Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
I'm planning to change my user name to Marie, of Roumania.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It bothers me that intelligent people forsake all reason and logic so as to make an impossible event like the Ark appear true. Than in the face of hard science, they still invoke their "God magic." Willful ignorance is maddening to me!
I came across this;
It's a full size Noah's Ark replica in Hong Kong. I think they should see if it can float!
Raw Video: Full-size Noah's Ark Replica | theledger.com | The Ledger | Lakeland, FL
Now all they have to do is load her up with all the specialized food needed for all those animals with very special diets, lots of fresh water, and let er go. Seeing as no wooden craft over 300 feet long is able to stay afloat, lets also get plenty of rescue boats ready to pick up all those poor animals, can chickens swim?
I just did a quick calculation. Scientists apparently agree that there are somewhere between 3 and 30 million animal species on the earth. So, let's assume that it took Noah 1 day per pair of animals (even though he didn't have any planes trains or automobiles, so it would actually take way longer than that to get some, but I'll let that part go), it would have taken him almost 44 thousand years to finish collecting them. In 44 thousand years, the animals would have to have been reproducing, so that means that there would have had to have been billions of animals on the ark by the time the flood came. If the average animal took up 5 square feet, the ark would have to have been 10-20 billion square feet, which is greater than 3000 football fields. If he were using 8' long logs, it would have been about 56, 250 logs long, times probably 80 logs in depth, so that eaquals about 450 thousand logs, and that's for the hull only, without even having built a deck yet. So, since he supposedly built the ark in 100 years, if he had worked for eight hours a day (excluding sundays) he would have built it in 250400 hours. He would have had to have felled and hewn trees at a rate of one every 15 minutes (allowing for some time to assemble the hull). To gather 450000 trees, he would have had to travel hundreds of miles to a tree, cut it down, hew it, and bring it back several hundred miles to the building site within 15 minutes. If we allow 5 minutes for travel to the tree, 5 minutes to fell it and hew it, and 5 minutes to bring it back to the building site, he'd have to drag the logs at a speed of 194 miles per hour. Yeah, I'm gonna say this didn't happen.
I'm not sure if anybody has mentioned this but the story of Noah's Ark is told in Vedic history as well. In fact, it was written before Abrahamic religions came to being. The event was not a recent thing. It was supposed to have happened (at least) millions of years ago and did not cover the entire earth.
Still, I personally do not think it is meant to be taken literally.
The event could not have happened millions of years ago as early man, capable of constructing anything dates back to between 250,000 to 400,000 years ago.
I think the bible mentions unicorns (don't see to many of these in the fossil record), who were naughty and so were killed along with the dinosaurs in the "Flood". Still doesn't explain how kangaroos survived, perhaps marsupials were fish during that period. Then given fur, legs, ears and arms in a bolt of lightning, at gods whim 2 days before captain cook arrived on the east coast of Australia.
Cheers
Maybe the flood took part in the northern hemisphere. After all, all doomsday predictions seem to refer to the northern hemisphere ie/ global warming ---> ice age in NH/slightly warmer in SH.
Not sure on a sphere as flat and smooth as the earth whether you can have a northern hemisphere only flood. From outer space the earth is smoother than a billiard ball.
Does anyone here actually take the story literally?Yes, which is partly why I don't take it literally.