Wyatt's Museum and the shape of Noah's Ark

Thanks Ned, I was going to get into it, since you all seemed to want to get into the meat of it, but think I'll let the string get back on topic, etc... I just don't agree with the dating being rigged and all, but back on topic, you gotta love them sea anchors, sorta proves the ark floated, and landed in the inerrant words of the bible in the mountains of Ararat, etc...P.S. Not on the Greater Ararat, thought that might bring a smile to your face, knowing how you hate Answers in Genesis, that they have been proven wrong on the ark, and the bible proven once again to be inerrant, etc...

You know what? If you ever settled on one position and defended that you would have a lot more credibility. One minute you have the ark wallowing deep in the water, next it is floating high and dry.Your lack of understanding of waves is truly humorous.And as I said -- if I was going to design a boat with those stones in the worst possible location, Wyatts would be it.Keep going though, this is better than comedy central.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Sorry, I should be more clear. Wyatts design with the anchor stones off of underwater forward extending 'keelsons' as described by whatever in his ever expanding dance of hyperbole.As for the "ark site" -- can you tell me which one?(from Bills post http://EvC Forum: Wyatt's Museum and the shape of Noah's Ark)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Raz, I agree with you there was an initial big wave, but that happened before the entire earth was covered with water, check this out, more evidence for your tusami, etc...Atlantisquest.comP.S. The ark could of rode low in the water without having excessive waters flowing over the bow, however, if it had a moon pool, with simple weighted intake and exhaust air vents, it would of had no problem with waters flowing over the bow, etc...The water would under normal air pressure only rise to the level the ark rode in the water in the moon pool, if it was centrally located, and if the ark was 54 feet high, then the moon pool could of been 30 to 50 feet high, the waves pulses would then be like a giant lung, a natural ventilation system, the waters never flowing out the top of the moon pool, continually providing force air ventilation, etc...[This message has been edited by whatever, 04-26-2004]

Whatever, whatever [This message has been edited by jar, 04-25-2004]

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You could answer the questions instead of repeating your same claims again.Or explain those 'weighted hatches' of yours ... exactly how do they operate to let air in but keep water out? I'm sure the Navy would be interested.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Raz, I was counting on the increased air pressure holding the intake vents closed when waters flowing over the bow, like if the ark dove into a wave unexpectedly, the moon pool level would rise, causing the air pressure to increase pressing air out to a pre weighted outlet air adjustment vents, when the ark bounced out, the inlet air vent would open because of the vacuum suction of the water in the moon pool sucking down in level, the outlet vents would close, only the intake air vents would open, when the ark was rising in the waves, etc...P.S. With waters leakage from these vents all flowing to the moon pool, and the moon pool level only seeking the level on the outside of the boat, or the level by adjusting the intake and outlets weights so more air sucking in than exiting, to lowering the moon pool level for getting rid of wastes of animals, etc...Think these ideas are more pre Ron Wyatt era (probably when the ram pumps were used to water farm houses before electricity), why Wyatt believed the ark had a moon pool, past brillant engineers trying to figure out how to keep the air fresh and remove wastes, to answer questions about the fesiblility of the ark, etc...

I realise that the date the sediment was laid down can't usually be determined directly - and that igneous rocks can often be directly dated by radiometric methods. However the principle of the thing is that the date the sediments were lain down DOES relate to the age of the fossil except in cases of intrusion which can usually be identified by examination. "Whatever" seems unable to understand this - presumably believing that time-traavellers teleport fosssils directly into solid rock.

As shown by the defintion I posted earlier, "they have rigged the dating methodology" means "they are lying".All you have to do to support your allegations is to show how all the fossil layers that have been dated were dated incorrectly and that they were dated incorrectly on purpose. That's what "rigged" means.Of course you can't do that; your only reason for believing that is your hope that reality isn't true.You are pitiful. Thank God you are not a representative of Christ's teachings.

So the intake vents close (and the outlet vents open) when the interior pressure is greater than the exterior pressure, and the intake vents open and the outlet vents close) when the exterior pressure is greater than the interior pressure. Most amusing.So some vents are always open, and the water flowing over the bows flows into them and sinks the ark.

