Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-23-2019 10:16 AM
47 online now:
AZPaul3, Phat (AdminPhat), xongsmith (3 members, 44 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,579 Year: 3,616/19,786 Month: 611/1,087 Week: 201/212 Day: 16/27 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
31NextFF
Author Topic:   That boat don't float
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1505 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 226 of 453 (521874)
08-30-2009 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by greyseal
08-29-2009 3:07 AM


A couple of points. If the only animals on the ark were the wild animals found in the marshes of southern Sumer, the area flooded, and only the domestic animals that were adapted to the intense heat of Sumer, then there were not too many animals on the Ark.

If there were no significant predators in the region, other than cats, and other small carnivores, then meat for the carnivores would not be a problem.

Reed boats, like the Tigris made by Heyerdahl, remained seaworthy after months continuously in the seawater. They did not use the tar and pitch that the ancients used, which may have increased the length of time. We do know that chips of tar that we found from these ancient boats had significant sized barnacles on them, showing that they spent much more than a few weeks in the water.

Reed boats are solid crafts, not hollow like wooden boats. waves washing over the boat just flows down through the reeds. It is impossible for the boats to sink. They can break apart or run aground, but they can't sink. The Hogging and other bending movements that cause wooden boats to sink are not a problem with reed boats.

We have thousands of years of continuous boat building experience. What you say about wooden boats is true. We have lost most of the scientific knowledge of Reed boat building. The ancients had at least a thousand years to make many errors and learn improvements. We have only made 10 to 20 reed boats, and do not know all of their secrets. Did they solve all the problems you mentioned. When I said "I don't know." I meant that we have no scientific evidence if reed boats can overcome those problems.

Yes, some verses seem to be better interpreted as a whole world flood. Other verses seem to be better interpreted as meaning a regional flood. When you examine the original Hebrew in detail, either interpretation can be supported. When two interpretations seem equally valid, I prefer the one that fits known science much better.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by greyseal, posted 08-29-2009 3:07 AM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by anglagard, posted 08-30-2009 2:56 AM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 228 by greyseal, posted 08-31-2009 1:17 AM greentwiga has responded

    
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 227 of 453 (521875)
08-30-2009 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by greentwiga
08-30-2009 2:10 AM


Make Much Sense?
greentwiga writes:

A couple of points. If the only animals on the ark were the wild animals found in the marshes of southern Sumer, the area flooded, and only the domestic animals that were adapted to the intense heat of Sumer, then there were not too many animals on the Ark.

If there were no significant predators in the region, other than cats, and other small carnivores, then meat for the carnivores would not be a problem.

OK, so far so good, there Gilgamesh.

Reed boats, like the Tigris made by Heyerdahl, remained seaworthy after months continuously in the seawater. They did not use the tar and pitch that the ancients used, which may have increased the length of time. We do know that chips of tar that we found from these ancient boats had significant sized barnacles on them, showing that they spent much more than a few weeks in the water.

Reed boats are solid crafts, not hollow like wooden boats. waves washing over the boat just flows down through the reeds. It is impossible for the boats to sink. They can break apart or run aground, but they can't sink. The Hogging and other bending movements that cause wooden boats to sink are not a problem with reed boats.

Too bad the designers of other 'unsinkable' boats, like the Titanic or Bismark did not know this. Just think, if only the Titanic had been built of reeds, it would have flexed when it hit that iceberg, regardless of how cold or stiff the reeds may have been. If only the Bismark had been built of reeds, it would have survived all those fatal shells from the Prince George, as it would just flex around them. Then they could have retaliated with their reed guns!

Somehow common sense makes me think reed boats are not as suitable for long distance ocean travel as wooden, or now steel, hulled ones are. If so, why aren't cruise ships, cargo ships, and {heaven forbid!} oil tankers made of reeds?

We have thousands of years of continuous boat building experience. What you say about wooden boats is true. We have lost most of the scientific knowledge of Reed boat building. The ancients had at least a thousand years to make many errors and learn improvements. We have only made 10 to 20 reed boats, and do not know all of their secrets. Did they solve all the problems you mentioned. When I said "I don't know." I meant that we have no scientific evidence if reed boats can overcome those problems.

{emphasis mine}

Name one ancient technology that has not been replicated in modern times. Sure, Europe went stupid under fundamentalism and forgot how to make concrete, but that does not mean the world went stupid along with Europe. They had their own time for their own fundamentalism to get stupid over. When considering individuals and groups instead of nations, it even happens to this day, all around the world (with some exceptions).

Yes, some verses seem to be better interpreted as a whole world flood. Other verses seem to be better interpreted as meaning a regional flood. When you examine the original Hebrew in detail, either interpretation can be supported. When two interpretations seem equally valid, I prefer the one that fits known science much better.

IMO, I like the speculations made at the beginning and end of your post a lot better than the ones in the middle.

