About that Boat - Noah's Ark

No mind game. You might see it as a mind game, but the very basic principles of Christianity (for instance) is very opposed to any type of deceit. No point in believing in Christ and falsifying evidence... 120 years is the time from which God announced his intentions to flood the Earth to the time the flood happened. God does not start to complain when Noah is 500 Off topic again, but for arguments sake, we can even give a time frame of 60 years if you so choose. Still a pretty long time to construct an ark or a type of wood that could well have become extinct. Yeah, constructing a floating 450 foot Ark would make us all believers wouldn't it ? If only building the Ark would make you a believer Perhaps this might help...Luke 6 vs24 (About a man in Hell)He called out, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.' 25 But Abraham said, "Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony. 26 Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.' 27 He said, "Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father's house 28 for I have five brothersthat he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.' 29 Abraham replied, "They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.' 30 He said, "No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31 He said to him, "If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "Building an Ark... wont convert anyone. We dont even know for sure the type of wood used, what it was constructed of, all we know is that the Great Designer was God himself ! Can we even today create a 400 foot wooden boat using the latest technologies ? Sheesh, if we can , we litterally have to extend that length by 8. 25 metres to reach the lenght of the ARK, yet that is impossible! Can you show evidence to support your claim that the Chinese that constructed the 400foot ship used metal works ?[This message has been edited by Zealot, 09-04-2003]

quote:

---

Pouring this much water onto the surface of the Earth, from whatever source, will produce hurricane-like condition.

---

Pouring how much? You seem to be under the impression that the Biblical Flood was caused by rain alone. (What is that? Sunday School misinformation again?)The Bible mentions two other ingredients involved in causing the Flood: 1. The break up of the fountains of the great deep, and 2. The opening of the windows of heaven. Neither one of them need have anything to do with rain.I am not saying that there was no wind at all, but the Bible says that the big winds did not start until after the Ark was already ashore. That evidence alone should tell you that what ever the Flood was, it wasn't just another rain storm, or hurricane.

quote:

---

rrrraaaoooohhh! A woman on horseback talking about big wood! I'm melting...

---

...I know how to drive a manual transmission car, too.

How can this not mean "rain"? Where is heaven if not up?

quote:

---

How do you pump several million cubic miles of water onto the surface of the planet and maintain New York Central Park boating conditions?
Answer: You don't.
The only way you could possibly have no wind and flat seas is to have ZERO temperature / pressure gradient differences on a global scale and at all elevations, both above and below the water surface, 24 hours a day.

---

I never said that there was no wind.
I never said that the seas were flat.
I mearly pointed out that high winds did not begin until after the Ark has already landed. Which indicates that whatever the flood was, it wasn't just some kind of unstable atmospheric disturbance such as a typhoon or hurricane or whatever.To be sure there was rain, but that was not all. The breakup of the "fountains of the great deep" may be a reference to somekind of geologic disturbance that disrupts the status quo. The 'Windows of heaven' may be a reference to cosmic influence of some sort. It is possible that the flooding may have been more the result of tsumai run up rather than rain.

quote:

---

I would love to see the model of what lunar tides would be like with no land to impede the tidal surge as it races around the globe twice a day.

---

Who knows, that may have occurred.

I started a thread long ago about the incredible inconsistency in creationist depictions of the flood.
EvC Forum: The Amazing Violent/Non-Violent Flood
One minute it is violent enough to rearrange the geology of the entire world and the next it is so gentle that a wooden boat with no steering,larger than any ever built and containing the largest and most complex zoo ever assembled floated around serenly for a year with no difficulty.Randy

quote:

---

Why do you focus on tension and compression? Those are only two factors. True. The top and bottom will carry a high compression and tension loads. This is not the end of the calculation.

---

Yes, they are only two of the forces but they are important ones. "Under most conditions of loading, the worst stresses in a beam are imposed at right angles to the direction of loading... Failure may also occur because of what we call shear... I don't indent to say much more about shear failure because bending moments rightfully demand the most attention in ship desin." Benford, Harry, 1991, "Naval Architecture for Non-naval architects," Published by the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. (SNAME) p. 140.I also calculated the shear forces for a box-girder design Ark and as you remember they are quite small. I have focused most on the bending moments because those are the largest stresses any ship will encounter. If SNAME doesn't know what is the most important stresses then heaven help all ships at sea.

quote:

---

All of this has been static load? How can you pretend to compensate for waves by calculating static loads?

---

The formula I've been using are for the standard l/20 trachoidal wave stress. This is concerned primarily with the bending moment and shear stress. Shock and torsion stresses, AKA impulse wave loads, are typically of short durationa and referred to as transient loads. But the magnitude and distributions of these loads, however, remain uncertain. This nonlinear effect may significantly change the distribution of the longitudinal bending moments and shearing forces. Major classification societies have either approximated this nonlinear effect in the rules or require additional calculations. (from Taggart, R. Ed. 1980, Ship Design and Construction, pub. SNAME. pg 239) So that's why I am looking for the formula to calculate these forces.

