Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-25-2019 5:23 AM
20 online now:
PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,630 Year: 3,667/19,786 Month: 662/1,087 Week: 31/221 Day: 2/29 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
2122
...
31NextFF
Author Topic:   That boat don't float
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 286 of 453 (562474)
05-29-2010 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 285 by hooah212002
05-29-2010 1:29 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
I already stated that these people do not remember the details of making ocean going boats. I just wanted you to see that reed buildings could be tall.

If you want a reference to ocean going reed boats, see;

http://archaeology.about.com/od/hterms/g/h3sabiyah.htm

This boat is dated to 5,000 BC They had 2,000 years to learn how to make them bigger and stronger. We have only tried to recreate them for 50 years, so we haven't been able to make them as big.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 1:29 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 1:59 AM greentwiga has responded

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


Message 287 of 453 (562477)
05-29-2010 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by greentwiga
05-29-2010 1:50 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
That is not a reference to ocean going reed boats of the magnitude necessary for the famed biblical ark. It is a reference for a piece of tar that possibly came off of a reed structure that was submersed in sea water.

lame ass about.com writes:

The boat is represented by a slab of bitumen tar, with reed impressions on the top and barnacles attached to the bottom

You don't like providing actual evidence, do you?

Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 1:50 AM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 2:26 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 289 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 2:34 AM hooah212002 has responded

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 288 of 453 (562481)
05-29-2010 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by hooah212002
05-29-2010 1:59 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
see message 286
This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 1:59 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 289 of 453 (562482)
05-29-2010 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by hooah212002
05-29-2010 1:59 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
it references;

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/...nal/118657921/abstract

Here the tar found at Oman originated in N. Mesopotamia. They state that the pieces are thought to have been from boats. Where do you get the evidence that the tar is from some other reed structure?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 1:59 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 2:52 AM greentwiga has responded
 Message 291 by Percy, posted 05-29-2010 8:21 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

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


Message 290 of 453 (562484)
05-29-2010 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by greentwiga
05-29-2010 2:34 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
They state that the pieces are thought to have been from boats.

Yes, thought. That is the key word.

Where do you get the evidence that the tar is from some other reed structure?

Where do you see solid evidence that it IS from massive hulking ark size reed ships? All this shows is a high possibillity that they were using bitumen tar for reed structures ~5000 BC. Whoopty friggin doo.

Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 2:34 AM greentwiga has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 10:37 AM hooah212002 has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18309
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 291 of 453 (562492)
05-29-2010 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by greentwiga
05-29-2010 2:34 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
Hi Greentwiga,

People aren't questioning the existence of reed boats or reed houses, and they do not doubt that people would have put pitch on reed boats.

What they doubt is the possibility of extremely large multi-story structures built from reeds. Providing pictures of single-level dwellings and small boats is not supportive of that possibility. And since one would expect that ancient inscriptions would attempt to capture the most amazing structures of the day, inscriptions that do not portray anything more complex than single story reed dwellings would seem to be evidence against your position.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 2:34 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
Modulous
Member (Idle past 183 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 292 of 453 (562493)
05-29-2010 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Granny Magda
05-28-2010 9:52 PM


the other ark
Also, the only other floating craft called an ark was made of reeds.

Was it? Do tell.

quote:
And when she could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child therein; and she laid [it] in the flags by the river's brink.

Exodus 2:3

That's the only other thing the Torah refers to as an 'Ark', and is probably what greentwiga's source was actually referring to.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Granny Magda, posted 05-28-2010 9:52 PM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Granny Magda, posted 05-29-2010 8:59 AM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 293 of 453 (562494)
05-29-2010 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by greentwiga
05-28-2010 11:24 PM


Re: anchor stones away ...
Hi greentwiga,

Re: anchor stones away ...
You mention 7064 as being nest or compartments. Compare that to 7070 (strongs) where the similar word is reeds.

They are not similar. 7064 is 'ets. 7070 is qaneh. What similarity am I supposed to see here? Even in Hebrew, they do not resemble each other. Besides, Gen 6:14 uses 'ets, not anything else, so the point is moot.

Strongs claims the word is from a different word, also meaning erect, but the Schocken Bible translates it as reeds, not rooms.

Your English is awful. Which word? Are you talking about 'ets or qaneh? Or something else? Please try to be clear in your writing.

The relationship is close enough and the language is often from such ancient sources, that reed is also a reasonable interpretation.

Or in other words "Ah screw it, close enough!"

There is no relationship. You have demonstrated no similarity, nor any reason to think that 'ets means anything other than wood.

Google search for Iraqi marsh arab reed mosques. that is the closest I can come to modern examples of tall reed structures on reed rafts.

I did, but all I found were pictures of buildings - buildings- not building/boats.