Edited by anglagard, : Add {emphasis mine}


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
ó Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. Itís us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by greentwiga, posted 08-30-2009 2:10 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1939 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 228 of 453 (521968)
08-31-2009 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by greentwiga
08-30-2009 2:10 AM


reed boats still get waterlogged
really, the subtitle says it all. I don't know what sort of magic reeds you would use, but all the boats I know about made of reeds would never be anywhere near large enough to hold an actual population of animals for a year without getting water-logged and sinking.

Anyway, you're pretty much saying it wasn't the whole world but an arbitrarily small part of it.

I'm fine with that - it wouldn't be a year, it wouldn't be impossibly big, it wouldn't hold everything...the story would be the fictionalized account of a real event, and with that I'm fine.

The problem is that there are many, many people on this board and others who don't think that. They think it meant the whole world, they think it meant a water-canopy somewhere above the sky, they think it meant literally all the animals of the world (and forget that all the plants would die) - AND then they insist that our science is insignificant when compared to the force^w^w faith.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by greentwiga, posted 08-30-2009 2:10 AM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by greentwiga, posted 09-01-2009 8:45 PM greyseal has responded

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1505 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 229 of 453 (522219)
09-01-2009 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by greyseal
08-31-2009 1:17 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
Yes, a reed boat has problems, but more to do with sailing angles. wooden boats have a single mast that allows them to point closer into the wind. I love you who claim that they get waterlogged without examining the archaeological, historical and scientific evidence. You are the same ones who claim the Christians don't look at the science. Remember, these ships stayed in the water for over a year, the marsh floods could stay flooded for over a year, and this is a perfectly reasonable scenario.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by greyseal, posted 08-31-2009 1:17 AM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by hooah212002, posted 09-01-2009 9:27 PM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 231 by Coyote, posted 09-01-2009 9:46 PM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 232 by greyseal, posted 09-02-2009 1:33 AM greentwiga has responded

    
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 230 of 453 (522222)
09-01-2009 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by greentwiga
09-01-2009 8:45 PM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
I have already provided sufficient evidence as to why they do not, and have not worked for vessels exceeding even 100 ft.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by greentwiga, posted 09-01-2009 8:45 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 183 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 231 of 453 (522223)
09-01-2009 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by greentwiga
09-01-2009 8:45 PM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
I love you who claim that they get waterlogged without examining the archaeological, historical and scientific evidence.

Any idea of the effects of elephant feet on reed bundles? For a year? (Don't forget elephant urine and feces.)

And, as some claim, we have to leave room for brontosaurus also. Two of them. And Tyrannosaurus and the rest of the big guys also.

Doesn't this whole scenario start to look the least bit ridiculous to you?

Or are you just going to keep coming up with "what ifs," each more outlandish than the previous, to support your a priori religious beliefs?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by greentwiga, posted 09-01-2009 8:45 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

  
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1939 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 232 of 453 (522239)
09-02-2009 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by greentwiga
09-01-2009 8:45 PM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
greentwiga writes:

I love you who claim that they get waterlogged without examining the archaeological, historical and scientific evidence.

You were given examples of reed boats, made last century to test such theories, that basically sank because they became waterlogged, soggy and fell to pieces, and they were much, much smaller than what you're positing.

Even the small ones (which apparently last from 4 to 9 months when built by people who have used them continually for thousands of years - these guys are the masters of that craft and they still don't last a year) get water-logged (it's their *nature*) and to claim that reeds magically repel water is ridiculous.

As always, it's not whether a boat could have carried some animals, it's whether a boat, even made from reeds, would last a year (it wouldn't), could be made that size (the maths seem to say it couldn't without collapsing under it's own weight), let alone carry all the animals of the world.

The account in the bible, if taken literally, is many orders of magnitude beyond that (and talks about a different boat material besides)

If you want to posit a smaller boat of believable size, made of alternative but real, known materials, holding breeding pairs of some animals, making a journey of even several months, then that's fine - but it's a far, far cry from the bible's account.

I repeat, because this is the important part: the boat described in the bible was too large to be feasible, not large enough for the task and not capable physically.

That's all that's needed - if you want to abandon the literal nature of the bible, we won't stop you, but to insist that it's a scientific, literal account? No.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by greentwiga, posted 09-01-2009 8:45 PM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 9:41 AM greyseal has not yet responded

