the only problem here is that you are assuming the Ark was built in the same way as a conventional ship.
The measurments of the ark do not show a vessel that is anything like the ships we know.
The measurments are 300 long, 50 wide, and 30 high. Rule up those measurements and you've got a rectangular box with a lenght to depth ratio of 10 to 1 and a length to width ratio of 6 to 1.
It was flat and square. It didnt need a rounded bottom or sharp bow to cut through the water; it required no steering; its only functions were to be watertight and to stay afloat.
What helped it to stay afloat was that it was made out of a resinous tree. This resinous wood is thought by some to be cypress or a similar tree and in that part of the world there was an abundant supply of resinous trees. The Phoenicians and Alexander the Great used the same type of wood in their ships because it is especially resistant to water and decay. Moses also was told to “cover [the ark] inside and outside with tar.” So it would have been completely waterproof, no 'pumping' would have been required.
Actually, you'd be more familiar with pitching then me, the ark would have needed to be strong enough to resist the tendency to sag under the stress of being lifted by the waves. The accounts show that the length-to-depth ratio was 10 to 1. Isnt this similar to the ratio modern ship builders use to accommodate such stresses?
Can you imagine the lethal atmosphere inside a big box without ventilation that was covered all over the inside with tar?
it was ventilated according to the account
Noah was told to make an opening at the top of the width of a cubit all around Ge 6:16. this wasnt just a small peephole, if the opening was a cubit in height near the roof and extending right around the four sides, thats nearly 140 sq/m air vent.
I understand that the structural limits are exceeded at 300 ft in length, but again you are assuming that Noah made each piece of wood at this length or longer. We are not told how Noah fastened the timbers together or what length each of them were so its not a valid argument to claim that the length of the wood would have been a failure for the ark.
also the ark was constructed with three decks, which would have added to its strength
But that's not what Genesis says. It says, "A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above." So there was a window on the top deck. So what? Please stop with the extra-Biblical inventions.
how its that an extra-biblical invention ???
you made the claim that there was no ventilation, i showed you otherwise. And genesis does not say 'window' it says 'tsohar' This is a hebrew word that means “opening for illumination.”
Gen 6:16 " You will make a tso′har [roof; or, window] for the ark, and you will complete it to the extent of a cubit upward, and the entrance of the ark you will put in its side; you will make it with a lower [story], a second [story] and a third [story].
This 'window' was an openening for light and air to come in.
To ventilate the ark you would have to have an intake of fresh air and an outlet for noxious fumes and a fan (or some other means) to drive the air.
houses are built with air vents that are not propelled by a fan. If they are of no value, why continue to build houses with air vents?
We are assuming that the ark exceeded 300 ft., to over 500 ft. in fact. It actually has nothing to do with the length of each plank but the structural strength of wood.
but i though you said that the structural limit stops at 300 ft. If thats the case, then several shorter lengths would not reach their structural limit. There is nothing to say that Noah used peices of over 300 ft. They could have been shorter pieces that were somehow connected together.
It actually has nothing to do with the length of each plank but the structural strength of wood.
the structual strength is determined by the ratio as RAZD has shown in his above post.
Really? Neither were we told anything about resinous wood, or a vent all around the ark. You just make it up as you go, don't you?
have you read the account or are you going off anti creation propaganda?
quote:Genesis 6:13 "Make for yourself an ark out of wood of a resinous tree. You will make compartments in the ark, and you must cover it inside and outside with tar. 15 And this is how you will make it: three hundred cubits the length of the ark, fifty cubits its width, and thirty cubits its height. 16 You will make a tso′har [roof; or, window] for the ark, and you will complete it to the extent of a cubit upward, and the entrance of the ark you will put in its side; you will make it with a lower [story], a second [story] and a third [story].
The length of the ark exceeded the structural strength of wood by more than 1.5 times.
the length is one thing, but the width is what increases its ratio and in the case of the ark, it was 1-10. You need to calculate the width into it.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix "quote" type quote box.
Either it is or it isn't a window. Exactly what do you think a window is? And somewhere in you confusion about the window/opening for illumination you come up with ventilation.
i was showing you what the hebrew word meant...Some scholars think tso′har is related to light and so they translate it “window”
it doesnt mean it had glass in it. It was an opening, therefore it let in light and air.
The real question is whether or not you have read it. Since you keep making up so much about the story that just isn't there, it would seem not. The "resinous tree" part is from a non-standard translation. No one knows what "gopher" wood was so it is a bit disingenuous to claim that "resinous tree"
Hebrew words are built from root words. The hebrew word used in the account, 'Gopher' belongs to a family that includes 'Pitch' (ko'pher) on the basis of this, many believe the tree to mean a resinious tree because the word Gopher is from the same root word meaning resin.
there is no making anything up...the hebrew words provide their own conclusion.
Without a keel running the entire length, a large ship/boat cannot withstand the hydronamic forces and structural stresses placed on it and would literally break up.
that may be very true,
however we have no way of knowing how Noah reinforced the ark, there are no details of how he laid any of the beams...if there were explicit details, then we'd be able to ascertain if its was a sound structure.
we can assume he did it the way that would cause the boat to break up, or we can assume he must have reinforced it in a way that kept it secure.
I can't find a full listing on line, but why would that matter ? Once you concede that people may claim descent form a mythical ancestor there is no bar to creating a genealogy including mythical ancestors.
if noah wasnt a real person, then neither is the whole jewish race
perhaps they also are figment of our imaginations lol