I do not deny that one can make a boat of reeds. I do not deny that one can make a small building of reeds. What I deny is that one can combine the two. You have provided no evidence that this this is possible. on anything like the necessary scale.

Otherwise we would have to look at the giant greek and roman barges that had several stories above the boat part.

Again, you are being very unclear. What Greek and Roman barges? Are you telling me that the Romans made multi-storey barges from reeds? Forgive me if I remain a little sceptical.

All told, you have no evidence from the text, you have no archaeological evidence, you cannot point to any structure similar to what you are proposing and you are flat-out denying the actual text of the Bible. All for a theory that offers no more likelihood of accounting for all-the-worlds-animals-on-a-single-boat than a wooden ark. All a bit pointless really.

Mutate and Survive

Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by greentwiga, posted 05-28-2010 11:24 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by dennis780, posted 06-06-2010 4:36 PM Granny Magda has responded

    
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 294 of 453 (562495)
05-29-2010 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by Modulous
05-29-2010 8:37 AM


Re: the other ark
Ahh. Thanks Mod.

Of course, I really don't think that this has anything to do with Noah's Ark. The word essentially means "box". The Moses story seems to fit this definition very well. I don't think that comparing a single floating crib and a gigantic floating zoo is particularly useful.

Also, it's probably worth noting that Exodus does not use the word 'ets to describe reeds, it uses suph. Nor does it use the same word for pitch as Gen 6:14, so the comparison really is pretty thin.

Thanks.

Mutate and Survive


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Modulous, posted 05-29-2010 8:37 AM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 295 of 453 (562503)
05-29-2010 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by hooah212002
05-29-2010 2:52 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
http://www.ce.memphis.edu/...Documents/Asphalt%20History.pdf
Marine Asphalt is an excellent waterproofing agent and was long used in ship building. Early on they coated papyrus reeds to bind them together and also to make them impervious to water and, incidentally, rotting. The small round boat called the gufa is an example and the asphalt would be applied in the form of ‘slime’. Later, when true ships were built using wood planking, the asphalt was mixed with fibrous material and packed into the joints between the planks, and called ‘pitch’.

A document at hinduthought.googlepages.com/oldestboat.doc goes into much more detail about why scientists think the chips were from a boat and not some other structure.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 2:52 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by hooah212002, posted 05-29-2010 11:48 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

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


Message 296 of 453 (562508)
05-29-2010 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by greentwiga
05-29-2010 10:37 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
Cool story bra'. Now take all of that stuff you looked up and somehow try and marry it up with the biblical flood.


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by greentwiga, posted 05-29-2010 10:37 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
dennis780
Member (Idle past 2855 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 297 of 453 (563732)
06-06-2010 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by Granny Magda
05-29-2010 8:50 AM


Re: anchor stones away ...
"All for a theory that offers no more likelihood of accounting for all-the-worlds-animals-on-a-single-boat than a wooden ark. All a bit pointless really."

Although I am not much of a boat expert, I am a logical man. And since you seem to proclaim to internet readers alike that believing in a boat made of wood carried every living thing on earth in it is more plausible than every thing on earth coming from a singularity that has never been found or discovered, and is supposedly made of nothing, that exploded and gave us light elements such as helium and hydrogen ONLY, that over billions of years formed clouds that collapsed down on themselves to form planets and stars (without any outside energy), that in turn incomplete chemicals travelled from the surface of earth to the vents of the ocean floor to create organisms with no genetic code of any kind, and could reproduce without any protiens (that are required for all of life today to orientate, reproduce and distribute oxygen).

Now, like I said, I'm no boat expert. But a simple Google of the largest wooden ships in history tell me that the arguement for the boat that don't float is irrelevant without some design flaw in the ark itself.

Tessarakonteres - 420×58 ft
Thalamegos - 377.3×46 ft (2 storeys)
Caligula's Giant Ship - 341 ft

Many completely wooden ships were over 300 feet, and some documented even over 400. To assume that a boat that God asked Noah to build would not float makes no sense, unless the real discussion is if God exists at all. Since boats of this size have existed, there is no question that the boat COULD have floated. And if it is plausible, then the question is, is God real? Because if he is, then God would have known what the boat needed to be (strength, shape, and size) for it to survive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by Granny Magda, posted 05-29-2010 8:50 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by hooah212002, posted 06-06-2010 4:54 PM dennis780 has not yet responded
 Message 299 by Percy, posted 06-06-2010 5:31 PM dennis780 has not yet responded
 Message 300 by Granny Magda, posted 06-06-2010 6:15 PM dennis780 has responded

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


(1)
Message 298 of 453 (563739)
06-06-2010 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by dennis780
06-06-2010 4:36 PM


Re: anchor stones away ...
Tessarakonteres:

Wiki writes:

But this ship was merely for show; and since she differed little from a stationary edifice on land, being meant for exhibition and not for use,

Thalamegos: found as an unconfirmed or mythological ship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world's_largest_wooden_ships#Unconfirmed_or_Mythological_large_wooden_ships

Caligula's Giant Ship: Useless as a vessel and believed to have been used as a sort of pleasure barge. Hardly suitable for the weather that must have been present to flood the entire world in 40 days.