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1505 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 233 of 453 (522271)
09-02-2009 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 232 by greyseal
09-02-2009 1:33 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
It was interesting to read how Heyerdahl hired reed boat builders from Africa (Sudan or Chad) The boat became waterlogged before it reached America. He then hired reed boat builders from Lake Titicaca who built reeds boats made firm, tied very tightly. Though tar and pitch were not used, it sailed to America easily. Then He built a bigger boat out of Mesopotamian reeds. This time, he learned that the reeds had to be picked in December. Something in the reed allowed it to resist the water far longer. Again, with no Tar and pitch, the boat sailed for many months and at the end, this still very seaworthy boat was burned in protest to the Arab/Israeli war. Recently, a group tried to build and sail a boat east from America. They took these lessons but allowed the reeds to dry out without properly rehydrating them. The boat broke apart. Again, they did not use the tar and pitch. We do not know why tar and pitch were used, but ancient Sumerians always used the mixture. They built boats they called the 100 and other boats called the 300. The 300 was clearly used to trade all the way to Pakistan. They had to wait for the monsoon winds to change to sail back. We have recovered tar chips that have reed grooves on one side and barnacles on the other side. We have not learned all the secrets of the ancient boatbuilders because we have not learned even how or why the tar and pitch were used. We have learned that, built right, they don't become waterlogged like happens with some building methods.

As for size, we have proven that huge wooden boats can't be built. Giant Reed boats may or may not be possible. It has not been proven either way.

As for the posts that mention the Elephants, I am not arguing for elephants. Read my posts before you criticize.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by greyseal, posted 09-02-2009 1:33 AM greyseal has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2009 9:49 AM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 235 by Theodoric, posted 09-02-2009 10:02 AM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 238 by Coyote, posted 09-02-2009 9:59 PM greentwiga has responded

    
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 234 of 453 (522274)
09-02-2009 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 233 by greentwiga
09-02-2009 9:41 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
Those vessels that did last for longer than a few months: how big were they? What was the cargo?

Grasp for anything you can try and latch onto.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 9:41 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by greyseal, posted 09-03-2009 7:24 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5954
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 235 of 453 (522275)
09-02-2009 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 233 by greentwiga
09-02-2009 9:41 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
Sources please.

Hard to understand context without any sources to this information. And please sources other than your website.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 9:41 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by PaulK, posted 09-02-2009 10:18 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14750
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 236 of 453 (522277)
09-02-2009 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by Theodoric
09-02-2009 10:02 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
His sources don't seem too accurate. Everything I turn up on Google says that the 60 foot Tigris sailed for 5 months (is that "many" to you ?) and was burned in protest at the wars near the mouth of the Red Sea - in Yemen, Ethiopia and Somalia.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Theodoric, posted 09-02-2009 10:02 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 7:23 PM PaulK has not yet responded

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1505 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 237 of 453 (522361)
09-02-2009 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by PaulK
09-02-2009 10:18 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
Aramco reprinted part of Heyerdahl's Book, Tigris. It lists the harvesting of the reeds. I got the month wrong. Not tying the bundles tight, and harvesting in the wrong month leads to waterlogging. Done right, they claim it will last at least 9 months. Notice also the reference to loads in excess of 18 metric tons.
http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/198006/voyage.to.the.past.htm

Another site describes the reed boats of the Euphrates but refers to the oceangoing tar chips with barnacles and also concludes that the boats were seaworthy for extended periods. They conclude that the tar helps extend the length of time that the boat/rafts remain seaworthy.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3284/is_293_76/ai_n28946720/


This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by PaulK, posted 09-02-2009 10:18 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by Theodoric, posted 09-02-2009 10:48 PM greentwiga has responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 183 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 238 of 453 (522366)
09-02-2009 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by greentwiga
09-02-2009 9:41 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
As for the posts that mention the Elephants, I am not arguing for elephants. Read my posts before you criticize.

Its not important what you argue for.

The mythical ark would have had elephants and a lot of other critters stomping around for a year. And, according to some, the critter list would have included dinosaurs. How would that material stand up to that for a year?

What effect would it have had on the papyrus or reeds when two brontosauruses got amorous? ("Noah! Make them stop! I'm getting seasick.")

If you ignore that, and a host of other factors (food and waterstorage, waste removal, ventilation, etc.), you're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Face it, the ark story as written is a myth. Switching from wood to reeds doesn't even begin to bail it out.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 9:41 AM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by greentwiga, posted 09-04-2009 10:53 PM Coyote has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5954
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 239 of 453 (522367)
09-02-2009 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by greentwiga
09-02-2009 7:23 PM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
They conclude that the tar helps extend the length of time that the boat/rafts remain seaworthy.

Where do they say that? I have reqa it numerous times and don't see this conclusion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by greentwiga, posted 09-02-2009 7:23 PM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by greentwiga, posted 09-04-2009 10:58 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1939 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 240 of 453 (522392)
09-03-2009 7:24 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by hooah212002
09-02-2009 9:49 AM


Re: reed boats don't get waterlogged
hooah212002 writes:

Those vessels that did last for longer than a few months: how big were they? What was the cargo?
Grasp for anything you can try and latch onto.

grasping at...straw?

O:-)

no, he's stuck in a loop - the ancient shipbuilders obviously had higher technology than people today, even people today who still build reed ships because fuck you that's why.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2009 9:49 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by greentwiga, posted 09-04-2009 11:16 PM greyseal has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
31NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019