
You are dillusional to think this could ever happen naturally. Could this happen? Miraculously (supernaturally), sure (which would also remove all doubt about the Loch Nes monster and Big Foot being real). Naturally, hell no.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

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 313 by prophet, posted 02-05-2009 6:24 PM prophet 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