It has already been pointed out that, while somewhat feasable, ships of this magnitude are worthless as seafaring craft.

Try again dumbass.


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by dennis780, posted 06-06-2010 4:36 PM dennis780 has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18309
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 299 of 453 (563746)
06-06-2010 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by dennis780
06-06-2010 4:36 PM


Reality Check
dennis780 writes:

...[Noah's ark] is more plausible than every thing on earth coming from a singularity that has never been found or discovered, and is supposedly made of nothing, that exploded and gave us light elements such as helium and hydrogen ONLY, that over billions of years formed clouds that collapsed down on themselves to form planets and stars (without any outside energy), that in turn incomplete chemicals travelled from the surface of earth to the vents of the ocean floor to create organisms with no genetic code of any kind, and could reproduce without any protiens (that are required for all of life today to orientate, reproduce and distribute oxygen).

Let's keep the focus on the boat, but just in case you were serious I thought I'd point out that there's nothing in that paragraph that accurately represents any scientific views.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by dennis780, posted 06-06-2010 4:36 PM dennis780 has not yet responded

    
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 300 of 453 (563750)
06-06-2010 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by dennis780
06-06-2010 4:36 PM


Re: anchor stones away ...
Hi Dennis,

Although I am not much of a boat expert, I am a logical man.

Uh-huh.

And since you seem to proclaim to internet readers alike that believing in a boat made of wood carried every living thing on earth in it is more plausible than every thing on earth coming from a singularity that has never been found or discovered... ...and could reproduce without any protiens (that are required for all of life today to orientate, reproduce and distribute oxygen).

If you were as logical as you think you are, you might have noticed that you never finished this sentence. Since I supposedly think that, then... what exactly?

On second thoughts, never mind. Your attempt to drag us off onto some digression about cosmology is irrelevant to the topic.

For the record though, I don't find the idea of a wooden ark much more convincing than a reed one. A vessel that size simply could not support some preposterous floating zoo. It would be way beyond the capacities of the vessel and beyond the capabilities of such a small crew.

Oh, and there never was any global flood, which kinda makes this whole discussion superfluous.

Now, like I said, I'm no boat expert. But a simple Google of the largest wooden ships in history tell me that the arguement for the boat that don't float is irrelevant without some design flaw in the ark itself.

Tessarakonteres - 420×58 ft
Thalamegos - 377.3×46 ft (2 storeys)
Caligula's Giant Ship - 341 ft

Yes, those are some very lovely unconfirmed or mythological ships. I notice that you left the ark off your list. Could that be because the ark is bigger than any of these?

To assume that a boat that God asked Noah to build would not float makes no sense, unless the real discussion is if God exists at all.

Could you be any more ridiculous? It must be possible, because God said to do it? Is that honestly the best you can do?

There never was any global flood. There was never a deluge and therefore no need for an ark. Whether God is real or not isn't relevant. Your God might well be real, but the story is still false. You are making the unwarranted assumption that the Bible account is the word of an infallible God and that is not an assumption that I am obliged to share. You can't confirm the veracity of a story by declaring one of its characters infallible. The only way to tell if the account is true or not, is to compare it to observable real-world evidence. And the flood myth fails this test.

Since boats of this size have existed, there is no question that the boat COULD have floated.

But you haven't demonstrated that. You've shown that a few slightly smaller ships might have been built, thousands of years after the ark was meant to have been built. Nor would it be enough to prove that such a boat could merely float; it would have to be seaworthy, in rough weather, with an entire zoo aboard.

Even if you could establish all this, which you can't, you would only have proved that the ark is plausible; You would still have to show evidence that it actually existed if you wanted to make the story believable.

And if it is plausible, then the question is, is God real?

No, if the ark were plausible - which it's not - then the question would be "Is the ark real?". And since it's not plausible, and since there exists no evidence for it, nor any evidence of a global flood, I think we can conclude that it was almost certainly not real.

Most people figure this out about the same time they realise that Santa doesn't really bring those presents.

Because if he is, then God would have known what the boat needed to be (strength, shape, and size) for it to survive.

I agree. You'd think that God would know that. Odd then, that the authors of Genesis don't appear to have had a clue.

Mutate and Survive


"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod
This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by dennis780, posted 06-06-2010 4:36 PM dennis780 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by dennis780, posted 06-07-2010 7:14 PM Granny Magda has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
2122
...
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