Like I said -- the navy would be very interested if you can make it work.Intake and outlet valved hatches would operate in opposite manners or they wouldn't operate at all. One or the other will sink your scheme. The outlet hatches would relieve the pressure wave and allow the inflow of water through the moonpool, and the intake hatches would suck water in as soon as there was a vacuum.A wise man learns from his mistakes, a fool repeats them.ps - ram pumps are very inefficient and don't operate anywhere like what you propose.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Raz, Actually the RAM pump runs by cavitation, with a ball checkvalve, this would actually be quite efficient due to the wave providing the power to continually generate a water hammer, thought these Ram pumps had a containment vessel with another check valve, so it would build pressure so water would be available on demand, the moon pool is just a spin off, using the entire ark as the containment vessel, any water flowing past the vented intakes, exhausts would flow to the moon pool, or to a water reservoir, etc...With the availability of iron / brass technologies in the bible pre-flood, iron ribs could of reinforced the moon pool structure, making it like an iron lung, etc...Jon, Good luck proving the fossils old via scripture too me, please use the Authorized King James Version, all the other versions have been compromised, and do not to take the bible literally according to some theologians like Gail Riplinger, only the KJV is based off the textus receptus, etc...Now I'm not a theologian, haven't read the old testament(browse it on occasion), read the New Testament once to say I did (still browse it occasionally), so if you feel I'm misinterpreting it in respect to fossil age, it would be quite interesting, because, the problem is I hold the scriptures at a higher level than your belief the fossils are old, because the sediments told you so. If your saying you believe in Christ? then other than loving one another in Christ, I'd only browse the Authorized King James Version, so your putting on the full armour of God (not that one can not be a believer without reading the bible, or other compromised versions),its all about the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. If you believe in Christ (the shield of faith), and (the helmet of salvation), if your reading the other bible versions you might be compromising the Sword of the Spirit, and not having put on the full armour of God to protect you from the wiles of the devil, etc... The apostle paul says we look through muddy waters, but in heaven we will be changed and all things will become clear, or something like that, etc...P.S. I'm going to take a break as you all just are wearing on me, I have to resort to hyperbole, to try to get something through not that I'm not a bit dense too, whatever, In heaven all things will be made clear, takes a bit of faith in this life though, etc...

Actually you have no clue. Do a google on ram pumps and learn why. These pumps could only be used to pump water into the boat (that would help), you have two hatches working in opposite modes (one in and one out) that do no allow the buildup of pressure, and we haven't even begun on the question of pressure inside needed to keep the moonpool from flooding the ark versus the resevoir of air inside that would need to be pressurized. It just won't work, sorry, give it up. Find another fantasy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

I'm not even going to try. The Bible does not have any useful indication of whether the fossils are old or young. It's not a science textbook. It's just plain irrelevant.God wrote the rocks, Man wrote the Bible. I prefer to beleive what God wrote.If you want to dicuss the Bible, do so in a forum about faith, not a forum about science. You are taking the Bible literally, and denying reality becasue of that. Take your own advice.

quote:

---

Good luck proving the fossils old via scripture too me,

---

Pardon me for jumping in, but I couldn't resist throwing in my two cents.On the length of the creative days, The morning and evenings are beginning and endings, like the sun rising or setting on an empire or an age. The Genesis creation account is a simplified poetic story told to man in a earlier age. The fact that each creative day is described as having a morning and an evening does not in itself require that they be literal days. Remember many things in the Bible are told in signs that have larger meanings like the parables Jesus told. Sometimes you have think a bit to discover the answer, this is part of how things in the Bible were hidden by God. On the length of the creative days, each one had a morning and an evening, all but the seventh day. Each of the earlier days we are told ended, but not the seventh, the Bible indicates that it is still on going. At Genesis 2:3 the seventh day starts and is on going, being referred to in Hebrew chapter 4 as still going on. In fact the seventh day is believed to last at least until the end of Christ millennium reign, which would give it a minimum length of over 7,000 years. This is the reason some use the figure of 7,000 years for the length of each creative day, but that is based on two assumptions, first that all the creative days were the same length, second that the seventh day ends at the end of the millennium. If we look to the physical evidence, we find that it overwhelmingly points towards very long periods of time. I am distrustful of scientific dogmatic statements, so I did some checking on some things that are hard to mess up. One of those things is Dendrochronology, tree ring dating, which extends back over 10,000 years into the past. The thing to remember is that that is a unbroken record made up of a continuos line of over lapping trees, it doesn't include 'floating chronology' of fossil trees from earlier times that are not part of the continuos record. The fact that fossil tree rings do not match the pattern seen in the continuos record, shows that these trees record patches of earlier time. For example trees from the Jurassic reveal that there was time enough for great forests to grow, so the time of the dinosaurs was real, it was not some brief period before the flood. The same is true of other periods, fossil trees and plants are found showing the passage of time. You may want to look at my post 134 in the Solving the Mystery of the biblical flood thread part 2 in which I have some pictures of fossil forests and discuss the impact on YEC flood theories.Use of the term day in regard to creation is also shown to refer to periods of time rather than actual literal days is shown by Genesis 2:4 where the six creative days are referred to as one day. In the Bible the word 'day' can refer to a literal day or a much long period of time, such as 'in our fore father's day' (2 Peter 3:4). Genesis 50:20 states that one day for God is as a 1,000 years and a 1,000 years as one day. Clearly God's days are not the same as our days. At John 8:56 Jesus referred to his time preaching on earth as a 'day'. At 2 Corinthians 6:1-2 Paul tells the Corinthians that they live in the day of salvation and not to miss it's purpose. At 2 Thessalonians 2:2 Paul warns the congregation not to be deceived that the 'day' of Jehovah or the last 'day' has not yet come. Frequently the Bible uses the word day to refer to a period of time much longer than a literal day.Obviously with the seven day being at least seven thousand years long, and the six days also being referred to as one day, the creative days refer to periods of time or stages or steps in the creation. There is no scriptural basis for requiring the creative days to be literal days of 24 hours each. The terms evening and morning simply means a beginning and end of each time period. The terms can't be taken literally for the simple reason that the earth is a sphere, the 'correct' morning would have only occurred a long one line of longitude. Places east or west would have their morning and evening at a earlier or later time, and at the poles the days can be six months long. Since the creation was not limited to just one location on the earth's surface, there is no way the terms evening and morning can be literal, for how can the whole earth have a literal morning or evening at the same time? Obviously the terms are figurative for a beginning and a ending of each 'day' or time period.A Second line of evidence I looked at was the pattern seen in fossil distribution around the world and the connection with rates of continental drift. What I found was that the patterns matched the movements of the continents, thus it was possible to use the rates of movement to estimate how long ago the animals had lived. Using the highest rates of movement seen today and even allowing for faster movement in the past, it is very apparent great lengths of time were involved in the creation of life on earth. While I am still doubtful about some of the accuracy of the exact timing of these pass events, it is apparent that they occurred and that they occurred very long ago.
To sum up and keep this from getting too long, I looked at many lines of evidence and found undeniable proof of the passage of great lengths of time. Which resulted in my having two lines of complementary evidence, scriptural and physical, and they both indicated that the length of the creative days was far longer than 24 hours.

quote:

---

please use the Authorized King James Version, all the other versions have been compromised,

---

The KJV was a wonderful achievement for its day, but Bible translators and archaeologists have hardly been twiddling their thumbs for last few hundred years. Many more ancient Bible manuscripts have come to light and translators have greatly increased their understanding of ancient Hebrew and greek. Just think of the Dead Sea scrolls, translators today have tremendous advantages over the translators of KJV. As a result, many of today's translations are far superior to the KJV. As a matter of a fact, if you check this link on the ranking of NT using 64 scriptures that Colwell used to determine accuracy in a New Testament, the KJV ranked dead last in accuracy out of the Bibles on this list of common translations. While I will agree there are many modern Bible translations that I would question, I wouldn't use the KJV by choice considering the many errors and poor renderings it has been shown to have.
hector3000.future.easyspace.com is no longer availableAs for your "Submarine Ark theory", the Ark's draft is indicated by (Genesis 7:20) "Up to fifteen cubits the waters overwhelmed them and the mountains became covered." obviously Noah would not known that there was 15 cubits of water over the highest mountain unless God told him so, what is much more likely being stated here is that Noah saw no land and the ark was flooding freely above the land, so he knew the highest elevations where he was were submerged by at least the draft of the Ark, 15 cubits. So the Ark had a draft of fifteen cubits (22.5 ft) out of height of 30 cubits (45 ft) so with half of the vessel being above the water line, regular submersion by wave action is not a major concern. Since the earth is old, there is no need for YEC flood currents ripping up the whole surface of the earth so there did not have to be monstrous wave action, and since only a small cross section of animals was actually on the Ark, there is no need to rapidly pump air in and out of a ridiculously over crowded Ark. Once we throw the YEC flood theory requirements over the side, the now lightened Ark as described biblically, is plausible.The recurring pattern is YECs take a believable scriptural account, and turn it into a totally impossible fantasy. Now who on earth, or busy going to and fro in the earth, could possibly want to do that?Wm Scott Anderson