I said: "As long as differences in construction methods are adhered to, it is possible to scale up from steel to wood."
You Said: "So you DO believe it is possible to build a wooden ship of any size whatever if we just use enough wood?I didn't say ANY size, but rather that it is possible to design a wood ship to same size as a steel ship by adjusting the cross-sectional area to match the strength capability of wood. I am not the only one to think so.From, Donnelly, W.T., 1917, Problem of the Wooden Cargo Ship: Description and calculations relative to construction of a 5500 ton deadweight carrying capacity cargo vessel, Marine Engineering International. 22(5)206-211:"The plans and information submitted herewith relative to a wooden ship of dimensions and carrying power much beyond anything hitherto constructed are the results of many years given to the sutdy and investigation of this problem...."The writer's attention was directed to the problem of the wooden ships by investigations and developments in the application of wood to floating dry docks, which in the last twenty years has resulted in the building of these structures up to a carrying power of 20,000 tons."The problem as here presented is believed to be a thoroughly scientific and practical solution of the use of wood as an engineering material for ship construction, and the plans as here presented have received very careful review and criticism by engineers of the highest standing."The vessel shown in the plans (sorry can't show them here) is 350 feet long between perpendiculars, 50 feet beam and 30 feet molded depth, with a deadweight cargo-carrying capacity of 5,500 tons. ... In these figures will be seen a typical secton of a steel double bottom ship of similar dimensions to the wooden hull under consideration ..."The longitudinal deflection diagrams give information relative to the strength and rigidity of the hulls. In working these out I have used the modulus of elasticity for steel of 30,000,000 and for wood 1,500,000 pounds."For the steel hull the deflection was worked out to correspond with a miximum stress of 10,000 psi, upon the material of the midship section, and was found to be 3 inches; and then a similar calculation was applied to the midship section of the wooden hull to determine the stress psi for the same deflection, and this was found to be 600 pounds."In comparing these results, it sould be noted that a working stress of 10,000 psi for steel compared with an ultimate strength of 60,000 psi gives a factor of safety of 6, while a woking stress of 600 psi applied to wood as compared with an ultimate strength of from 8,000 to 10,000 psi give a factor of safety of something more than 12."From twenty years' experience in the design of floating dry docks, I am prepared to state that I have found it entirely practical to develop as near an approach to the full section value as is possible with steel.
End QuoteSo. This experienced naval architect and engineer shows that it is possible to design a wooden ship the same size as a steel ship and be able to successfully withstand the stresses.And then there is this from Benford, H. 1991, Naval Architecture for Non-Naval Architects, Publisher SNAME, p. 155.From a section on construction materials -- Wood;"One of its historic shortcomings was the practical difficulty of making efficient end connections. In former times this technical fact tended to limit boat lengths to the length of available lumber. Greater lengths were possible, but always at a price in strength and complexity. This is no longer true. Modern fastening devices and bonding materials... have freed wooden hulls from the constraints of the past. Joing efficiency, which in bygone days was perhaps only 25 percent, may now be as high as 85 percent. Still we do not see ships of any great size being built of wood because, even at best wooden hylls become relatively heavy and expensive as size increases. Moreover, as the world's supply of timber continues to shrink, the availability of suitable lumber becomes a worsening problem.
end quoteIts not size that is the problem for the construction of wood ships, it is jointing and economics that is the problem. Economics evidently was not a problem for Noah, because he built one. And somehow he solved the jointing problem, perhaps by using full length structural members.Allen

I Said: The opening of the windows of heaven.
You Said: How can this not mean "rain"? Where is heaven if not up?What has the "opening of the windows" have to do with rain? And just what is meant by "windows of heaven" anyway? It is interesting to find that the Hebrew word that is translated as window is elsewhere translated as Chimney, Dove Cote, and Lattice. Besides that, the root verb from which this Hebrew word is derived means "to ambush." How do you get a noun derived from "to ambush" to mean window, lattice, chimney or dove cote?? While other words derived from the same Hebrew verb mean "an ambush," "an ambusher," or "attacker." There is something more here than immediatly meets the eye. Rainfall is hardly an adquate result to tie to the opening of the windows of heaven.So what if heaven is up? So is the sky, the stars, comets, asteroids, galaxies and outer space. (Of course there are some who will argue that when we use the word "up" we should really use the term "out" or "away.")Allen

Windows keep out rain. When you open them, rain comes through. Obvious to me, at least. Says you. It's a perfectly appropriate metaphor to me. For instance, why do people say "the floodgates of heaven opened up" when it's raining hard?I recognize that metaphors are not universal. But surely you can see how it's a valid metaphor? If not you're either unimaginative, or just being deliberately obtuse.We're in a world of metaphor, here. Obviously literal windows didn't open up in a literal heaven that the writer could see, even if we grant (for purposes of argument) that the flood did actually occur. But literal interpretation is clearly not the tack you want to take here. After all, that phrase isn't meaningless. If you won't take it to mean "rain", then you have to take it to mean literal windows in the sky, which are obviously impossible, and would thus falsify the flood account. Or otherwise you have to explain what you think that means. It has to mean something, or else it wouldn't be there.

