Summations Only

In 1909 the schooner Wyoming was launched from the Percy & Small shipyard in Bath, Maine. She was state-of-the art in wooden hulled shipbuilding. She was a six masted schooner and, at 329 ft., the longest ship with an all wood keel and hull ever built. She was the last of nine wooden hulled, six-masted schooners built between 1900 and 1909, and one of seven built by Percy & Small. All were 300 ft. or more in length. They were all state-of-the art.The Wyoming had 90 steel cross-braces. Even while she was yet on the drawing boards the marine engineers who designed and built her knew from experience with shorter ships that the length of the Wyoming would exceed the structural limits of wood. For this reason they attempted to defeat, or at least support, the laws of physics and the principles of marine engineering with steel. It was to no avail. Not even the steel bracing could prevent the flexing and twisting that resulted in the separation of the hull planking. The Wyoming required constant pumping, as did her sister ships. The Wyoming leaked from the day she hit the water until the day, 14 years later, when she foundered and broke up off of Monomoy Island while riding out a storm at anchor.It is said that she could be seen to snake (movement of the bow and stern from side to side in relation to mid ship) and hog (movement of the bow and stern up and down in relation to mid ship) while underway. The action of the waves, in even calm seas, caused the planking to be sprung beyond the capabilities of any caulking that could be devised. The Wyoming and her sisters were used, for the most part, for short, close-in coastal hauls, generally in sight of land. At the first sign if inclement weather, they could run for port. The Wyoming served for several years as a coal hauler, as did several of her sisters.I have always had a great love for windjammers. I have some very expensive books that deal with the minutia of their construction and for years my hobby was to build full rigged wooden models. I spent hours climbing over the decks of the U.S.S. Constitution in Charleston Navy Yard, admiring her construction. The Wyoming must have been a beautiful vessel. But she was a beautiful anachronism. At about 300 ft. the structural capabilities of wood were exceeded beyond the abilities of engineering and design to remedyFew other ships of this size were built of wood. One exception was the four-masted medium clipper barque, Great Republic built in 1853. She is sometimes reported as the longest wooden ship ever build with a length of 334 feet, but more usually it is claimed that she was 325 feet. The Great Republic also had 90 steel cross braces, 4 inches wide, 1 inch thick, and 36 feet long. Nevertheless, she sprung her hull in a storm off of Bermuda. She was abandoned when the water in the hold reached 15 feet.And yet, creationists want me to believe that a 450 ft. (minimum) vessel of ALL wood construction was able to withstand a storm of 40 days and then remain at sea for almost a year, manned by only eight people, without the efficient pumps of the turn of the century, caulked with nothing more than "pitch inside and out". Not to mention the overwhelming necessity of the limited crew to feed and water thousands of animals and to muck out thousands of pens (and then carry the result of the mucking up two decks in order to throw it overboard). When was there time for pumping (24 hours a day if the above is any indication) and the constant re-caulking in a futile attempt to stem the flow.Experience with real wooden ships sailing in real oceans indicates that Noah's ark would not have survived many days of the 40 day storm.My opinion of Noah's ark is that that boat don't float.

Thread copied here from the That boat don't float thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Goddidit.See how easy that was? No more explanation required.

Two words:Gopher Wood.It's magical, y'know. Stronger than steel, self-bailing and poop-resistant, resists heat to 800 Fahrenheit..........

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Amazing post!

I think that whoever recorded the story of Noah and the FLUD got confused and mistranslated part. I think that what happened was that when god told Noah to build the ark, Noah said to his three sons, "You gofer wood. I'll wait here."

Another consideration is what would have happened to a big, wooden box in a stormy sea. Any sailor will tell you how important it is to maintain steerage way in heavy seas. That is the only way that the bow can be pointed into the swell. Sailing ships, even in gale force winds, carry some sail in order to keep the ship pointed in a direction that makes it easier to ride out the weather - stern to in the case of sailing ships. Well, Noah's ark was just a big box if we are to believe the Bible. There was no bow, or stern, and no sails.Here's what happens to a ship (or a big box) that cannot maintain steerage way in a big storm. In December of 1944 the US Navy Task Force 38 was caught in a typhoon in the Philippine Sea east of Luzon. (The Caine Mutiny was set in that storm - LCdr Gerald Ford was serving aboard the USS Monterey during the typhoon.) In that storm, three destroyers (USS Hull, USS Spence, USS Monaghan) lost power when their engine rooms were flooded. All three ships had pumped out the ballast tanks in anticipation of refueling. All three capsized when they were turned broadside to the waves. All hands were lost. You see, when the height of a wave exceeds the particular dimension of the ship that it encounters, over the ship goes. Waves as high as the length of a Navy destroyer just don't happen. Waves as high as the beam of the ship are common.So how would Noah's big wooden box have fared? With no means of propulsion the ark would have been turned broadside to the first few small waves. If the 40 day storm was as severe as creationists tell us, Noah and family and all the animals spent 40 days rolling over and over and over - unless the ark settled quietly on the bottom.

