• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Ark was built by an amateur, the Titanic by professionals, evidence of Arc

JerryL

Well-Known Member
Obviously I did JerryL...."uncover evidence that Noah's flood may have a basis in some rather astonishing events that took place around the Black Sea some 7,500 years ago."
This does not support your "worldwide flood" claim. This supports a local flood.

And mind you the science behind the hypothesis is relatively new...not all the data is in yet. If you read more about the subject in general you would realize this yourself.
Actually, the science is pretty old. The hypothesis itself is pretty new, though I find the evidence compelling.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
Perhaps I should have used a different set of words other than 'world wide flood' when I mentioned this phenomenon to Dave....but the theory explored in those links of wide spread flooding is closely related to the biblical account nonetheless. I mean give me a break...look at the title these two geologists named their book! My point is that there HAVE been instances of massive flooding during earth's past. THEY chose to name it Noah's Flood, not me.

I am sure we will hear more in the future on the findings of these explorations....as we all know it takes time to decipher the findings.

"Two geologists at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory have offered a new theory of what happened next. William Ryan and Walter Pitman, in Noah's Flood (Simon & Schuster), postulate that as time went on, the world warmed, the glaciers retreated and meltwater from the European glaciers began to flow north into the North Sea, depriving the Black Sea of its main source of replenishment. The level of the Black Sea began to drop, and most of the area around its northern boundary — the area adjacent to present-day Crimea and the Sea of Azov — became dry land. At this point, the level of the Black Sea was several hundred feet below that of the Mediterranean, and the two were separated by the barrier of the Bosporus, then dry land. This situation, with the world ocean rising while the Black Sea was falling, could not last forever. Eventually, like a bathtub overflowing, the Mediterranean had to pour through into the Black Sea basin."
 

JerryL

Well-Known Member
Perhaps I should have used a different set of words other than 'world wide flood' when I mentioned this phenomenon to Dave....but the theory explored in those links of wide spread flooding is closely related to the biblical account nonetheless. I mean give me a break...look at the title these two geologists named their book! My point is that there HAVE been instances of massive flooding during earth's past. THEY chose to name it Noah's Flood, not me.
So you are claiming that there was an historical flood (perhaps the flooding of the Black Sea) which was the origin of the story that became Noah's flood?

If so, I agree.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
JerryL said:
So you are claiming that there was an historical flood (perhaps the flooding of the Black Sea) which was the origin of the story that became Noah's flood?

If so, I agree.
Very well could have been.....the timing seems to be right. I am excited to find out more about archaeoligical artifacts from the digs.

I have heard before that Noah's ark is supposedly trapped in ice ontop of Mt. Ararat in Turkey....so far, it's only speculation. There have been numerous attempts to find the ark but they are running out of places to look. Here's an interesting link with eyewitness accounts of sightings thru the years along with other expedition data.

http://www.noahsarksearch.com/ararat.htm
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Buttercup said:
I have heard before that Noah's ark is supposedly trapped in ice ontop of Mt. Ararat in Turkey....so far, it's only speculation. There have been numerous attempts to find the ark but they are running out of places to look. Here's an interesting link with eyewitness accounts of sightings thru the years along with other expedition data.

http://www.noahsarksearch.com/ararat.htm
From that link...

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Given the extensive research which has taken place on Mount Ararat, it seems fair to say that if Noah's Ark ever survived into modern times and is somewhere on Ararat, there are few new places remaining on the mountain to search. There have been many expeditions, accounts, alleged sightings, anomalies, and claims of discovery involving Mount Ararat. What is lacking is any scientific evidence or photo that shows that Noah's Ark exists today.[/font]
 

Ceridwen018

Well-Known Member
Buttercup said:
I have heard before that Noah's ark is supposedly trapped in ice ontop of Mt. Ararat in Turkey....so far, it's only speculation. There have been numerous attempts to find the ark but they are running out of places to look. Here's an interesting link with eyewitness accounts of sightings thru the years along with other expedition data.
If they were to find Noah's Arc on this mountain, wouldn't that completely undermind the Biblical story? I mean, it would show that there was no world-wide flood after all--only a relatively massive flood of the region around the Black Sea, which although devastating to the people who settled around the Black Sea, is hardly an area large enough to even be country-wide, let alone continent or world wide. The discovery of Noah's arc on the mountain, and its connection to this supposed flooding of the Black Sea would only confirm historians' theory that this supposed "Noah" fellow was really just a character created by the survivors of the Black Sea flood to preserve their story.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
Ceridwen018 said:
If they were to find Noah's Arc on this mountain, wouldn't that completely undermind the Biblical story?
I think if Noah's Ark were discovered (and proven to be THE ark) ANYWHERE in the region of the middle east...and if it could be dated somewhere around 6-8,000 years ago, it would not matter one whit about the flooding. It would be an AMAZING, STUPENDOUS find and corroborate Genesis greatly.