I'm your turbo lover. Tell me there's no other. Forbidden------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Something's missing in this whole Ark constuction debate.Okay, let's assume for a moment that the Ark WAS built. So what did you have?The most successful wooden vessel ever built. It saved mankind, it saved the animals. It was designed by God and built and crewed by God's chosen family. And then they forgot all about it?The Noahs of Ararat forgot how they built it? They couldn't remember a single detail of so successful a construction technique that it was not copied by successive seafaring nations? All the wooden vessels that followed had to be designed from scratch because Noah's children wouldn't divulge their shipbulding methods at any price?No one bothered to "take the lines" off the Ark to duplicate it's design for future ocean voyages? Even to scale it down as a river barge?Success is copied. Failure is not. No one copied the most successful vessel of all time for commercial purposes? It's carrying capacity alone would have returned a fantastic profit for the investors. It was a Godly design. How could you fail? You mean God didn't bless some of Noah's children as shipbuilders to carry the message of God's power in the most "in-your-face" vessel imaginable?That's what I call "missing the boat."(:raig

quote:

---

If you won't take it to mean "rain", then you have to take it to mean literal windows in the sky, which are obviously impossible, and would thus falsify the flood account. Or otherwise you have to explain what you think that means. It has to mean something, or else it wouldn't be there.

---

I dont want to take too long on this, because we are getting off the topic of the Boat and it's design and strength, etc.Getting back to the hebrew word again -- "arabah." who's root is "arab" which means "to ambush." I believe that the key to understanding the meaning of the word and its relationship to it's root is found in the translation "lattice". In the Middle east. Chimneys often have lattice work that cover the holes. Windows are usully covered with intricate lattice work shades. Thus the women who are not allowed to be seen, can see out the windows without being observed. And a dove cote resembles lattice work in its general shape.
The lattice work windows can tie into the general theme of ambushing, or lying in wait, by noting that an attacker can hid behind a lattice window watching for a victim and yet not be seen. When the victim is within range, the attacker would then open the window and attack the victim. The victim would not see the attacker until the window is opened and the attacker jumps out.If we apply this concept to the opening of the windows of heaven, then there would be something not visible lying in wait to attack in the heavens. It would only become visible as it attacks from the heavens.One might relate this to rain, but rain doesnt come from a cloudless sky.Creationary Cataclysmists are looking to something else for which there is found evidence in the gologic record. Bolide impacts. Asteroids are invisible to the naked eye, and the first indication that an impact is going to happen is the 15 seconds it takes for one to streak through the atmosphere before impact. The results of such impacts are catastrophic -- fire storms, earthquakes, impact-tsunami, etc. If, as Creationary Cataclysmists believe, the geolgoic record is of the Flood, then hundreds of bolides impacted the earth throughout the Flood. Such a "storm" of asteroid impacts would certainly be an ambush through the windows of heaven. And not be rain.Allen

quote:

---

Creationary Cataclysmists are looking to something else for which there is found evidence in the gologic record. Bolide impacts. Asteroids are invisible to the naked eye, and the first indication that an impact is going to happen is the 15 seconds it takes for one to streak through the atmosphere before impact. The results of such impacts are catastrophic -- fire storms, earthquakes, impact-tsunami, etc. If, as Creationary Cataclysmists believe, the geolgoic record is of the Flood, then hundreds of bolides impacted the earth throughout the Flood. Such a "storm" of asteroid impacts would certainly be an ambush through the windows of heaven. And not be rain.

---

And you think that all the effects of those impacts would have left any humans alive if they were compressed into a period of days, rather than eons? You and I don't need to do the math, because it's been done. Compacting all those impacts into the period you suggest would, in all likelihood, destroy life on earth.If you still think the flood is supported by the fossil record, tell me how this sequence of environments fits into that belief:http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/#columnNote the complex sequence of different environments preserved in one locale, and the number of different layers that each could not form in a short period of time or in anything but still water.It is the ignorance (willful or otherwise) of this kind of knowledge that sustains YEC, in my opinion. Had I had this information earlier in my life, I would not have wasted my time reading flood geology books.