It was the Narwhals. They're the Jedi's of the sea you know.

Hi pandion, interesting post. You must have missed "JohnFulton" (aka aka reversespin, Bret, Charley, Craig, keys, the Golfer, Tom, Tim, whatever) and the amazing anchor stones and moon pools ... Message 203 and (filtered posts by him)
EvC Forum: Wyatt's Museum and the shape of Noah's ArkNoah'sArkStones

quote:

---

Underwater view of ark carrying the large anchor stones.

---

This is Wyatt's model of the ark (it's in his "museum") - I've seen a picture showing the stones hanging from the back end. Wan't to guess what they will do in a storm tossed sea?Entertaining to say the least.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

These heavy stones would tear a wooden ship apart in heavy sea state conditions. The amount of shearing forces involved would be enormous as the wood would be pulled in all magnitudes and directions.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

Hi pandion, Who said anything about storms, typhoons, or the like. Ah you been listening to too many YEC fairy tales.According to Genesis 1:9 the earth would have looked like my avatar but the land mass could have been much smaller.Genesis tells us it began to rain and the fountains of the deep opened up. If that happened all around the planet the water would have rose like it does at the Bay of Fundy.Depending on the sea level of that land mass would determine how much water was necessary to flood it.So without all the earthquakes and everything put forth by the YEC's to produce their impossible dream the water would have rose like water in a tub filling from the bottom.Remember this was God's project and I think it was a much easier task that creating the universe. So why would he have problems with such a small thing as flooding the earth and keeping humans, and animals alive on an ark for a year?But then I will assume that I am talking to someone who does not believe God exists. Therefore would have no comprehension of what He can or can not do.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This is a science thread. Please take discussion of flood scenarios requiring divine intervention to the religious forums.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Well, Genesis mentions a storm that lasted 40 days and 40 nights. What would you call it? I mentioned a typhoon only to illustrate what can happen to a vessel that cannot maintain headway, like a big box. So you're going to tell me even more fairy tales. That's not what Genesis says. So all of that rain and these imaginary "fountains of the deep" didn't cause any waves at all. Tell me another fairy tale. The point was that any wooden ship over 300 ft in length leaks - all the time. It could not have stayed afloat for a year. It would require about 4 times the total volume of water on the earth to flood it as described in the Bible. And you know that how? So it is nothing more than a miracle. In that case, what was the point? Why didn't your little god just poof everything out of existance and start over? What was the point of the flood if it was a miracle anyway? Since I actually studied theology, my bet is that I have a better understanding of the nature of god than you.By the way, how do you propose to get all of the continents to where they are now in less than 4500 years without melting the whole planet?

I don't remember no storm... just* 40 days and 40 nights of rain. Reference please?* "just" being something like under Niagara falls.

We've been down this road with ICANT before. There is no discussion of physics or geology regarding the FLUD that will sway him.I'd focus more on your initial observation: that a boat of teh size described in Genesis would exceed the structural limitations of wood.From your description, I take it such a vessel would leak even in relatively calm seas, correct? So even if ICANT is correct and the ocean didn't behave as if it were in a storm (certainly a preposterous assertion since it was raining worldwide for 40 days and nights, which would of necessity create bizarre and violent weather patterns), the Ark would still have sunk simply because the conditions experienced in normal, calm seas with waves that we see in perfectly normal weather exceed the structural limitations of wood for a vessel of that size. Is that about right?If so, ICANT's view of the FLUD is irrelevant - unless the waters were still as glass for the entire voyage (in which case, how did the Ark move and wind up on a mountain, since that would preclude any current or even any wind), the Ark would have sunk.