Noah's Ark project in US to move forward

porchrat said:
As to the Noah's Ark thing I wonder if he will be building it using the original tools and materials Noah himself had access to and are they going to actually put it into the ocean and test it? THAT would be fun to see.
Click to expand...
DrJohnZoidberg said:
I'm not too worried about it being able to float, I would however like to see them put two of every animal on board as well as food and water and then live inside for the duration of the "flood".

I'd pay to see that! :D
Click to expand...
I'd pay triple to see them do both...
 
DrJohnZoidberg said:
I'm not too worried about it being able to float, I would however like to see them put two of every animal on board as well as food and water and then live inside for the duration of the "flood".

I'd pay to see that! :D
Click to expand...
Nah I doubt it will be able to hold together. I do agree though I'd like to see the animal thing. I doubt it would be allowed though. Animal cruelty and all. It simply wouldn't be ethical.
 
Yeah, just looking at the dimensions, I doubt the structure will hold together even if it just sits on land.
 
porchrat said:
Nah I doubt it will be able to hold together. I do agree though I'd like to see the animal thing. I doubt it would be allowed though. Animal cruelty and all. It simply wouldn't be ethical.
Click to expand...

Don't have to use real animals, just an equivalent dummy that weighs as much as the real thing...
 
Don't have to use real animals, just an equivalent dummy that weighs as much as the real thing
Click to expand...

With sufficient food for all the carnivores, herbivores, frogs, eagles, ...

How much would 2 mammoths eat in a 100 days ?
 
daveza said:
With sufficient food for all the carnivores, herbivores, frogs, eagles, ...

How much would 2 mammoths eat in a 100 days ?
Click to expand...
I thought it was 40 days and 40 nights?... or was that just how long the rain lasted?

Looks like it was actually a little more than a year, not 100 days.

Jeez that makes the story even more ridiculous. :p
 
porchrat said:
I thought it was 40 days and 40 nights?... or was that just how long the rain lasted?

Looks like it was actually a little more than a year, not 100 days.

Jeez that makes the story even more ridiculous. :p
Click to expand...
I'm not even fussy, I'll even settle for a measly month...
 
The story of Noah's ark is a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh, with a few changes by jewish shepherds a few thousand years later to suit their religion. That is all.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Don't have to use real animals, just an equivalent dummy that weighs as much as the real thing...
Click to expand...

It'll have animatronics ..

The wooden ark would have old-world details, such as wooden pegs instead of nails, straight-sawed timbers and plenty of animals - some alive, some robotic.
Click to expand...

Somehow I don't think His Noodly Appendage would've settled for anything else but real pasta.
 
Laugh all you want, but this is so far the closest thing I've seen from Creationists potentially doing actual science.
I just hope once it's done someone would finally filter down the so called "kinds" of animals form the current fauna + flora available to once and for all see what happens if you try to cram it all into that tiny space and keep it alive for 40 days or whatever.

Hell, they should move the damn thing to occupy the more-or-less empty space in the middle of the Large Hadron Collider in Europe, that way we can not only marvel at the cream of the crop humanity has achieved... but we'll also have the bottom of the barrel to contrast it against.
Pure winnings.

/popcorn
 
Last edited:
rza said:
Of course atheists are allowed to have their museums, which show carcasses of baboons as proof for their bed-time story.
Click to expand...

Oh yes because an anthropomorphic being created the universe and humanity and then made women from ribs :erm: Uhuh, seems legit. Unless they were genetically engineered like Leeloo from fifth element ;)
 
DrJohnZoidberg said:
It would sink because there are psychical limits to how large you can build a boat out of wood. It would just break apart if it encountered even the slightest external forces.

However you know this already and you're just trolling.
Click to expand...

Do you realise that wood is stronger than steel for a given mass? Therefore a wooden ship can be built as strong as a steel one but weigh less.
Also wood has no fatigue limits like steel does as long as you don't break the fibres.

The largest flying aircraft ever built was built almost entirely from wood. The Spruce Goose dwarfs the An225, the 747 Jumbo and even the Airbus A380-800.
It also had it's critics who said it would never fly.
 
dZUYRRn.jpg
 
Paul_S said:
The largest flying aircraft ever built was built almost entirely from wood. The Spruce Goose dwarfs the An225, the 747 Jumbo and even the Airbus A380-800.
It also had it's critics who said it would never fly.
Click to expand...

Pretty poor example, the Spruce Goose flew once, for one mile, at 20 meters above the water....
 
Paul_S said:
Do you realise that wood is stronger than steel for a given mass? Therefore a wooden ship can be built as strong as a steel one but weigh less.
Also wood has no fatigue limits like steel does as long as you don't break the fibres.

The largest flying aircraft ever built was built almost entirely from wood. The Spruce Goose dwarfs the An225, the 747 Jumbo and even the Airbus A380-800.
It also had it's critics who said it would never fly.
Click to expand...

You cannot build a seaworthy vessel with the proposed dimensions of the ark completely out of wood.

Here is one article which explains the physics: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4279
 
Paul_S said:
Do you realise that wood is stronger than steel for a given mass? Therefore a wooden ship can be built as strong as a steel one but weigh less.
Also wood has no fatigue limits like steel does as long as you don't break the fibres.

The largest flying aircraft ever built was built almost entirely from wood. The Spruce Goose dwarfs the An225, the 747 Jumbo and even the Airbus A380-800.
It also had it's critics who said it would never fly.
Click to expand...

:erm:

Luckily we have our massively competitive and potentially lucrative modern air/ocean travel industry employing some of the smartest engineering minds in the world, floating in a gobal free-for-all market that pretty much guarantees anyone who doesn't agree completely with this statement that they're on the right track out of pure obviousness.

And if the "obvious" doesn't satisfy your conclusions and urges you on to Google for some examples of previous "obvious" assumptions in human history that were proven wrong as if it actually means something...well, you'd still have to disprove your detractors by physically proving them wrong by building something better (out of wood) than can be created without the ridiculous amount of effort put behind research and production of better materials like aluminium/titanium alloys and carbon nanotubes etc.

Good luck.
Also, wood is ****ing cheap. We'd use it if we could. Can bet your arse on that.

To me, personally, the only disturbing or controversial aspect of this article is the fact that up to now there's a six page thread on MyBB about this and that I'm actively a part of it on a Friday night... and there I was, thinking the 10 year old skeptic inside of me was long gone by now.

Well played, Creationists, well played.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X