We would just have to dig deeper to figure out the flooding question.....But, for now, the geologists and scientists are researching the flooding aspect, not Noah's Ark.
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
the flood discussed is a local flood... certenly a big one, but not a global phenominon.

it is likely that several such local floods occured as the ice sheets melted and formed large freshwater lakes that let go suddenly. Another such flood appears to have happined when the ice sheets retreated from the great lakes region.
Add to that the annual flooding of the major rivers of the Middle Eastern region, Tigris, Euphraties, Nile and so on.

wa:do
 

God is love

Active Member
ark11.gif
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
God is love said:

There have been at least two survey expeditions to this formation that makes the connection between the peaks of Ararat and "Little" Ararat Nothing was found.

Regards,
Scott
 

finalfrogo

Well-Known Member
God is love said:
Many scientists agree the numbers of species in those days would be between 1.544 and 2,392. There would have to be hundreds of rooms to accommadate that many species. Some of those animals in the cold climate and closed quarters would have gone into a hibernation state, making it easier for a small crew {family} to acre for them.

It seems highly unlikely that scientists would agree on such a ridiculous quantity. There are more than 1.5 millions species named today. Scientists estimate that there may be as many as 5 to 10 million species, but they just don't have them all classified. Where are you getting your information?
 

finalfrogo

Well-Known Member
And even then, we still wouldn't know if the tablets were ACTUALLY written by God. Maybe Noah just went crazy and started signing his name as God.
 

mortuus monastica

New Member
Well, this is certainly interesting…

God is Love said:
Many scientists agree the numbers of species in those days would be between 1.544 {1,544} and 2,392. There would have to be hundreds of rooms to accommadate that many species. Some of those animals in the cold climate and closed quarters would have gone into a hibernation state, making it easier for a small crew {family} to acre for them.
There are several problems pertaining to this ghastly oversimplification of misrepresented and inaccurate theory. First, the number of species currently named is approximately 1.5million, which given the supposed 8000 years intervening, would imply that one new species emerged every two days… Need that be considered further?

Secondly, let one conduct a feasibility study on the one’s already quoted:

From the data given in http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html and the other pages found throughout the thread:

The average dimensions, and the dimensions determined by the quaint photos provided, give the supposed ark to be 450x75x45 feet in dimension (using the optimistic 18inch cubit – which has ranged anywhere from 12 to 18 inches over historical study). This results in the 1518750 cubic feet found on the ‘source’ pages. The page above lists this as sufficient volume to fit 569 stock cars: having each with a volume of 2669.2 cubic feet. The study the quotes double-deck stock cars to have the capacity for 240 sheep… That is: 2669.2/240 = 11.12 cubic feet per sheep, or a cube of 2.23 feet width, depth and height. I’m not sure what size sheep may have been for this figure, but the 11cf is also not taking into account the fact that most sheep do not take kindly to being stacked on top of each other in order to maximize space utilization. Given animals usually need some space, the 11cf is optimistic in this case.
The article goes on to state that using a biblical definition of ‘created kind,’ the ark may have only needed to house 2,000 animals aboard to accomplish its goal – that would translate to no more than 1000 created kinds of animals (supposing that 2 of every type was aboard and that just two of every kind would be enough to sustain the genealogies for any amount of time…) in which case, those 1000 kinds would have had the 8000 years the other estimate above, the 2392 species, to produce the 1.5 million species we have today.

BUT WAIT! I error, for if, as some claim, the ark only had to carry land animals, then the 1.5 million is reduced to only about 50,000 to 40,000 species! That’s only one new species every 72 days! SO much more reasonable, don’t you think?

Taking then the 50,000 ANIMALS the study suggests (25,000 species) then using the entire ark would give each animal 30.375cf to house itself, its water and food. If the ark was divided into the biblical 3 floors (each of area 450x75 square feet, giving 33750 square feet per floor, 101250 square feet total) then each animal would have a square area of no more than 2.025sf each. That is, 2.025sf per animal assuming that the entire volume of the ark, the whole thing, was dedicated to the animals housing – with no volume lost to walkways, wall thickness, etc..

For the 2,000 animal, 1,000 kinds, estimate, the area increases marginally to 50.625sf – much better, eh?

But then again, this is GOD we’re talking about – He could have used his divine intervention to help Noah along in more than just the building of the ark, so anything’s possible, right? If so, why not just purge the planet using something more refined than a massive flood? Divine beings, all-powerful beings must be able to simply deal with their problems than flooding all of his creation… Or perhaps not – maybe he was just feeling creative (or unimaginative). With the argument that omnipotent God performed miracles every step of the way at the forefront of creationist debate strategies, the truth is a rather hard thing to find, no?

The point of all of this was to demonstrate that if one wishes to avoid having their creationist claims questioned by attempting to quote scripture, eye witness accounts and fuzzy aerial photographs, then the science one uses to tie the three together had better come up with more realistic figures than an average of 30cf per animal on an ark which, if it had been lodged in a glacier as the photos and ‘evidence’ suggest, would have been destroyed by glacial forces (you know, they do move – significantly over even 2,000 years) or by erosion if not in the glacier for the entire time.
If you do a feasibility study on a story, this is what you can expect.
 

ButcherGEIN

Member
My question is this... if humans were created 6,000 years ago according to the bible... how is it that they have physically discovered a man made structure off the coast of japan that could be more than 10000 years old?
 

Fade

The Great Master Bates
There are caves in France and numerous other countries that provide plenty of evidence for human existance way before 10000 yrs ago.
 
Top